Newsnet Main Articles
Tuesday, 14 February 2012 04:48
48 Comments
By a Newsnet reporter
The SNP has welcomed the assessment of a senior independent defence analyst that BAE's Clyde shipyards are well placed to continue their highly skilled work post-independence.
Howard Wheedon, senior strategist with City firm BGC Partners, told the Daily Record newspaper that the Clyde yards would continue to operate after Scottish independence.
Mr Wheedon's remarks come after Labour's shadow defence spokesman Jim Murphy claimed that Scottish independence would cost "thousands" of jobs on the Clyde.
Mr Murphy said:
"It's crystal clear that if we leave Britain then we leave the Royal Navy. If we lose the Navy we lose the work in the yards. That would cost thousands of skilled jobs and many more in small companies in the supply chain."
However Mr Wheedon disagreed with Mr Murphy's assessment. He noted that defence giant BAE has called in consultants to look at the future of the Govan and Scotstoun yards, as well as their yard at Portsmouth. Mr Wheedon believes that the Portsmouth yard is the one most likely to be closed.
Mr Wheedon said:
"If BAE decide to close a shipyard because of uncertainty about future work levels, I think it would be Portsmouth. It would be natural because Portsmouth is smaller than the Clydeside operations.
"It's true that if Portsmouth closed and Scotland went independent, all the yards would be in Scotland. But that's not BAE's concern. That's the UK Government's concern."
Commenting on the assessment, SNP MSP for Glasgow Anniesland Bill Kidd said it showed that in all circumstances Scottish yards will continue to secure orders on the basis of their skills, and record of delivery. He added that in comparable countries like Finland, Denmark and Sweden, shipbuilding occupies a larger proportion of the economy than it currently does in Scotland, yet these nations do not depend upon orders from the Royal Navy or the Westminster government.
Mr Kidd said:
"Howard Wheeldon's assessment shows that in all circumstances Scottish yards will continue to secure orders on the basis of their formidable skills and record of delivery.
"BAE is reviewing its business because of UK cuts to defence spending as a result of the economic mess left by the last Labour government – under which at least 5,000 shipbuilding jobs were lost in Scotland.
"If shipbuilding in Scotland had the same average share of manufacturing turnover and employment across each of the four comparable nations of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, turnover would be £400 million higher and employment over 2,000 higher.
"Like the Scottish yards, these countries accept orders from all over the world. It is not the UK that makes the yards successful, it is the great Scottish skills base and technical expertise that brings orders to the yards – and this will continue to be the case post independence."
Comments
#
2012-02-14 08:47
Thanks to Mr Wheedon for confirming what we all knew anyway, that the Clyde yards like the rest of the country will manage just fine after independence.
Westminster must be getting really desperate, as this is the third time this scare story has done the rounds in the last six months, and every time it gets blown out of the water.
I suppose they are thinking, if you tell a lie long enough, people will eventually believe it.
Not any more old chaps.
Westminster must be getting really desperate, as this is the third time this scare story has done the rounds in the last six months, and every time it gets blown out of the water.
I suppose they are thinking, if you tell a lie long enough, people will eventually believe it.
Not any more old chaps.
#
2012-02-14 08:53
Believe B****r all that comes out of the mouth of Scaremongering Skeletor. Labour in Scotland - Rampant Negativity. Their death throws.
#
2012-02-14 12:22
Quoting UpSpake:
Hopefully UPSPAKE "capitals intentional"
Believe B****r all that comes out of the mouth of Scaremongering Skeletor. Labour in Scotland - Rampant Negativity. Their death throws.
Hopefully UPSPAKE "capitals intentional"
#
2012-02-14 08:55
Mr Murphy said:"It's crystal clear that if we leave Britain then we leave the Royal Navy. If we lose the Navy we lose the work in the yards. That would cost thousands of skilled jobs and many more in small companies in the supply chain."
God that man is dense!
I just love it how they never even once think about admitting that Scotland would have its own Navy and would need its own contracts.
They never once point out that under tendering rules across the EU we could bid for Royal Navy contracts and they would be hard pushed not to offer them to us if we were the best bid.
They never note that at present many of the contracts for construction of these naval vessels already goes abroad. In fact we get people like Admiral Lord West, the former First Sea Lord, saying:
“If Scotland became completely independent, there is no way that what would be left of the UK would build its warships in another country.
“The Clyde yards would be entirely reliant on foreign orders from countries who don’t have their own shipbuilding industries.
“They might get one or two orders from people like the Sultan of Brunei or Oman but that would be all. When I was First Sea Lord, I was very impressed by the BAE shipyard on the Clyde. It has state-of-the-art equipment but I don’t see how it could keep going.
“If I was on the board of BAE, I would be questioning whether there should be more investment there until we know if Scotland is going to become a separate country. A safer bet would seem to be Portsmouth and Barrow.
So not only talking rubbish as can be seen from the article above and the fact that contracts already go abroad, but also talking down investing in Scotland over the coming years also!
God that man is dense!
I just love it how they never even once think about admitting that Scotland would have its own Navy and would need its own contracts.
They never once point out that under tendering rules across the EU we could bid for Royal Navy contracts and they would be hard pushed not to offer them to us if we were the best bid.
They never note that at present many of the contracts for construction of these naval vessels already goes abroad. In fact we get people like Admiral Lord West, the former First Sea Lord, saying:
“If Scotland became completely independent, there is no way that what would be left of the UK would build its warships in another country.
“The Clyde yards would be entirely reliant on foreign orders from countries who don’t have their own shipbuilding industries.
“They might get one or two orders from people like the Sultan of Brunei or Oman but that would be all. When I was First Sea Lord, I was very impressed by the BAE shipyard on the Clyde. It has state-of-the-art equipment but I don’t see how it could keep going.
“If I was on the board of BAE, I would be questioning whether there should be more investment there until we know if Scotland is going to become a separate country. A safer bet would seem to be Portsmouth and Barrow.
So not only talking rubbish as can be seen from the article above and the fact that contracts already go abroad, but also talking down investing in Scotland over the coming years also!
#
2012-02-14 09:14
Scots defense contribution to Whitehall is about £3.62 billion.
UK Parliament's strategic defense review document, states that defence expenditure in Scotland dropped by 68% over 6 years. In 2008 it was down around £1.57 billion.
Scotland therefore effectively subsidises the rest of the UK defense budget by over 2 billion a year.
In reality there would still be a Scottish Defense Force, and the First Minister has recently intimated the SDF would likely now maintain one air base, one naval base and one land force.
Essentialy he is saying we will start from what we have left over from the SDSR.
This is important as it is the minimum we need to create an armed forces and can be built from.
The main Naval base would probably be Faslane and there would be smaller supporting bases.
The same applies to the Air Force with Lossiemouth being the main base and smaller support fields being available.
The Army would most likely be a MULTI-ROLE Brigade with supporting Armour.
Professor Malcolm Chalmers, research director at London-based Royal United Services Institute, recently quoted a £2.2bn price tag for an SDF. The £2.2 billion proposed budget, would get everything the First Minister referred to, and substantially more while providing £1.42 Billion in savings to the Scottish Government compared to current costs, while simultaneously increasing spend in country by nearly half a billion pounds compared to current spending levels.
We would be wise to follow the Canadian example and have unified armed forces.
This single institution would consist of the sea, land, and air environmental commands (Navy, Army, and Air Force), which together are overseen by an Armed Forces Council, chaired by the Chief of the Defence Staff.
The benefits of this is that staff can move between disciplines and as there is a single command structure there are not any duplication of efforts or power games between the sections.
This reduces costs of personnel and administration, increases the flexibility to adapt and improves procurement so would be a good idea for Scotland.
In other words, we can get a better run better equiped modern military that fits with the needs of the country and does get involved in offensive operations for less money.
UK Parliament's strategic defense review document, states that defence expenditure in Scotland dropped by 68% over 6 years. In 2008 it was down around £1.57 billion.
Scotland therefore effectively subsidises the rest of the UK defense budget by over 2 billion a year.
In reality there would still be a Scottish Defense Force, and the First Minister has recently intimated the SDF would likely now maintain one air base, one naval base and one land force.
Essentialy he is saying we will start from what we have left over from the SDSR.
This is important as it is the minimum we need to create an armed forces and can be built from.
The main Naval base would probably be Faslane and there would be smaller supporting bases.
The same applies to the Air Force with Lossiemouth being the main base and smaller support fields being available.
The Army would most likely be a MULTI-ROLE Brigade with supporting Armour.
Professor Malcolm Chalmers, research director at London-based Royal United Services Institute, recently quoted a £2.2bn price tag for an SDF. The £2.2 billion proposed budget, would get everything the First Minister referred to, and substantially more while providing £1.42 Billion in savings to the Scottish Government compared to current costs, while simultaneously increasing spend in country by nearly half a billion pounds compared to current spending levels.
We would be wise to follow the Canadian example and have unified armed forces.
This single institution would consist of the sea, land, and air environmental commands (Navy, Army, and Air Force), which together are overseen by an Armed Forces Council, chaired by the Chief of the Defence Staff.
The benefits of this is that staff can move between disciplines and as there is a single command structure there are not any duplication of efforts or power games between the sections.
This reduces costs of personnel and administration, increases the flexibility to adapt and improves procurement so would be a good idea for Scotland.
In other words, we can get a better run better equiped modern military that fits with the needs of the country and does get involved in offensive operations for less money.
#
2012-02-14 19:42
Let's get a couple of things clear. We not only need a naval base we need a Dockyard and a shipbuilder. These are all catered for at Rosyth. Faslane is only a naval Base not equipped for building, repairs or refits. The Clyde yards are builders. Rosyth was a Naval Base and Dockyard and could also build ships. Crombie, just upstream, was an armament depot. Rosyth also has a deep water channel. How did you think they could get that giant carrier in and out? Put it this way you can berth, (base), a ship anywhere but you cannot build/maintain/repair and refit it anywhere.
#
2012-02-14 21:10
The Canadians have recently moved back to a system of three single services but that doesn't mean you can't exploit economies by working jointly in certain areas. It's all very well saying Scotland would retain one air base, one naval base and one brigade sized land force but what tasks would be set for the Scottish Defence Forces. Analysis of those tasks would drive the level of provision and resourcing.
#
2012-02-18 10:11
Hi Taysider & Sleekit. I had a good look at this over several months, units, costs, manning, etc. However it really depands on what future foreign policy is and the commitment to 'securing' Exclusive Economic Zones and working with our neeighbours. Any military force has to be linked up and be flexible enough to work as a ,brigade group' or broken up and work in smaller 'battle groups', whether this be on land sea or air. Do not get me wrong I am not talking about militarising Scotland, but the systems have to work properly. Anyway trops can be deployed on IFOR or UN missions, otherwise they lose their edge.
#
2012-02-14 22:18
Sleekit 2012-02-14 08:14
"Scots defense contribution to Whitehall is about £3.62 billion."
Where on earth do you get that figure from?
"Scots defense contribution to Whitehall is about £3.62 billion."
Where on earth do you get that figure from?
#
2012-02-14 22:53
excel,
Please see this attached link to an article from Newsnet Scotland in January.
newsnetscotland.com/.../...
Paragraph 16
Hazel Lewry did a great job putting together the argument for this, I am just making sure it doesnt get forgotten and adding to her thesis where appliccable.
Please see this attached link to an article from Newsnet Scotland in January.
newsnetscotland.com/.../...
Paragraph 16
Hazel Lewry did a great job putting together the argument for this, I am just making sure it doesnt get forgotten and adding to her thesis where appliccable.
#
2012-02-14 23:02
You may also like to look at these links for further info on the defence industry in Scotland.
www.defencemanagement.com/.../
mod.uk/.../...
Or this one... Just ignore section 30 that has obviously been added by the Scottish Office as an afterthought:
scotlandoffice.gov.uk/.../...
Or this one
betternation.org/.../defence
www.defencemanagement.com/.../
mod.uk/.../...
Or this one... Just ignore section 30 that has obviously been added by the Scottish Office as an afterthought:
scotlandoffice.gov.uk/.../...
Or this one
betternation.org/.../defence
#
2012-02-15 09:17
I've also dug out the 2009-2010 GERS report published in June 2011 and had a look through that.
You are corrrect that they attribute a different figure of £3.16 Billion to Scotlands Contribution.
scotland.gov.uk/.../...
Page 48; Table 6.1
You are corrrect that they attribute a different figure of £3.16 Billion to Scotlands Contribution.
scotland.gov.uk/.../...
Page 48; Table 6.1
#
2012-02-14 12:25
Whatwould Murphy know about defence?
Conscripted into the Sou African military as a teenager he flew the coup back to Scotland to be a failed student.
Found his worth in the student union...
Devils deciple to Reid him of ermine robes
Conscripted into the Sou African military as a teenager he flew the coup back to Scotland to be a failed student.
Found his worth in the student union...
Devils deciple to Reid him of ermine robes
#
2012-02-14 23:08
Puskas
Flew the coop? you're too kind slithered back on his belly seems more appropriate
Flew the coop? you're too kind slithered back on his belly seems more appropriate
#
2012-02-14 19:25
The truth is that it IS HER MAJESTY's Navy NOT the English Navy NOR the Westminster Navy OR The UK Navy. The joint monarchy is not ending - just the Joint Parliament and Her Majesty is Queen of Scots AND Queen of England.
#
2012-02-14 21:37
While you're right about the name of the armed forces and their nominal 'commander-in-chief', the fact remains that it's not the Queen that pays their wages or buys their kit. They're the UK armed forces, who happen - mainly for historical reasons which no longer apply - to be named for the UK head of state. As the UK armed forces, their kit (and their bases) are UK assets which would need to be equitably divided on independence.
#
2012-02-14 09:57
The Security and Defence paper on the SDA web-site sums up the Scots position quite nicely for me. A defence force for Scotland would have no corelation with the current UK set up. It would not and should not be a scaled down version of an Imperial force with a farcical MOD supporting it.
#
2012-02-14 10:06
Mr Murphy said:
"It's crystal clear that if we leave Britain then we leave the Royal Navy. If we lose the Navy we lose the work in the yards. That would cost thousands of skilled jobs and many more in small companies in the supply chain."
Crystal clear is it? Says the professional politician and overgrown student. Remind me again what he has ever done in the real world. All contractors and secondary agencies will be well employed seeing to our needs post independence whilst still competing for contracts world wide. In order to suit a new military footprint all services may indeed need entirely new equipment requirements keeping our contractors in all military sectors quite busy for some time.
"It's crystal clear that if we leave Britain then we leave the Royal Navy. If we lose the Navy we lose the work in the yards. That would cost thousands of skilled jobs and many more in small companies in the supply chain."
Crystal clear is it? Says the professional politician and overgrown student. Remind me again what he has ever done in the real world. All contractors and secondary agencies will be well employed seeing to our needs post independence whilst still competing for contracts world wide. In order to suit a new military footprint all services may indeed need entirely new equipment requirements keeping our contractors in all military sectors quite busy for some time.
#
2012-02-14 19:45
Hey! Some of the Army, navy and air force are ours, bought and paid for. In any case the are Her Majesty's not A UK parliament that ends on independence day.
#
2012-02-14 10:09
5th paragraph error -
"He noted that defence giant BAE has Defence giants has called in consultants to look at the future of the Govan and Scotstoun yards"
Doesn't make sense.
Jake
[Thanks. Now corrected. - NNS Mod Team]
"He noted that defence giant BAE has Defence giants has called in consultants to look at the future of the Govan and Scotstoun yards"
Doesn't make sense.
Jake
[Thanks. Now corrected. - NNS Mod Team]
#
2012-02-14 10:26
From the article:"Like the Scottish yards, these countries accept orders from all over the world. It is not the UK that makes the yards successful, it is the great Scottish skills base and technical expertise that brings orders to the yards – and this will continue to be the case post independence."
BAE Systems plc
Legal name BAE Systems plc
Registration no. 1470151
Registered office
6 Carlton Gardens,
London,
SW1Y 5AD,
United Kingdom
BAE Systems plc
Legal name BAE Systems plc
Registration no. 1470151
Registered office
6 Carlton Gardens,
London,
SW1Y 5AD,
United Kingdom
#
2012-02-14 19:49
Which means nothing? Did you know that anyone, for less than £30 can set themselves up as a registered company?
In any case a London Registered company only means they are refistered to pay tax to the Treasury. If that tax is earned in Scotland then the PLC will be required to pay the tax to Scotland.
In any case a London Registered company only means they are refistered to pay tax to the Treasury. If that tax is earned in Scotland then the PLC will be required to pay the tax to Scotland.
#
2012-02-14 11:00
BAE Systems plc - Public limited Company.
Companies don't think about borders, they think about profits for shareholders.
If they worried about operating in foreign countries, companies like Walmart would have restricted their business operations to America and Ikea to Sweden.
Companies don't think about borders, they think about profits for shareholders.
If they worried about operating in foreign countries, companies like Walmart would have restricted their business operations to America and Ikea to Sweden.
#
2012-02-14 11:04
Scotland will need more than one naval base. Scapa, Rosyth, and possibly Faslane - though it could be further west. They won't have to be big bases.
#
2012-02-14 19:57
Why would they need several bases? You can berth ships just about anywhere? Your base is where you have your Homebase. It is not where you repair, maintain and refit ships. In any case Scapa was an anchorage, not a base. Faslane is a base not a dockyard, Rosyth is a base, shipyard and dockyard with deep water and a firth for anchorage. It had Crombie armaments yard and Port Edger as a base. It also had naval airstation at Donibristle. Faslane was just a base and still is.
#
2012-02-14 11:32
Is this the same J. Murphy who was educated in South Africa?
[Please provide a link to the source that you mentioned - NNS Mod Team]
[Please provide a link to the source that you mentioned - NNS Mod Team]
#
2012-02-14 11:46
The Unionist scare mongering continues and the more they insult the Scottish Electorate, the more it will backfire on them when the Referendum vote comes around. The floating voter will eventually see through all this Unionist propaganda and make their own minds up. The SNP are quite correct in allowing considerable time to let all this Unionist nonsense come out in the wash over the coming years so the voter in informed by the time they vote in the Referendum.
Well said JImbo - right on the mark!
Well said JImbo - right on the mark!
#
2012-02-14 11:57
I think you make a good point about giving time to let the facts come out. This is probably why Moore would rather have the referendum sooner. Keeping people in the dark is a characteristic of Westminster governments.
#
2012-02-14 17:31
"Exile 2012-02-14 10:23
Very impressive, exel. You know their address. And your point?"
From your place of exile do you know anything about the British Defence Industry, especially BAE?
As I have indicated in my post, BAE is British, unemployment is increasing in Britain and if manufacturing jobs are to be created/maintained in Britain, then British Companies will feel obliged to create them in their existing/new plants in Britain.
Scottish (BAE) shipyards presently get jobs from Westminster because they are British yards.
Very impressive, exel. You know their address. And your point?"
From your place of exile do you know anything about the British Defence Industry, especially BAE?
As I have indicated in my post, BAE is British, unemployment is increasing in Britain and if manufacturing jobs are to be created/maintained in Britain, then British Companies will feel obliged to create them in their existing/new plants in Britain.
Scottish (BAE) shipyards presently get jobs from Westminster because they are British yards.
#
2012-02-14 18:18
Except that companies are in business to make maximum profits for their shareholders.
If you seriously believe that their Directors are striving to increase employment in whatever country their HQ is registered, then you are living in a world long gone - if it ever existed.
If you seriously believe that their Directors are striving to increase employment in whatever country their HQ is registered, then you are living in a world long gone - if it ever existed.
#
2012-02-14 19:06
Unless NCR are now a Hungarian company scared out of Dundee by the illegal closed shop ran by AMICUS. Not that you had to join the union if you were already there but you had to if you wanted to work there. At least I was able to refuse to pay the Labour party levy although they refused to pay the equivalent to the SNP when I asked.
#
2012-02-14 22:08
oldnat 2012-02-14 17:18
“If you seriously believe that their Directors are striving to increase employment in whatever country their HQ is registered, then you are living in a world long gone - if it ever existed.”
I said that British Companies would feel obliged to maximise the use of their existing/new plants in Britain, just as I would expect Scottish Companies to do the same here.
At the moments the BAE plants here are in Britain. After independence any inward investment to Scotland would have conditions, they may even sell up and move elsewhere, who knows?
“If you seriously believe that their Directors are striving to increase employment in whatever country their HQ is registered, then you are living in a world long gone - if it ever existed.”
I said that British Companies would feel obliged to maximise the use of their existing/new plants in Britain, just as I would expect Scottish Companies to do the same here.
At the moments the BAE plants here are in Britain. After independence any inward investment to Scotland would have conditions, they may even sell up and move elsewhere, who knows?
#
2012-02-14 20:01
Nah! BAE are a limited Company and registered to pay tax in Britain. Scotland, in case you had not noticed, is still part of Britain and will remain so after independence. As their yards are here they will be required to pay tax here. If they also want to operate in England they will be required to also register there too.
#
2012-02-14 17:50
The workforce in the shipyards aere highly skilled and no doubt the skills are transferrable from building warships - or bits thereof - to building other things. For example:
Wind Turbines. Samsung owns the largest shipyard in the world and has diversified some of its operations there into building wind turbines especially for off shore.
Specialised ships
1) used during the constructiuon and maintenance of off shore energy developments eg wind farms, tidal and marine.
2) For the off shore oil and gas industry. An Aberdeen based company just announced a new contract for the supply of off-shore oil industry. As well as increasing the workforce to service this contract they had to order new ships. The order went to Spain.
Oil Rigs. Two were ordered recently for the new field off Shetland. One order went to S. Korea the other to Norway.
Cruise ships: Anyone noticed how many of these things now ply their trade around the world? Are any Clyde built? Did we not used to build liners?
So there would appear to be plenty of work if the shipyards are prepared to diversify but that is more likely to happen if the Scottish Government has morfe say in directing/encouraging diversification .
One possible fly in the ointment is that iof course the vast hinterland of suppliers and allied trades that used to be supported by the Clyde shipyards no longer exists or at least not to the same extent.
Again a Scvottish Government with full powers could takew steps to redress that and in the meantime keep the yards going with orders for Naval ships more suited to our needs and defence profile as an independent country.
Wind Turbines. Samsung owns the largest shipyard in the world and has diversified some of its operations there into building wind turbines especially for off shore.
Specialised ships
1) used during the constructiuon and maintenance of off shore energy developments eg wind farms, tidal and marine.
2) For the off shore oil and gas industry. An Aberdeen based company just announced a new contract for the supply of off-shore oil industry. As well as increasing the workforce to service this contract they had to order new ships. The order went to Spain.
Oil Rigs. Two were ordered recently for the new field off Shetland. One order went to S. Korea the other to Norway.
Cruise ships: Anyone noticed how many of these things now ply their trade around the world? Are any Clyde built? Did we not used to build liners?
So there would appear to be plenty of work if the shipyards are prepared to diversify but that is more likely to happen if the Scottish Government has morfe say in directing/encouraging diversification .
One possible fly in the ointment is that iof course the vast hinterland of suppliers and allied trades that used to be supported by the Clyde shipyards no longer exists or at least not to the same extent.
Again a Scvottish Government with full powers could takew steps to redress that and in the meantime keep the yards going with orders for Naval ships more suited to our needs and defence profile as an independent country.
#
2012-02-14 18:12
Bert
“ Is this the same J. Murphy who was educated in South Africa? “
Or maybe its this J Murphy?
MR JIM MURPHY AND THE NATIONAL UNION OF STUDENTS
Session: 1995-96
Date tabled: 12.06.1996
Primary sponsor: Livingstone, Ken
Sponsors:
That this House condemns the intolerant and dictatorial behaviour of the President of the National Union of Students, Mr Jim Murphy, who has unconstitutiona lly suspended NUS Vice President, Clive Lewis, because he took part, in a personal capacity, in an open debate at Queen Mary and Westfield College on the issues raised by the Campaign for Free Education; further notes that along with President Elect, Douglas Trainer, both men have warned NUS Executive member, Rose Woods, that if she attends the Scottish launch of the Campaign for Free Education she too will be suspended from the NUS Executive; reminds Mr Murphy and Mr Trainer that freedom of speech is a right in the United Kingdom, that they have no power to overturn the results of elections that went against their preferred candidates and that, whilst these methods are a common practice in dictatorships around the world, they are not acceptable behaviour from someone such as Mr Murphy who is putting himself forward as suitable for election to the House of Commons.
www.parliament.uk/.../991
“ Is this the same J. Murphy who was educated in South Africa? “
Or maybe its this J Murphy?
MR JIM MURPHY AND THE NATIONAL UNION OF STUDENTS
Session: 1995-96
Date tabled: 12.06.1996
Primary sponsor: Livingstone, Ken
Sponsors:
That this House condemns the intolerant and dictatorial behaviour of the President of the National Union of Students, Mr Jim Murphy, who has unconstitutiona lly suspended NUS Vice President, Clive Lewis, because he took part, in a personal capacity, in an open debate at Queen Mary and Westfield College on the issues raised by the Campaign for Free Education; further notes that along with President Elect, Douglas Trainer, both men have warned NUS Executive member, Rose Woods, that if she attends the Scottish launch of the Campaign for Free Education she too will be suspended from the NUS Executive; reminds Mr Murphy and Mr Trainer that freedom of speech is a right in the United Kingdom, that they have no power to overturn the results of elections that went against their preferred candidates and that, whilst these methods are a common practice in dictatorships around the world, they are not acceptable behaviour from someone such as Mr Murphy who is putting himself forward as suitable for election to the House of Commons.
www.parliament.uk/.../991
#
2012-02-14 18:29
Muttering Mumbling Murphy is going to be worth thousands of Yes votes come the referendum. The guy is a spineless creep. I wish labour had a few more like him.
Obviously Murphy gets put up to his inane nonsense by London Labour or Tory or LibDem bosses, just the same as the Fran and Annie Alexander duo and gormless Moore. They're all worked with string.
Cammerons plastic commandos, they couldn't scare the wits out of weans.
ps That's the kindest thing I could come up with about that lot.
Obviously Murphy gets put up to his inane nonsense by London Labour or Tory or LibDem bosses, just the same as the Fran and Annie Alexander duo and gormless Moore. They're all worked with string.
Cammerons plastic commandos, they couldn't scare the wits out of weans.
ps That's the kindest thing I could come up with about that lot.
#
2012-02-15 02:23
Jim Johnston
“ Muttering Mumbling Murphy is going to be worth thousands of Yes votes come the referendum. The guy is a spineless creep. I wish labour had a few more like him. “
They have… in Holyrood and in both houses at Westmidden.
“ Muttering Mumbling Murphy is going to be worth thousands of Yes votes come the referendum. The guy is a spineless creep. I wish labour had a few more like him. “
They have… in Holyrood and in both houses at Westmidden.
#
2012-02-14 22:10
I agree with Exel on the multinational nature of these shipyards, they're no more British than Scotch Whisky distillers, are somehow Scottish. These yards are not state run enterprises.
There was a time when work due to come to the Clyde was diverted to Devonport, there were Tory seats at risk. I don't remember the details, Rifkind might have been involved, but Devonport made an erse of the job and the contract was sent back north.
There was a time when work due to come to the Clyde was diverted to Devonport, there were Tory seats at risk. I don't remember the details, Rifkind might have been involved, but Devonport made an erse of the job and the contract was sent back north.
#
2012-02-14 22:33
cokynutjoe 2012-02-14 21:10
“There was a time when work due to come to the Clyde was diverted to Devonport, there were Tory seats at risk. I don't remember the details but Devonport made an erse of the job and the contract was sent back north.”
As you point out the Scottish yards are not state run enterprises, but politics dictate what work is sent from British Defence Procurement resources, as you know,
So I repeat: “At the moments the BAE plants here are in Britain. After independence any inward investment to Scotland would have conditions,”
“There was a time when work due to come to the Clyde was diverted to Devonport, there were Tory seats at risk. I don't remember the details but Devonport made an erse of the job and the contract was sent back north.”
As you point out the Scottish yards are not state run enterprises, but politics dictate what work is sent from British Defence Procurement resources, as you know,
So I repeat: “At the moments the BAE plants here are in Britain. After independence any inward investment to Scotland would have conditions,”
#
2012-02-14 23:00
Inward investment to any country comes with conditions and depends on conditions. In an independent Scotland, we'll get to negotiate the conditions and create the conditions, for the benefit of Scotland rather than London and the South East of England.
#
2012-02-15 00:16
I would like to make this point, if as MR Murphy states we go independent we then leave the Royal Navy. But if the Queen is still our head of state in Scotland does that not mean we would/could then have the Royal Scottish Navy (R-S-N)which would be part of the Royal Scottish Armed Forces (R-S-A-F) and their would be bugger all Mr Murphy and the rest of his scare mongering Westminster numptys could do about it.
#
2012-02-15 10:31
exel, if Portsmouth closes, as seems likely, and given that Barrow specialises in submarines, warship building in these islands will be concentrated in the Clyde. This is cutting edge and highly specialised work. You can't just conjure up Govan or Scotstoun from scratch somewhere else. England may well find itself without warship building capability.
Like Johann Lammont bewailing the lack of Scottish fabrication contracts for the Forth Bridge, or sleeper contracts awarded oversees as we no longer have the capability, Shit happens!
There may may well be a gap in demand from the RN after the carrier work is completed at Rosyth,(and mothballed?), the money situation still being tight the RN is unlikely to be splashing out on big warship contracts
in any case.
A new Scottish navy will need ships, and if you make a world class product there are other navies in the world.
The Canadians are recruiting in Glasgow at the moment, they have full order books, the demand is there.
Like Johann Lammont bewailing the lack of Scottish fabrication contracts for the Forth Bridge, or sleeper contracts awarded oversees as we no longer have the capability, Shit happens!
There may may well be a gap in demand from the RN after the carrier work is completed at Rosyth,(and mothballed?), the money situation still being tight the RN is unlikely to be splashing out on big warship contracts
in any case.
A new Scottish navy will need ships, and if you make a world class product there are other navies in the world.
The Canadians are recruiting in Glasgow at the moment, they have full order books, the demand is there.
#
2012-02-15 13:18
cokynutjoe 2012-02-15 09:31
exel, if Portsmouth closes, as seems likely, and given that Barrow specialises in submarines, warship building in these islands will be concentrated in the Clyde. This is cutting edge and highly specialised work. You can't just conjure up Govan or Scotstoun from scratch somewhere else. England may well find itself without warship building capability.
IF???
exel, if Portsmouth closes, as seems likely, and given that Barrow specialises in submarines, warship building in these islands will be concentrated in the Clyde. This is cutting edge and highly specialised work. You can't just conjure up Govan or Scotstoun from scratch somewhere else. England may well find itself without warship building capability.
IF???
#
2012-02-15 14:25
exel, everything in shipbuilding is "if".
Shipyards operate from one contract to another and always have, there are no guarantees of work continuity, you're as good as your last ship!
A launch was a big day for some and the dole for others.
This Union has seen our shipbuilding industry decline to the present specialised core. There is no reason why it can't compete and prosper. Or that in time we might be sending a team to Canada to get skilled men back.
There is no future for our yards, in or out of the Union, if they depend for a livelihood on a rapidly declining maritime power. No "if's" about that.
Shipyards operate from one contract to another and always have, there are no guarantees of work continuity, you're as good as your last ship!
A launch was a big day for some and the dole for others.
This Union has seen our shipbuilding industry decline to the present specialised core. There is no reason why it can't compete and prosper. Or that in time we might be sending a team to Canada to get skilled men back.
There is no future for our yards, in or out of the Union, if they depend for a livelihood on a rapidly declining maritime power. No "if's" about that.
#
2012-02-23 00:18
well there goes another three ships for the royal navy to er--- south korea , well in an independant Scotland mr. murphy we will compete globally for shipbuilding work , thanks for all the help getting this work from our caring ' unionist politician's ' who do not give a damm about Scotland or the shipbuilding on the ' Clyde ' but will use it as a propaganda tool against ' INDEPENDENCE '.
Donate to Newsnet Scotland
Latest Comments
- East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Can't wait until they start moaning to t... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
o/t great news for the people who voted ... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
One point I would like to make is in reg... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
Aplinal 2012-05-17 13:17 I take your poi... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
When they act in concert and have a lead... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
This is bizarre. Loony Labour councillor... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
I never watch FMQs on telly. Far better ... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
It's interesting - but not alarming. My ... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Really? Apart from the 1945-50 governme... - The 'Great Debate' isn't just ...
Lesley says, “Deprivation for example is... - Late, Late appearance for Salm...
Thanks for these three. I viewed the Ale... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
bbc website first minister questions! bb... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
Ha ha, I know that - no worries. Just aw... - Conservatives at war over Came...
They should have gone with Murdo ! - Conservatives at war over Came...
"cannot stand the sight of each other" I... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Was just listening to that in the radio ... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
On another thread I remarked I was stopp... - Conservatives at war over Came...
Probably because they are. - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Nice to see the labour leader wearing a ... - Conservatives at war over Came...
What's this? A junior party member from ...