On line bookmakers Betfair are so confident that the result of the referendum on Scottish independence will be "No" that they have already paid out bets that this would be the result.
The firm said it had paid out a "substantial six figure sum" despite polls suggesting the result is close.
"We've decided that 'no' is most likely to be the winning vote in 3 days' time, so we've put our money where our mouth is," Betfair said.
It said betting patterns on its site suggested a 79% chance of a "No" vote.
Three opinion polls published in the Wednesday papers and released on Tuesday evening all show the No vote leading by 52% to the Yes votes 48% once the "don't know"s are stripped out. A poll from IPSO/Mori on Wednesday showed a 2% difference but this seems to be an outlyer as another also showed 48-52.
What the independence campaign has done is to alert those in the other constituent countries to both the "West Lothian Question" and the "Barnett Formula".
The Barnett Formula is the method used to distribute money between the four countries. Based on the population and the items devolved. Its effect is that each person in Scotland gets £10.1K but the Welsh get £9.8k and English £8.5k.
Some politicians argue a fairer funding formula would reflect "need" ie. poverty, ageing etc in each country. On this measure Wales is very hard done by, and Scotland does spectacularly well.
If you aren't Scottish and you think the settlement is iniquitous, you might welcome Scottish independence. At that moment Scotland's higher level of public spending will have to be raised from Scotland's own tax base. The SNP's calculation is that oil and other revenues will cover it. The Institute of Fiscal Studies and the respected Barnett expert Iain Maclean disagree. The real relevance is that a maintenance of the formula was promised in Tuesday's three party "vow". That is highly controversial with politicians in England and Wales.
It's all about oil though, isn't it?
No, it isn't. The "tartan top-up" on public spending goes back more than a century, well before the oil industry, let alone North Sea Oil. In the 1880s Chancellor Viscount Goschen was essentially trying to buy off home rule in Ireland and Scotland.
It failed in Ireland but in Scotland the so-called "Goschen Proportion" channelled £11 to Scotland for every £80 spent in England and Wales. This continued even as Scotland's population fell: effectively a windfall for Scottish spending. Barnett was meant to equalise spending levels through a careful "squeeze". But it was never allowed to bite.
http://news.sky.com/...
The now Lord Barnett has disowned it.
He said it has become a "national embarrassment" and that he feels ashamed his name is still associated with it.
The formula was introduced in 1978 when Lord Barnett was a member of the Callaghan government, and was originally intended to be used for a "year or two".
Instead it was adopted by subsequent governments amid fears that withdrawing it could severely damage the Union.
Lord Barnett, 90, told The Telegraph: "It is unfair and should be stopped, it is a mistake. This way is terrible and can never be sustainable, it is a national embarrassment and personally embarrassing to me as well.
Part of the offer of extra powers to Scotland from the Yes campaign included the preservation of the Barnett formula. This has caused protests from Plaid Cymru because it would continue the underfunding in relation to need that Wales has.
The "West Lothian Question" was raised by Tam Dalyell, the MP for that Scottish constituency in 1977 at the time of devolution. Tam asked why, as a Scottish MP he was entitled to vote on matters that would be devolved to the Scottish Parliament? He would be voting on matters that would affect the other three constituent nations of the UK but not Scotland. (SNP members at Westminster now voluntarily abstain on these matters but Labour MPs do not). The subsequent devolutions to Northern Ireland and Wales add what might be called the "West Carmarthen" and "West Belfast" questions. Failure to address the problem is long overdue.
Both the Barnett Formula and the "West" questions are exciting back bench Tories. Some have suggested that they will block the necessary legislation to transfer the greater powers to Holyrood if the formula stays.
Solving the West Lothian question sounds like it should be fairly easy however there is an interlocking of different powers being devolved to Wales and Northern Ireland and their inability to vary taxation - which the Scottish Parliament can. Some laws made at Westminster only apply to England, others to England and Wales as a single legal system only and others at a UK level. So, for example, defense policy is at UK level; Holyrood and Westminster decided to introduce same-sex marriages (NI did not) and NHS matters only concerning England is decided at Westminster.
Previously laws which only applied to Scotland because of its separate legal system were voted on by a "Scottish Grand Committee" of the Commons. A similar system could be set up to deal with English or England and Welsh only matters. Even that could be unsatisfactory for different regional interests within England. London and the Home Counties, for example, contribute far more in taxes than the rest of the country, including from North Sea Oil but receives far less in benefits or investment. People in Yorkshire and the NE of England in general feel distant from decisions at Westminster and in the same way people in the Orkneys feel distant from Holyrood. The discussions over a new constitutional settlement should be "interesting".
Just to correct some false information that some of you have as was expressed in an earlier diary, now taken down . Higher education tuition is provided at no charge to Scots and EU citizens other than those from the rest of the UK because tuition fees are paid from the block grant the Scottish government receives.
The standard tuition fee for an undergraduate degree course in Scotland in 2014 is £1,820.
The Student Awards Agency for Scotland (SAAS) will pay these fees if you meet eligibility conditions; for example, if you are a Scottish resident and/or a qualifying non-UK EC student.
If you come from the Rest of the UK (RUK), universities in Scotland will charge you variable fees up to a maximum of £9,000 just like England and Wales.
http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/...
If Scotland were to vote Yes and be allowed to join the EU, they would be forced to charge English, Welsh and Northern Irish students like others currently from other EU countries - in other words, they would lose about £9000 for every one.
The Edinburgh study, led by Professor Sheila Riddell from Edinburgh University's school of education, suggests "rUK" students from the rest of the UK should pay up to £170m a year to study in Scotland. Scottish universities must give all other EU students free tuition under EU equal access rules. That has left Scotland with the highest proportion of EU students of any part of the UK, costing the Scottish government roughly £150m a year.
...
There were other barriers such as living costs, travel costs, the extra year of study in Scotland and distance from home that would be disincentives, it found. The study also found that Scotland would need more non-Scottish students to make up for a demographic shortfall in the number of Scottish teenagers until 2023.
Riddell said there was widespread scepticism about [Scottish Education Minister] Russell's policy. "The Scottish government has been very confident that it will be able to charge rUK students, but the general view among policymakers and those with a civil service background is that it is highly unlikely to be possible," she said.