Jump to content

strichener

Gold Members
  • Content Count

    8,529
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

strichener last won the day on September 5 2014

strichener had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,470 Excellent

1 Follower

About strichener

  • Rank
    Golden Shoe Winner

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • My Team
    Peterhead

Recent Profile Visitors

11,618 profile views
  1. I don't know what one has to do with the other. Only you are linking the two things after making an arse of yourself again.
  2. Carried over and spent next year and, as you pointed out, the underspend was lower then. There will be an underspend every year because ScotGov can't overspend. Do you honestly think that money could have created the manufacturing capability you describe in any case? I don't. Ok.
  3. Just checking that I have you right here - Firstly there wasn't any money and the government couldn't borrow to secondly there was money but it wasn't enough to now there was money, it was substantial but it shouldn't have been spent on renewables. Quite the journey. It is down to the governement to make spending decisions based on their own prorities and pet projects but let's not claim that there wasn't money available when there quite clearly was. It therefore comes back to my earlier post that they should have been investing in renewables 15 years ago.
  4. Carried over and spent next year and, as you pointed out, the underspend was lower then. There will be an underspend every year because ScotGov can't overspend. Do you honestly think that money could have created the manufacturing capability you describe in any case? I don't. So we are agreed that there was money available even without borrowing powers. However you are incorrect on the underspend - It was not carried over and spent the following year at that point, it was handed back to the UK Treasury. In fact when the SNP came to power, they actually reached agreement with the UK to receive prior years underspend back. This equates to an extra £655m in 2007/8, £300m in 2008/9, £400m in 2009/10, £174m in 2010/11. In total over £1.5bln which I do think could have created not just the manufacturing but also the other complimentary skill required for renewables.
  5. Eh? I was replying specifically to the insinuation that there was no money 15 years ago to invest in renewables. Why does every post have to be relating to the SNP? If we want to look at subsequent years then it wasn't until 2011/12 that the underspend fell below £200,000,000. So yes the SNP should have spent more money in this area just as the Labour/Liberal coalition before them should have done.
  6. £281m budget underspend in 2005/06. Not so fascinating that there was money available to spend.
  7. The last 15 years would have been a start.
  8. The issue here is that it is valid moan. The SNP government already part own the yard and have extended millions in finance to the yard. So much for becoming a renewable powerhouse - we don't manufacture the turbines nor do we make the jackets. The turbines are essentially where we should be arriving to get into the market. However a full Scottish solution (electrics, turbines, blades and structure) should be the aim. It won't be without cost nor failures neither of which should put us off.
  9. They could have decided to provide financial support. It takes the EU at least two years to take these matters through their court and it would be the UK that the EU would have to take action against as it can only raise these matters against member countries. By the time this went to court, the EU would have no jurisdiction.
  10. Having had both Sutherland and Rory in and out the club twice, take it from me that even Rory on the bench is better business than Sutherland.
  11. Do we know if De Gualle was polled personally? Five centuries of history, of which half were as part of the UK is not relevant to Scotland's place in the EU. If the French people were in any way disadvantaged by Scottish entry then those polls would easily reverse.
  12. He's not judging it on one or two scenes you old fanny. He's watched it from the beginning, and that was the scene (which wasn't early on in the series) he's finally came to his judgment. Aggressive for a wimp.
  13. In fairness the DMO hasn't had a failed auction since 2009. It does show a wider issue with the world economy when negative returns are viewed as attractive. Getting that level of coverage shows that the yield was too high (even though it was negative). It is actually a sign that the issuer isn't properly engaged with the market.
  14. De Gualle said all this. Nostradamus doesn't get a look in.
  15. It's called "playing to the audience". If anyone thinks that this is relevant to our modern day relationship with France then more fool them.
×
×
  • Create New...