Two grand extra to live in Scotland

Scots pay a higher average tax than the rest of the UK.  Nearly £2,000 a year more - each.

£1,890.38 more to be precise.  Here's how:

In 2011-12 Scotland paid £56.871 billion in taxes (9.9% of the UK tax take) - Figures from GERS, table 1.

The mid 2011 population estimate is 5,254,800 (latest figures available).

That means taxes of £10,822.68 for every person in Scotland - including tiny little baby-type people, toddlers and school pupils.

I haven't bothered finding another source for UK taxation revenue, I just made the calculation from GERS.  That gives UK taxation for 2011-12 of £574.455bn.

The census day estimate for the UK population in 2011 was 63.2 million.

That means taxes of £9,089.47 per person in the UK - including the younger people.

So Scots pay £1,733.21 more than the UK average but that's not quite the whole story:

Take the Scottish figures out of the UK figures and the population becomes 57.9452 million and the tax take £517.584 bn; taxes of £8,932.29 per person in the rest of the UK.

So Scots pay £1,890.38 more in tax than the 'rest of the UK' average - it's nearly a £2k premium to be a Scot.

£1,890.38 for the privilege of being in the UK, for the privilege of hosting the UK's nuclear weapons, for the privilege of having Scotland's budget cut by George Osborne, for the privilege of hearing Labour politicians say we can't afford decency and equality in our public services.  We pay extra just to be told we're too poor to be independent, we pay dearly for the pleasure of being told that we're too wee to survive in the big, bad world, we pay over the odds and we're told we could never survive without the rest of the UK.

I'm quite happy to pay my taxes but I'd rather see them spent in a nation where we value each other, protect the vulnerable, help people when they're down on their luck and out of work, let our pensioners live in decent circumstances, build houses fit for people to live in, build communities that act as a social safety net.  I want to live in a nation that doesn't think big businesses should get free labour from people who happen to be on benefits and bullied by the Government that should be protecting them, where medical care is delivered free at the point of need, where education is free at the point of delivery, where we don't harbour weapons of mass destruction, where our international relations are about making the world a better place rather than trying to make it come to us on bended knee.  I want my nation to be fair, socially just and forward-looking.

We'll pay our way in the world; we already do - don't insult us any longer.

Scottish Politics Twitter League

Here's a Scottish Politics Twitter League compiled earlier today - obviously not comprehensive but a bit of an interest in terms of who has most reach.  It may actually be a matter of who writes the most interesting stuff as much as anything else, but interesting nonetheless.

@AlexSalmond                       34,608

@NicolaSturgeon                    23,902

@theSNP                                19,164

@YesScotland                         13,340

@UK_Together                         8,746

@patrickharvie                           8,327

@JohnSwinney                           7,618

@scottishlabour                          7,372

@KennyMacAskill                     6,610

@Feorlean                                  6,420

@MorayMP                               6,020

@FionaHyslop                            4,897

@RichardLochhead                     4,534

@kdugdalemsp                           4,286

@AngusMacNeilMP                   4,190

@PeterMurrell                             3,890

@strathearnrose                           3,905

@AlexNeilSNP                            3,823

@RuthDavidsonMSP                   3,788

@JohannLamont                           3,782

@willie_rennie                               3,408

@scotgp                                       3,186

@AlynSmithMEP                          3,045

@ScotTories                                 2,959

@LindaFabianiSNP                      2,788

@scotlibdems                                2,759

@BlairJenkinsYes                          2,435

@blairmcdougall                            2,270

@KevinJPringle                            1,855

@paulbsinclair                                  743

Who owns our whisky?

I was intrigued by a piece by Douglas Fraser on the whisky industry and where the market share was concentrated and the ongoing tale of the Scotch Whisky Association objecting to minimum pricing so I nipped off to the SWA to have a look at its membership list and do a bit of research.  It was the ownership that struck me most.  I've only looked at SWA members and no-one else because it was easier for me than trawling for everything.  When I'd finished doing all that I found a site which lists distillery ownership which might have made the whole process a bit easier but I've not had a good look at it yet.

I think I've got this right, I had to dig a bit to follow the ownership trail on some of them.  The location in the fancy brackets at the end of each entry indicates the location of the headquarters of the company that is at the top of the ownership tree in each instance (if I've got it right).  That doesn't mean that all the shareholders are there, of course, but it does mean that the headquarters jobs are there, that profits will probably be declared there and perhaps where taxes are paid - although we already know that some companies use subsidiaries to avoid or minimise taxes - Diageo, for example.

Of the 51 SWA members listed I counted 14 owned by companies headquartered in Scotland and one more jointly owned between a company headquartered in Glasgow and one headquartered in London.  Eight are owned by the Thai Beverage Public Company Limited of Bangkok; and ten and a half are owned by or are subsidiaries of Diageo (London) - Edrington owns the other half of North British Distillers.  It should be noted up front that not all of the companies are distillers and some of these companies are only in the industry tangentially (based elsewhere and selling whisky, for example).

Unless there are plenty other companies in the whisky industry that aren't members of the SWA, ownership of the whisky industry is very concentrated.  Whether that is a good thing or not is a debate to be had, I suppose, but here's what I've found.

Scotch Whisky Association

A Dewar Rattray – small independent in niche market; mainly bottling, some own stock {Ayrshire, Scotland}

Aceo – whisky brokers and offers other services to industry {Gloucestershire, England}

Adelphi Distillery – tiny independent bottler, just got planning permission for distillery {Argyll, Scotland}

Balblair Distillery Co Ltd – small distillery, owned by Inverhouse Distillers which in turn is owned by the Thai Beverage Public Company Limited (ThaiBev)  {Bangkok, Thailand}

Beam inc – (Laphroaig and Teachers) {Illinois, USA}

Ben Nevis Distillery Ltd – independent small distillery {Fort William, Scotland}

Berry Bros & Rudd – (owns The Glenrothes distillery) wine & spirit merchant {London, England}

Blairmhor Distillers Ltd - small distillery, owned by Inverhouse Distillers which in turn is owned by the Thai Beverage Public Company Limited (ThaiBev)  {Bangkok, Thailand}

Blairmhor Ltd – same as Blairmhor Distillers Ltd; owned by the Thai Beverage Public Company Limited (ThaiBev)  {Bangkok, Thailand}

James Buchanan & Co Ltd – bottlers in London, owned by Diageo {London, England}

Burn Stewart Distillers Ltd – owned by CL Financial – a company currently in the midst of major investigations after its collapse {Trinidad}

James Catto & Co Ltd – blender owned by International Beverage Holdings which in turn is owned by the Thai Beverage Public Company Limited (ThaiBev)  {Bangkok, Thailand}

Chivas Brothers Ltd – distiller owned by Pernod Ricard {Paris, France}

John Dewar & Sons Ltd – distiller owned by Bacardi {London, England}

Diageo Brands BV – marketing and distribution branch of Diageo based in Amsterdam {London, England}

Diageo Great Britain Ltd – marketing and distribution branch of Diageo based in London {London, England}

Diageo plc – group name {London, England}

Diageo Scotland Ltd – production, marketing and distribution based Edinburgh {London, England}

 

Edrington – international holding company & distillers {Glasgow, Scotland}

Glen Grant Ltd – distiller owned by Campari {Milan, Italy}

Glenglassaugh Distillery Company Ltd –distiller owned by the Scaent Group {Amsterdam, Netherlands}

Glenmorangie Company Ltd – distiller owned by LVMH (Louis Vuitton Moet Hennessy) {Paris, France}

Gordon & MacPhail – bottler and broker {Elgin, Scotland}

J&G Grant – independent distiller {Ballindalloch, Scotland}

William Grant & Sons Ltd – distiller {Bellshill, Scotland}

John Haig & Co Ltd – distiller, bottler, blender owned by Diageo {London, England}

J&W Hardie Ltd – distiller {Edinburgh, Scotland}

Harvey's of Edinburgh International Ltd – distiller, bottler, blender owned by HOE International {Taipei City, Taiwan}

Highland Distillers – distiller, owned by Edrington {Glasgow, Scotland}

International Whisky Co Ltd – blender {London, England}

Inver House Distillers Ltd – owned by (ThaiBev) {Bangkok, Thailand}

D Johnston & Co (Laphroaig) Ltd – distiller {Glasgow, Scotland}

Justerini & Brooks Ltd – wine & spirits merchants (J&B whisky), owned by Diageo {London, England}

Kilchoman Distillery Co Ltd – small distiller {Argyll, Scotland}

Knockdhu Distillery Co Ltd – distiller owned by IBH and so by (ThaiBev) {Bangkok, Thailand}

Laing, Douglas & Co Ltd – independent bottler and blender {Glasgow, Scotland}

Last Drop Distillers Ltd – broker {London, England}

London & Scottish International Ltd – wholesaler {Bramley, England}

Ian Macleod Distillers Ltd – distiller {Broxburn, Scotland}

Morrison Bowmore Distillers Ltd – distiller owned by Suntory {Osaka, Japan}

North British Distillery Co Ltd – distiller owned jointly by Edrington {Glasgow, Scotland} and Diageo {London, England}

Old St Andrews Ltd – bottler and distributor {Sevenoaks, England}

Pulteney Distillery Co Ltd – distiller owned by IBH and so by (ThaiBev) {Bangkok, Thailand}

Peter J Russell & Co Ltd – non trading, owned by Ian Macleod Distillers Ltd {Broxburn, Scotland}

Wm Sanderson & Son Ltd – non trading, owned by Diageo {London, England}

Scotch Malt Whisky Society – club owned by Glenmorangie and so by LVMH {Paris, France}

Speyburn-Glenlivet Distillery Co Ltd – distiller owned by IBH and so by (ThaiBev) {Bangkok, Thailand}

Wm Teacher & Sons Ltd – distiller owned by Beam inc {Illinois, USA}

Tomatin Distillery Co Ltd – distiller owned by Takara Shuzo Co., Ltd {Kyoto, Japan}

United Distillers UK plc – distiller owned by Diageo {London, England}

John Walker & Sons Ltd – distiller owned by Diageo {London, England}

That statement on Europe

Nicola Sturgeon's statement on EU membership for Scotland after independence seems quite reasonable to me -

I am pleased to have the opportunity to make a statement on an independent Scotland’s continuing membership of the European Union and to respond to recent statements by the President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso.

Firstly, let me be clear that the Scottish Government believes that Scotland should continue to be a member of the EU; a view that does not appear to be shared by a UK government that is displaying ever increasing signs of Euro-scepticism. Indeed, in my view, it is the overtly hostile stance of the UK government – or at least significant parts of it – that presents the real risk to Scotland’s continuing membership of the EU.

This government believes that Scotland does benefit from EU membership and that the EU benefits – enormously – from having Scotland as a member. It is also our view that Scotland’s interests would be better represented in the EU by an independent Scottish Government, with a seat at the top table, able to speak up for our national interest without having to seek the prior permission of UK ministers; and a government able to work closely and constructively with partners across these islands, and across the EU, to advance our shared interests.

Presiding Officer, that is our ambition for Scotland’s future in Europe. It is positive and constructive – with Scotland’s and Europe’s best interests at its heart - and it stands in sharp contrast to the stance of the UK government.

Let me turn now to the recent statements of the President of the European Commission.

As head of the Commission, Mr Barroso’s opinion on this matter should be – and will be by this Government - treated seriously and with respect.

That is why I have written to him seeking an early opportunity to discuss the particular process by which Scotland would become independent and the implications of that for our continued EU membership.

However, in doing so, it is important that I also set out the following points.

Firstly, the European Commission, however important, is not the final arbiter of these matters. Mr Barroso’s statements do not constitute a ‘ruling’, as some have suggested. Nor does the Commission even claim to be specifically addressing the particular situation of Scotland.

Indeed, the President of the Commission himself made clear, in his letter to the House of Lords Committee, that ‘the European Commission has expressed its views in general…’

Second, there is absolutely no provision in the EU Treaties for the dis-application of those Treaties or the removal of EU citizenship from a country and its people when they exercise their democratic right to self-determination. And it would be extraordinary if anyone in this chamber - or indeed anyone else committed to the principle of democracy - was to suggest that there should be.

Indeed, Mr Barroso said in response to a question on 10 November 2012, ‘There are no provisions in the Treaties that refer to the secession from a member state.’

Therefore, what I want to outline to the President – and indeed hear his views on – is the specific process by which Scotland would become independent and the way in which we would seek to ensure that our intention to remain within the EU is achieved.

Firstly, let me deal with the process of independence. As a result of the Edinburgh Agreement that process is democratic, agreed and consensual and the result will be respected and implemented by both the Scottish and UK governments.

Following a ‘yes’ vote in 2014, a process of negotiation will take place with the UK government on the transfer of powers to an independent Scottish Parliament. As I said last week, it would be the intention of the Scottish Government to invite representatives of the other parties and of civic Scotland to contribute to that process. It is a process that we would intend to have completed in time for the next Scottish election in 2016. However, in the period between autumn 2014 and May 2016, Scotland would still be in the UK and, therefore, by definition, still within the EU.

In parallel to negotiations with the UK government, it would be our intention to negotiate the terms of an independent Scotland’s continuing membership of the EU.

And here I should point out that the need for negotiations with the EU was made clear by the Scottish Government in Choosing Scotland’s Future in 2007, in Your Scotland, Your Voice in 2009 and in Your Scotland, Your Referendum in 2012. And it is worth remembering that these are matters that are likely to be about political negotiation more than they will be about legal process.

Let me also pause here to reflect on the position of the UK in such negotiations. It would be interesting to hear those who argue that an independent Scotland would have to reapply for EU membership explain in some detail why that same argument wouldn’t also be true of the rest of the UK, given that the democratic process we are engaged in would lead to the dissolution of the UK in its current political form. However, since I do not believe that we would be in a formal re-application situation, I will not dwell on that point.

However, what will undoubtedly be the case is that negotiation on terms of continuing membership will be highly relevant to the rest of the UK which will require to determine, for example, its own number of seats in the European Parliament and its revised financial contribution.

So, I believe Scotland and the rest of the UK would have a shared interest in concluding such negotiations smoothly and quickly.

And I believe that such a sensible process of negotiation will result in Scotland’s continuing membership of the EU on terms that are reasonable. And by that I mean, for example, that just like Sweden, we would not join the Euro until and unless it was in Scotland’s interests to do so and we had satisfied the conditions for doing so. And, just like Ireland, we would not enter Schengen but would instead look to co-operate with Ireland and the rest of the UK in the Common Travel Area. Both of these positions are practical and justifiable and would, I am sure, be supported by all parties here in Scotland. And, given their approach in other circumstances, the evidence suggests they would be understood by our European partners.

I will cite two reasons for my view and, in so doing, I am very deliberately relying, not simply on arguments of law or process, but on arguments of common sense, reality and mutual self-interest.

Firstly, the EU is an organisation that welcomes new members. It wants others to join – it most certainly would not want to see existing parts of its territory leave.

Let me quote, again, the words of Mr Barroso, this time on 11 September – ‘I see no country leaving and I see many countries wanting to join.’

The EU is also an inherently flexible organisation – it adapts, as indeed it should, to the changing circumstances of its member states. To demonstrate that, we just have to look at how quickly and smoothly the former East Germany was integrated into the EU following re-unification. Indeed it’s instructive to read the press release issued by the Commission about East Germany in 1990. It said, ‘The community institutions have all done their utmost to bring about the integration of what was the German Democratic Republic as smoothly as possible and within the timescale allowed by the unification process.’

There was no direct precedent for what happened with East Germany – just as there is no precedent for what might happen in Scotland – but the EU found a solution that is consistent with the principle of sincere co-operation that lies at the heart of the EU Treaties. They adapted and they did it on the basis of common sense and accommodation of internal decisions taken by one of its member states.

My second reason for believing that Scotland would continue in membership of the EU is that it is overwhelmingly in the EU’s interests for us to do so.

And by that I don’t just mean that to go through the complicated process of putting Scotland outside the EU, just for us to be readmitted later, would be – as Graham Avery, an Honorary DG of the Commission, said – 'not feasible'.

I mean that Scotland’s vast assets – fishing, oil and gas, renewables; our value as an export market to other member states; our education system enjoyed by thousands of EU students every year; and our status as home to tens of thousands of EU citizens, mean that the economic, social and political interests of the EU would be best served by Scotland remaining in continuous membership.

Let us just look at some of that in more detail. We have around 90% of the EU's oil and gas reserves. We accounted for around two-thirds of EU crude oil and a fifth of EU natural gas production in 2009. An independent Scotland would be the largest producer of oil and the second largest producer of gas in the EU.  

In 2010/11, there were more than 16,000 EU students enrolled at Scottish HEIs and 150,000 EU citizens living here by virtue of the freedom of movement that comes with us as being part of the EU.

We are an integral member of the EU and it is not credible to argue that the other nations of the EU would not want to retain access to the vast array of resources and opportunities that Scotland brings to the EU table.

Indeed, if the opposition parties have Scotland’s best interests at heart then – notwithstanding their opposition to independence – they will accept that, in the event of a ‘yes’ vote, the process I have outlined today would be in the best interests of Scotland, the UK and the EU.

Presiding Officer,

As I said earlier, I have sought the opportunity to discuss the matter with Mr Barroso in the near future.

I will be happy to update parliament again following that discussion.