bill wrote:With all the discussion on currency and membership of the E.U. one of the more important issues has not been mentioned so far.If Scotland gains independence they will not automatically gain entry to the final of Eurovision, but have to go through the qualifiers with all the minnows. Just remember that when you vote on Thursday 18 September.
The Darien Scheme
William Paterson, a Scot who's other major claim to fame was the foundation of the Bank of England, was born in Tinwald in Dumfriesshire in 1658. He made his first fortune through international trade, travelling extensively throughout the America's and West Indies.
Upon his return to his native Scotland, Paterson sought to make his second fortune with a scheme of epic proportion. His plan was to create a link between east and west, which could command the trade of the two great oceans of the world, the Pacific and Atlantic. In 1693, Paterson helped to set up the Company of Scotland Trading to Africa and the Indies in Edinburgh to establish an entrepôt on the Isthmus of Darien (the narrow neck of land separating North and South America now known as Panama). It was claimed that the company would prosper through foreign trade and promoted Darien as a remote spot where Scots could settle.
The original directors of the Company of Scotland were Scottish and English in equal numbers, with the risk investment capital being shared half from the English and Dutch, and the other half from the Scots. However, under pressure from the East India Company, afraid of losing their trade monopoly, the English Parliament withdrew its support for the scheme at the last minute, forcing the English and Dutch to withdraw and leaving the Scots as sole investors.
There were no shortage of takers though, as thousands of ordinary Scottish folk invested money in the expedition, to the tune of approximately £500,000 - about half of the national capital available. Almost every Scot who had £5 to spare invested in the Darien scheme. Thousands more volunteered to travel on board the five ships that had been chartered to carry the pioneers to their new home where Scots could settle, including famine driven Highlanders and soldiers discharged following the Glen Coe Massacre.
But, who had actually been out to see this Promised Land, this remote spot where Scots could settle? Well not Paterson apparently! The pioneers had wrongly believed, on the basis of sightings by sailors and pirates, that Darien offered them a colony where entrepreneurs could establish trading links with the world and bring prestige and prosperity to their country. And so it was with much fanfare and excitement that the ships sailed from Leith harbour on 12 July 1698 with 1,200 people on board.
It was however, a depleted and less excited group of pioneers that arrived on the mosquito-infested scrap of land known as Darien on 30 October 1698. Many were already sick and others were quarrelling as power struggles arose among the elected councillors. They struggled ashore and renamed the land Caledonia, with its capital New Edinburgh. The first task was to dig graves for the dead pioneers, which included Paterson's wife. The situation grew worse because of a lack of food and attacks from hostile Spaniards. The native Indians took pity on the Scots, bringing them gifts of fruit and fish. Seven months after arriving, 400 Scots were dead. The rest were emaciated and yellow with fever. They decided to abandon the scheme.
Sadly, news did not travel quickly in the 17th century. Six more ships set sail from Leith in November 1699 loaded with a further 1,300 excited pioneers, all blissfully ignorant about the fate of the earlier settlers. Whoever said that bad news travels fast was obviously not a Scot as a third fleet of five ships left Leith shortly after.
Only one ship returned out of the total of sixteen that had originally sailed. Only a handful survived the return journey. Scotland had paid a terrible price with more than two thousand lives lost. Together with the loss of the £500,000 investment the Scottish economy was almost bankrupted.
It has been argued that the Darien Scheme crippled the country's economy to such an extent that it triggered the dissolution of the Scottish Parliament and led to the 1707 Act of Union with England. Was this a mere coincidence, or had the English withdrawal from the scheme been deliberately engineered to ensure its failure?
gizmo wrote:Am I geting this wrong here Baz?
Is this not a tale of Scots deciding to "go it alone" and falling flat on their faces. Whos side are you on.
tarmmaker wrote:So it's the fault of the English that a hair brained idea by some greedy bloke wanting to line his pockets ended in disaster. Or perhaps the English saw it for what it was.
These ridiculous digs belittle you.
The McCrone Report was a UK Government dossier on the economic viability of an independent Scotland, written in 1974 by Professor Gavin McCrone, a leading civil service economist, for the Conservative UK government.
The report predicted that North sea oil revenue would give an independent Scotland a large tax surplus, on such a scale as to be "embarrassing", making the country "as rich as Switzerland."
It also surmised that this surplus revenue would make the Scottish pound the hardest currency in Europe "with the exception of the Norwegian kronor"
The report went on to advise UK government ministers on the various methods they could use to take "the wind out of the SNP sails".
The incoming Labour administration classified the document as secret over fears it could give a further boost to the SNP's policy of Scottish independence.
A year after Professor McCrone had submitted his report to the government, civil servants (including McCrone) met again in London to discuss its implications. They concluded that his findings had been accurate, and that the average income in Scotland would increase by up to 30% per head if the country became an independent state.
They also concluded that Scotland's "economic problems would disappear", and it would become "the Kuwait of the Western world", though this was balanced somewhat by the opinion that Scotland could risk "disaster" if the oil price collapsed. They summed up by finding that there was a good case for the continuation of the Union.
UK oil production peaked in 1999 and had declined 67% by 2012, but petroleum still contributed £35bn to the UK balance of payments in 2011. The UK government took an estimated £6,530m in direct petroleum taxes in 2012-13 plus £6bn in income tax, national insurance and corporation tax from supply companies in 2011-12.
As of 2012 around 45% of UK oil & gas employees are in Scotland.
The dossier came to light in 2005 when the SNP obtained the report under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
The full provisions of the Act came into force on 1 January 2005.
In his evidence to the Lords Committee on the Economic Implications of Scottish Independence in 2012, Professor McCrone stated that Scottish GDP would increase by around 20% if North Sea oil were to be counted as part of it.
Govangirl wrote:And a wee peek into a Dystopian parallel universe if Scotland says Och Aye . . .
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Price-Freedom-Andy-Skeen/dp/0956761623/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1393254306&sr=1-1
Govangirl wrote:For crying out loud Baz, lighten up!!!!!
baz wrote:No need.
You seem to have light-minded frippery pretty much covered.
baz wrote:
Independence is the most serious issue affecting Scotland, and should be approached with gravitas.
Humour has it's place within the conversation, but to the exclusion of all else?
baz wrote:
Do you have an opinion on successive Westminster governments concealing the McCrone Report for 30 years?
baz wrote:What are your thoughts on radioactive contamination of Scottish waters?
baz wrote:How about the disparity of the Scottish vote and Westminster parliaments?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests