PPRuNe Forums


Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 17th Jun 2014, 08:39   #101 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 191
I find it strange that the SNP have time to think about and write a constitution that they will pass into law to be effective as of March 2016 (if the vote is yes) but can't seem to find the time to give us the answers (with the vote only 3 months away) as to the costs of setting up an iScotland, what currency will be used IF it is true we will not be allowed to use Sterling, and many other questions that they constantly dodge with their usual accusation of "bluff and bluster" or "bullying" - although how pointing out the obvious flaws in their plans can be construed as bullying is beyond me.

What I do like though, should the unthinkable happen, is that by passing the constitution into law with a fixed date, in March 2016, is that the SNP have effectively tied their own hands behind their backs when it comes to negotiating the terms for the separation with rUK. All the rUK have to do is take their time over negotiations and the SNP will either have to back off on their demands or lose face by moving the date of their own Independence Day to the right - a date they are adamant they can meet.
MFC_Fly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 08:40   #102 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 59
Posts: 1,944
Some more context on the start up cost debate

Alexander says Swinney should stop keeping set-up costs secret | Herald Scotland


From the article


Asked what he made of Prof Dunleavy's 250m estimate for the set-up costs, which the First Minister described as "reasonable", the Chief Secretary said: "This would build a bridge about a quarter the way across the Forth. It's not plausible."


Come on guys it's time to start smelling the coffee on this one....

Last edited by Seldomfitforpurpose; 17th Jun 2014 at 09:00.
Seldomfitforpurpose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 10:06   #103 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,860
Must admit I thought the original quote for start up costs was low.

And that was with loosing things like mi5 and mi6 and the like.
mad_jock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 11:25   #104 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 636
The proposed start up costs of 250m are comically low.

As an example, the running costs per year of DVLA IT is 40m alone. This is not even a set up cost. Want to share it/change it to cope with Scottish plates/revenue?

180 new departments would be needed.

250m wouldn't even fund the letterheads and paperclips.

Look how much it cost to tweak the UK tax IT systems to be ready to collect the 3% devolved extra income tax. Holyrood has never used this hugely expensive capability and effectively all the money was wasted as the support contract for the changes has now lapsed.
JFZ90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 12:50   #105 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 59
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFZ90 View Post

250m wouldn't even fund the letterheads and paperclips.

Many know this but will definitely poo poo it as an annoying bit of trivia
Seldomfitforpurpose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 15:46   #106 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lone_Ranger View Post
Seriously?, they put that figure out?, can you give me a link?
I know we are talking about some right numpties here, but surely no adult outside a mental institute could make that estimate....could they?
Here's 2 links for starters for you L_R...

SNP fail to convince on cost of setting up independent Scotland | UK | News | Daily Express

Reveal true cost of independent Scotland, SNP told - The Scotsman
MFC_Fly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 15:55   #107 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,860
the treasury had put out 2.5 billion as the start up cost. And they got upset with that.

It seemed a bit low to me even allowing for the fact that certain things they won't be bothered with.

They are lacking a lot of expertise a lot of which doesn't come cheap.

Even just setting up Scotlands IT solution for tax etc is going to cost a fortune and be a bit of a bitch.

Never mind a lot of the IT infrastructure is XP just now and is on a time delay with Microsoft with support. Sorting that bomb shell out will cost 250 mil plus on its own. Add in the hospitals and your over 500 mill.

So 2.5 billion seems a bit low to me.
mad_jock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 15:59   #108 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 636
You can watch Alex say "yeah not unreasonable" or similar when the scot tory mp (ruth thingy) was quizzing him at fmq, and asking him if the academic blokes estimate was right (I thought he said 150m, can't recall).

Only a couple of weeks back. Its on youtube. Bizarrely some yes voters think he won the argument by laughing about treasury costs (which in my view are still underestimates), whilst providing no information of his own.

I'll post a link if I can find it.
JFZ90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 16:13   #109 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
You really got to laugh, until the bill is presented they are all estimates. And, as demonstrated by the UK Govt which overestimated the treasury's own advice by a factor of x10, the only certainty is that all the estimates will wrong. Wonder how the estimates for Gulf War I and 2, Op Herrick, Apollo programme, govt's welfare reform compared to reality. Only estimate I'm pretty concerned is really accurate at the moment is from the architect planning my garage conversion.

Tom
TomJoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 16:35   #110 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 59
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomJoad View Post
You really got to laugh, until the bill is presented they are all estimates. And, as demonstrated by the UK Govt which overestimated the treasury's own advice by a factor of x10, the only certainty is that all the estimates will wrong. Wonder how the estimates for Gulf War I and 2, Op Herrick, Apollo programme, govt's welfare reform compared to reality. Only estimate I'm pretty concerned is really accurate at the moment is from the architect planning my garage conversion.

Tom

Be nice to have one though, but I did quite accurately predict the poo pooing
Seldomfitforpurpose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 16:40   #111 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Well done you clever boy - gold star for you wee seldom.

One was tempted to use the Blackadder reference but I resisted.


In any respect I am more than happy to trust HM Treasury estimates, after all good enough for HM, good enough for me.

Mind you, looking at the estimate of works I got for the garage conversion - that builder must have went to the HM Govt school of estimates


Tom
TomJoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 16:49   #112 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 59
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomJoad View Post
Mind you, looking at the estimate of works I got for the garage conversion - that builder must have went to the HM Govt school of estimates


Tom

At least that has given you a realistic idea as to whether your planned work is actually affordable, now if you could just get Mr Swinney to do business like that eh
Seldomfitforpurpose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:01   #113 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 49
Posts: 101
2.7bn. Not a penny more, not a penny less. Put your garage on it.
perthsaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:04   #114 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 59
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by perthsaint View Post
2.7bn. Not a penny more, not a penny less. Put your garage on it.

Must admit I was surprised by Tom, I thought he would have just had the garage built and worry about trivia like the cost afterwards
Seldomfitforpurpose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:09   #115 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 636
Do we like polls? Here's one ready for poo pooing!

70% Non, merci.

Momentum is with the campaign for Scotland to stay in the UK | Better Together

The treasury estimate was 1.6-2.7Bn, not sure why some think it was 10 times less. The only guy that said that was the academic who thought 15m per major department would do, and he doesn't sound very credible when you look at e.g. actual IT costs for the DVLA.
JFZ90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:10   #116 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 49
Posts: 101
Wonder if his neighbour's spent the last couple of years telling him it's too risky/expensive/difficult etc. Maybe he's even tried to scare Tom out of doing it.
perthsaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:16   #117 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 59
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by perthsaint View Post
Wonder if his neighbour's spent the last couple of years telling him it's too risky/expensive/difficult etc. Maybe he's even tried to scare Tom out of doing it.

Appears to have worked as Tom has asked for estimates up front before committing himself to anything, seems like sound business acumen to me after all only a complete fool would do it any other way
Seldomfitforpurpose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:22   #118 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 49
Posts: 101
Absolutely, Seldom, and what could be more reliable than a Treasury estimate?
perthsaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:24   #119 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 59
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by perthsaint View Post
Absolutely, Seldom, and what could be more reliable than a Treasury estimate?

One from Alex, John or Nicola maybe......................


Seldomfitforpurpose is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 17th Jun 2014, 17:30   #120 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 49
Posts: 101
Even they fall before the Treasury. No, 2.7bn it is.
perthsaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 18:24.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1