Spending squabbles
A day to go until John Swinney publishes his draft budget - and the statistical squabbling is well under way.
From the Scottish Government, indications that the budget to be announced by Mr Swinney will represent a real terms cut: the first since devolution.
Aha, says the Scotland Office, but that is only because you, Swinney J., opted to bring forward £347m of capital expenditure from 2010/11 - and now have to account for that expenditure.
Other than that, says the SO, there would have been a slight real terms increase in the money available for 10/11 compared with 09/10.
That calculation includes the "efficiency savings" ordered by the UK Government.
Hang on, says the SG. You call them "efficiency savings". We call them cuts.
Plus the acceleration of capital spending was in line with a composite strategy to attempt to revive the ailing economy. Further acceleration is needed.
Let's cut to the chase here. This is a collective challenge for Holyrood. One way or another, our MSPs have to deal with a relatively tight budget, however that sum was reached.
Further, in subsequent years, that constraint will become tighter still. Read Gordon Brown's lips. There is no new spending.
It is understandable that, in advance, the parties squabble over who is to blame. It is understandable that they seek electoral advantage.
However, I fully expect that, such endeavours exhausted, they will get down to the job of matching demand to supply with regard to public sector spending in Scotland.
At this stage, it does not look like that will be accomplished via the cross-party mechanism prompted by the Liberal Democrats.
You will remember that part of the LibDem price for endorsing the previous Swinney budget was a new system whereby other parties would be consulted at an earlier stage over the details.
There have been only two meetings of the new cross-party steering group - and none in recent weeks. In effect - although this will meet adamant denials from some - the mechanism is in suspense.
For three reasons. One, governments like to govern. They tend to want to control their own budgets as much as possible, even when in a minority in Parliament.
Two, Labour in particular harboured a lingering suspicion that they might be sucked into endorsing Mr Swinney's plans without full sight of government documents.
Three, there was a concern abroad at Holyrood that cross-party bargaining might cut across the open, constitutional scrutiny of the budget which is undertaken by Parliament's finance committee.
So, in reality, we're back to the status quo ante. John Swinney will publish his budget - and proclaim that he's protected Scotland from the worst of the Westminster cuts.
Opponents will claim that he's got his priorities wrong.
There will then be protracted negotiation. The revised budget will, eventually, be endorsed.
No complaints here about process. That's politics. Parliamentary politics.
I'm 
© MMX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~24~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Perhaps I'm missing something here. Sounds about like business as usual in any government and actually no noticeable anti-SNP sniping, which I find refreshing.
Complain about this comment
Comment 81 (on last blog): fifebirder wrote
They [SNP] seem to be trying to play fair and not get into slanging matches but at some point somebody is going to have to say enough is enough.
The media are the defacto police when it comes to the bahaviour of a political party. Witness the coverage and vitriol aimed at the BNP from those within the media. When a political party's irresponsible behaviour and public utterances are such that they could conceivably harm our fragile civil democracy then the media step in.
The party is effectively forced into altering it's behaviour and rhetoric as a result, otherwise they become unelectable.
The SNP cannot afford to drag itself down to Labour's level and must behave like a responsible government; that said I do believe that TV resenters like Campbell should have the tables turned on him when he oversteps the mark.
Jim Murphy made a comment last night on the Benbecula reprieve. His interview was going the way of typical interviews, nothing controversial, when he suddenly stated "The SNP have been going around the country politicising this issue". The interviewer let the remark go without asking Murphy to justify it. It angered me not just because it was a lie, but once again Labour were allowed to accuse the SNP of behaviour that only, I repeat ONLY Labour had been guilty of.
This kind of stuff needs to be stamped out, but our media aren’t just ignoring it, they are at times encouraging it and even promoting it.
Campbell's remark on the evening of Megrahi’s release that "Kenny MacAskill is tonight the toast of Tripoli" should have seen him carpetted by the BBC.
Complain about this comment
dont start with the double speak already, Efficiency savings mean cuts , and correct me if I am wrong but is there not a cut of £500 million on the money the Scottish government gets from Westminster ?
Just waiting for Labour to politicise this
Complain about this comment
The politics of this won't help anyone in Scotland who is struggling or unemployed. Frankly I can see some truth in both the SNP and Labour arguments. However everyone accepts the need is now to do more for less in the Public Sector.
What the electorate have a right to see is the parliament offering sensible, innovative ideas on how to deal with the reality of the situation, not squabbling and point scoring. The private sector has shown some innovative ways of dealing with this recession without job cuts, in conjunction with the Unions. We need something similar.
Lets be honest people want to see some real effort at protecting the most vulnerable and making sensible long term decisions that are for the nations benefit.
It will be interesting to see if all sides have learned from last years debacle which showed none of them in a good light. Even more interesting to see if any of the proposals show any innovation at all.
Complain about this comment
You are probably right Brian and the people at the bottom will be the ones to suffer from brown's cuts/efficiency savings, or whatever you want to call it. You can be sure that the other parties will jump on the SNP administration and blame them, solely to try and make political capital out of this. While the BBC Scotland will continue to turn their wheels of innuendo against a democratically elected government in Scotland while lamblasting the Labour government in Westminster. Oh, what a tangled web we weave...
Complain about this comment
There have been only two meetings of the new cross-party steering group - and none in recent weeks.
For three reasons. One, governments like to govern. They tend to want to control their own budgets as much as possible, even when in a minority in Parliament.
Two, Labour in particular harboured a lingering suspicion that they might be sucked into endorsing Mr Swinney's plans without full sight of government documents. Eh? Did Labour boycott the meetings? Did they simply refuse to attend - come on - what?
Three, there was a concern abroad at Holyrood that cross-party bargaining might cut across the open, constitutional scrutiny of the budget which is undertaken by Parliament's finance committee.
I have to say that that these three reasons appear contrived, there was either an initial willingness on all parties to hold these meetings or there wasn't. Is this an attempt at excusing more bad behaviour tomorrow before it actually happens?
There of course might just be a fourth reason, that the Unionist parties were far too absorbed with politicising the Megrahi decision to focus on anything else - not to mention the holidays.
It is understandable that, in advance, the parties squabble over who is to blame.
Ah, so they are not squabbling over the sums involved but over who is to blame? Blame for what Brian?, the grant handed to Scotland is controlled by Westminster - full stop. The economic stewardship of Gordon Brown has left the UK in a dire position.
So, there is only one party to blame for this economic mess and the hardship that this oil producing country is about to endure - Labour.
Oh, and by the way, since when was The Scottish Office the official opposition to the Scottish Government, has Iain Gray been sidelined already with little over six weeks to go until the by-election?
Complain about this comment
# 96 mrbfaethedee on 'The final cut?'
Isn't it strange that the USA has been borrowing trillions of dollars for years to fund its illegal wars and for subsidising its military based and other industries and then, all of a sudden, a few (relatively speaking) people fail in their morgage repayments and the banks go bust! Sure I believe that. This is another global financial con to get the rest of the western world to pay for the USA's debt by pretending that there is a crises in the banking industry.
The trouble that we in the UK are in is because Brown did not encourage the Bank of England to hold back our investment arms of our banks from diving into this financial bubble. I don't believe for one moment that he did not know what was going on and I don't believe that our bankers did not know either. We are being ripped off to pay for this 'new world order' so that those at the top can stay at the top. Capitalism(?), don't make me laugh; this is out and out global financial dictatorship.
Complain about this comment
# 98 handclapping in 'The final cut?'
I find little to disagree with you.
Complain about this comment
Brian
If you are spending £700 and putting £200 on the card each month you are heading for disaster. That is what the UK is doing at present. It's not just squabbles over spending that we're needing but some wet towels and strong coffee as we try to find cuts of 29% to stop ourselves sliding into bankruptcy.
If we are going to ringfence the NHS then we need to make sure the NHS is only doing what it should and not being used as cover for spending on social problems that have been medicalised to keep them out of politicians hair.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Once again our pretend politicians will make long winded speeches, adopt positions and generally attempt to look as though they are fighting the SNP budget , but in reality an election is the last thing the opposition parties want so the budget will be agreed after a few non concessions have been made. As for spending cuts on public bodies and local government, this as usual will consist of getting rid of a few dustmen, roadmen and other lower paid members of the civil service; meanwhile a myriad new executive posts will be created along with more unnecessary outreach, councelling, drug and PC advisory workers all at over egged salaries and all contributing nothing to the public wellbeing. More overweight community and traffic wardens will also no doubt appear at more cost than worth and a few new drug /alcohol initiatives will be instituted to get rid of any cash surplus that may be hanging about.
Complain about this comment
A budget inbalance caused by bringing forward expenditure from the next financial year.
Just think what would happen if a new Forth Road Bridge were financed by bringing forward money, (which would have to be borrowed internationally), from a future and indeterminate year in the future.
In Monopoly Terms:
Mr Salmond, Go the Jail, Go directly to Jail, do not pass Go, do not collect your First Minister's generous pension.
Complain about this comment
None of the unionist parties wish to be seen as working with the SNP as the union means more to them than Scotland. We are going to suffer as are other regions of the UK caused by the nuLab's scorched earth policy.
FT.com
Complain about this comment
# 102 Thomas_Porter on 'The final cut'
'I would be pleased if all sides could agree to my idea of the NHS though :D
lol. Wouldn't life be wonderful if that were the case for all of us.
'You get what's coming to you, you should live with the consequences with what you choose to do.
I'm not too sure that I can agree with that as there are many situations where people can get into trouble without them realising that this is what can happen to them. You can't put an old head on young shoulders.
'The me, me, me attitude is what exists while we create a nanny state, people want more and more but are unwilling to put anything into the system.
Remember that the NHS was started up to stop people from becoming infirm and dying from easily preventable deseases.
'However I will point out that I would not refuse to help those who are unfortunate to go through a terrible phase which is out of there control, but why should I help those who do put themselves at risk?
I refer you to my previous answer but one above and I would add that not all of us in this society can be as strong as what you say you are.
'I am far more individualistic then you, so I don't see us agreeing any time soon :-)
You are making an assumption about me based on my viewpoint of what a society should be. I have fallen a few times due to the industry and trade that I have, but have always managed to pick myself back up again. Some people are just not that strong. So, I agree with you in that we will have to agree to disagree. ;-)
Complain about this comment
#11. At 6:38pm on 16 Sep 2009, kaybraes wrote:
...in reality an election is the last thing the opposition parties want...
Not THAT is the truth. It is almost funny how MUCh the opposition parties do NOT want an election. The chances that they'll SERIOUSLY challenge Mr. Salmond and the SNP are pretty close to nil because that would mean they would have to (as we say in these parts) PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Fat chance. They know where that would lead.
Complain about this comment
You make a big assumption Brian -
"Labour in particular harboured a lingering suspicion that they might be sucked into endorsing Mr Swinney's plans without full sight of government documents."
Half of Scottish labour MSPs could not spell their own names, let alone make A cosidered judgement of a complex financial budget.
How would Westminster manage if they were given a block grant? Brown would blow it in five minutes at the behest of his banking pals in the city of London.
D McN
Complain about this comment
Amusing Freudian slip: Not THAT is the truth.
Indeed not. I have never seen parties quite so anxious not to go to the polls. I fear I snickered at MacScroggie (12.). The opposition would drag Mr. Salmond back as they screeched, "No! We'd have to go to the polls!"
Complain about this comment
12. MacScroggie
A fine Scots name, Mr MacScroggie, you must be proud of your heritage. Tell me is that the 83 Princes Street MacScroggies or the 145 West Regent Street MacScroggies? I'm sure you will be glad that your old family feud is past news and that both branches of the family are back on friendly terms.
Complain about this comment
Brian
"One way or another, our MSPs have to deal with a relatively tight budget, however that sum was reached.
Further, in subsequent years, that constraint will become tighter still. Read Gordon Brown's lips. There is no new spending.
It is understandable that, in advance, the parties squabble over who is to blame. It is understandable that they seek electoral advantage. "
However that sum was reached? Brown has presided over a meldown in UK finances from selling our gold reserves at the bottom of the market to letting the banks off the leash to make rash short term profits with no regard to prudence - remember that phrase?
"Read Gordon Brown's lips. There is no new spending" can't wait to see ho he'll trim MoD inefficiencies - if he ducks that one we'll just have to tighten our belts I suppose.
"the parties squabble over who is to blame." - well they might be squabbling but I know who is to blame - don't you know?
Complain about this comment
Even as I was voting "Yes"-"Yes", I never thought that I would be in the position of saying that, for the sake of Scotland, the Scottish Parliament (or ought that to be Government?) SHOULD be exploring the deployment of the 3% variation in Income Tax rates.
Provided that We The People can SEE the fruits of the additional taxation - and, no, the Forth Crossing would NOT be an acceptable cause - being taxation of, by and for Scots, I think that it could somewhat perversely be an electoral asset for the SNP.
Complain about this comment
Gordon Brown's 'costs of failure' will reach £256 billion
Time to close the border methinks.
Complain about this comment
The Life of Brian
Is brian There? is a bit like asking god -- are you there?
No reply would indicate that the almighty is acting in character as the (man given charecteristic) of an almighty - whilst a sneaking suspicion is reinforced that there is in fact nobody in attendance.
Complain about this comment
Good to see that the Great Leader's minions haven't lost their touch when it comes to old-fashioned airbrushing 'non-persons' from history.
Complain about this comment
#21, cynicalHighlander
"Gordon Brown's 'costs of failure' will reach £256 billion"
History (or, rather, The Future) is unlikely to judge Gordon Brown well - a bit like Dubya but without the (unintentional) funny bits - so the Great Leader should go for broke, and do everything to make the country ungovernable when Call Me Dave's successor as Tory Leader {my money's on Hague} moves in to No.10 next year.
Complain about this comment
#20 Fae Farfar
Why do you assume the correct move is to increase tax by the allotted 3%?
Surely decreasing it would free more money up for spending on goods and services - thereby increasing employment or investing in business expansion - thereby increasing employment - I assume you'r happy with current levels of unemployment and state dependency - or don't you trust the average person to employ there own money wisely?
Complain about this comment
20. At 8:59pm on 16 Sep 2009, Fae Farfar wrote:
Even as I was voting "Yes"-"Yes", I never thought that I would be in the position of saying that, for the sake of Scotland, the Scottish Parliament (or ought that to be Government?) SHOULD be exploring the deployment of the 3% variation in Income Tax rates.
Provided that We The People can SEE the fruits of the additional taxation - and, no, the Forth Crossing would NOT be an acceptable cause - being taxation of, by and for Scots, I think that it could somewhat perversely be an electoral asset for the SNP.
----------------
increasing taxes while the rest of the UK pays less is political suicide. no matter what the argument would be, the snp be thumped.
if they were in the position to lower them, then yes. but at present we rely on income from westminster and that is being cut.
but you are correct, using additional taxes would be unacceptable, especially to those who aren't going to use it.
while i can see swinney's point, i am a bit cautious about using money from next year's budget. it is not a huge sum but he must be careful.
no 23:
what else do you expect from big brother?
Complain about this comment
Doesn't look like we need to fear invasion, stand down the troops.
Why focus on failed states?
Complain about this comment
24. Fae Farfar
""Gordon Brown's 'costs of failure' will reach £256 billion"
History (or, rather, The Future) is unlikely to judge Gordon Brown well - a bit like Dubya but without the (unintentional) funny bits - so the Great Leader should go for broke, and do everything to make the country ungovernable when Call Me Dave's successor as Tory Leader {my money's on Hague} moves in to No.10 next year."
The IMF's not far away if they have anything left in there coffers. How the old Labour members can allow Brown such freedom is beyond rational comprehension has non of them a conscience.
Complain about this comment
#The IMF's not far away if they have anything left in there coffers. How the old Labour members can allow Brown such freedom is beyond rational comprehension has non of them a conscience.
Methinks what they're mainly lacking (strictly distant observation, mind) is a backbone. That was my thought while watching the opposition at Holyrood as well.
Spinelessness has its penalties.
Complain about this comment
29. JRMacClure
"Spinelessness has its penalties."
A difficulty in being upright!
Complain about this comment
Ah, a spine indeed, invertebrates and silent, maybe not them all, make some noise please.
Complain about this comment
Off Topic (no change there) Part II of the Scottish Review's
investigation into swine flu
Complain about this comment
"efficiency savings"....A Cut is a Cut is a Cut, simple as that, the good news is that there is an almost infinite amount of dead wood in the Scottish public sector that could be cut away with no significant loss of services to the Public. Long over due I'd say.
Complain about this comment
So the political elite now! consider their political class has bottle necked and we all live in a neon liberal minded world, well that's hope wee eck and a few others are more left than the Blair world of social democrats. The more I hear of Mandelson this weather the more I'm certain he wants to finish Blair's work and unite the lid/dems and labour under one umbrella.
Complain about this comment
Is online Ed being silenced ?
By Brian, Glen, Kirsty or by the paid labour bloggers ?
We should be told.
Don't worry if you wont tell us we will find out elsewhere.
I see the labour's Ben Bradshaw is now calling for the removal of the BBC Trust and the BBC governors. Not before time. Sadly, I think it is just to keep Murdoch onside. However the BBC is in dire need of a honest and competent complaints system - therefore the choice is the lesser of two evils.
Finally I don't think Glen or Kirsty will survive as political journalists if complaints are taken seriously.And the rest of you need to buck up your ideas. Here to help. :)
Complain about this comment
Boodnock
infinite amount of dead wood in the public sector
Hate to tell you this but it will never happen ,because for every public service worker there is a shadowy figure who follows them around ticking boxes here there and every where .No one knows there names but they can usually be identified by a card swinging round their necks, an officialish looking diary/clip board and in the females case a suit from Next. They also speak in a strange language where the words cascade, robust ,root and branch and transparent replace commonly known english such as common sense, capability and competence.If you should see one of these creatures be afraid be very afraid
Complain about this comment
35. At 11:00pm on 16 Sep 2009, astonishedII wrote:
Is online Ed being silenced ?
By Brian, Glen, Kirsty or by the paid labour bloggers ?
We should be told.
LOL! Your soo right, Glen 'anything but impartial' BEEB and co, LOL
Complain about this comment
#37. You lost me with your sharp left turn there. I mean I follow (quite well since I make them) that BBC is hardly impartial but should be told what?
Complain about this comment
Any comments about this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8258320.stm
Complain about this comment
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/14/peter-mandelson-spending-cuts
Mandy's coup.
Complain about this comment
Where does the BBC go from here with Ben Bradshaw threatening their expansionism and the BBC Trust from Westminster and the SNP sure to sort them out in Scotland? Are they between a rock and a hard place? Who will they show their unstinting support to now? Perhaps their best bet would be to descend into a position of absolute neutrality like they should be anyway.
Complain about this comment
@33 & 36
I'd love to hear from you some examples of this "dead wood" and mysterious clip board carriers (sounds like too much Daily Mail Reading).
Efficiency is of course always sought by the vast majority in the public sector. Personal experience suggests it is when individuals believing in the cheap "inspirational" management textbooks and the need to be more like the private sector are given authority that things start to go awry. Testosterone fuelled budget protection, fear of advising local politicians where that advice maystand in the way of career advancement and a desire to "network" their way into the private sectors hearts.
I agree we need a full scale revision of policy regards public service provision but would have a personal view that we need to invest more meaningfully in our social structures and supports to prevent a quick return to the private sector greed that led us to this current recession. The Scandinavian model appeals and appears to have feared a more robust system in the face of global shock.
I would also press for increased localization of overall government spend. Hypothecating central resource allocations to local levels throws up significant questions over the efficiencies at the core. I fear however the paranoia that seems to grip senior Westminster politicians would prevent them from making any meaningful steps on the subsidiarity route.
Complain about this comment
@39
Sadly GB misled only himself. Selfishly however am delighted he handed the Tories such a present. Double bonus as it further guarantees a Tory landslide in the next general election (if you're gonna get cuts best they're done by professional butchers) and push the Scots further towards the critical mass you have mentioned.
A referendum returning a "yes" vote in 2010 is beginning to look like an achievable goal.
Complain about this comment
All right. I admit it. This has driven me crazy for years. I'm sure there is some secret Scottish meaning to calling Salmond Wee Eck. But I can't figure it out and after a couple of years of trying, I give up. (or is it just another thing that you do in order to drive foreigners crazy and there IS no reason--I long since figured out that was the REAL reason for kilts)
And while you're at it please share your secret decoder ring. =)
Complain about this comment
44.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oor_Wullie will explain all.
But now you know the secret I will have to kill you.
Complain about this comment
Thanks. (I think--backs out of reach)
Possibly I would have figured this out did I speak Glaswegian.
Oh, on the kilt thing--I actually quite like them and would be fine with all Scots men being required by law to wear them. But we all know they were invented in the 1700s just to frighten small children (the hairy legs--you know).
Complain about this comment
Examples of deadwood in public sector - Trident on the Clyde and labour in power!
This is the absurdity of London labour, they will keep this relic of the cold war. Yet, they will cut front line services such as Health, Education, Transport, Social Services, Public Housing and policies aimed at eradicating poverty.
We keep coming back to the same old theme, what are labour for, answer opportunist careerist with no philosophy, heart or attachment to the communities they purport to serve.
Meanwhile the Scottish Government will get on with the business of governing for all the people of Scotland!
D McN
Complain about this comment
#33 boodnock
Welcome back. Take my repeated apology for my first treatment of you for granted. However, there is still aneed on this blog to justify your assertions, instead of just making statements.
"A Cut is a Cut is a Cut, simple as that, the good news is that there is an almost infinite amount of dead wood in the Scottish public sector that could be cut away with no significant loss of services to the Public. Long over due I'd say."
What would be the "almost" of "almost infinite" cuts in public sector provision? Education and Social Work are the biggest expenditure areas of Councils. If you advocate (as I would) reduction of spending on central provision as opposed to teachers and social workers, then that would produce avery limited reducti9on in the council budge.
Complain about this comment
# 45 InfrequentAllele
Traitor ;-)
Complain about this comment
I work in local government, where we've been told cuts are going to be with us for around 5 years. To be honest 'efficiency savings' have been going on for most of the time I have been in local gov and I don't think there is that much inefficiency left ( I worked in the private sector prior.....not much different) however, I have noticed a large amount of posts created recently which are just not core services.....'bio-diversity officer', 'walking co-ordinator', 'travel to work planner' etc etc......just useless posts costing thousands of pounds. Also, councils seem to love to employ private sector 'consultants'...againn costing a fortune for little forseeable good.
Those are the easy cuts but I bet they never get made, instead they'll look at reducing service in core or front line services. Idiots.
Complain about this comment
Has anyone any idea when/if Brown is going to allow the by-election in Glasgow NE? This is getting beyond a joke. Even though I was never a great fan of the Weegies (jealousy at their football dominance I should imagine. However, the Arabs did OK against Celtic) being a kettle boiler myself, this leaving the good people of Glasgow NE without an MP, because of Labour's political fright of the SNP taking it, is just insulting to that constituency. I hope that when the by-election does take place, if it ever does, that the voters of Glasgow NE will remember this.
Complain about this comment
#49. At 07:12am on 17 Sep 2009, gedguy2 wrote:
# 45 InfrequentAllele
Traitor ;-)
Haha! I'll soon know ALL your secrets.
Complain about this comment
Apparently the hoody has been around for sometime, along with cross dressing. geduy,JRMacClure.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1200-1300_in_fashion
Complain about this comment
Brian the risk for all of Scotland is that this reduced figure will form the base and when the Tories are in power for 10 years they will use this lower block grant to cut back on future Barnett and public spending in Scotland.
Holyrood should recieve it's full grant and the Parliament should identify savings to be paid pay back as agreed in devolution.
SLAB and the Libdems are being shortsighted on this.
Complain about this comment
# 52 JRMacClure
I'll bet you're one of those CIA types, in disguise, trying to break all our secret Scottish codes. ;-) Well good luck to you as there are areas in Scotland where I haven't a clue what they are talking about.
I was visiting a friend in Hawick once and stopped my car to ask directions from some children playing in the street. After they told me I immediately stopped off at a corner shop and bought a local map as I never understood a word they said. There was also the time when I was helping to build the camp at Mossbank in the Shetlands and worked with a local Shetlander. It took me nearly three months to understand him. I'm sure he had the same problem with my accent.
Complain about this comment
#53. At 07:36am on 17 Sep 2009, derekbarker wrote:
Apparently the hoody has been around for sometime, along with cross dressing.
Hmmmm Never thought of it quite that way. =)
Complain about this comment
#51. At 07:22am on 17 Sep 2009, gedguy2 wrote:
Has anyone any idea when/if Brown is going to allow the by-election in Glasgow NE? This is getting beyond a joke.
Ok. I know someone explained this to me before but I'm still confused. Is there any law about someone actually having to HAVE this mythical by-election? Or might they simply talk about it until it becomes a moot point--I assume after the GE?
Complain about this comment
#44, JRMacClure
Re calling Salmond Wee Eck, is the desired explication as simple as noting:
1. Eck is a Scots diminutive of Alexander
2. Salmond is overweight, hence the use of Wee is ironic
Of course, it might never have caught on but for the inbuilt sentiment arising from the Oor Wullie character.
Complain about this comment
Budget review today! Hmmm! what will it bring, rows of empty private housing and single mothers hanging their old love letters out to dry.
It's enough to make you stop believing. when will their be a true harvest for the world.
Seems to me! that our politicians have accepted the UB40 situation and thousands more will become a satistical reminder of no care.
If you do tolerate this then your children will be next?.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjwOeLj4egI
Complain about this comment
I knew that Salmond was a bit overweight so I followed the wee part. But Eck as a diminutive from Alexander had totally escaped me. And it didn't come up on a Google search for Eck either which I assure you I had done several times and ended up scratching my head and making mumbling comments about crazed Scots. ;-)
Complain about this comment
Well, if anyone ever figures out if they're having a by-election, let me know. Time for the yank to go to bed.
Complain about this comment
I've noticed two of my comments have been referred to the mods. They have not yet been deemed inappropriate so I'll have to wait to find out the result of the complaint.
The content of both posts was not abusive, one was off topic and sought to address a suggestion that the SNP ought to be more vociferous in dealing with smears. It also suggested that the media here in Scotland is being derelict in it’s duties by apparently allowing and arguably encouraging Labour’s increasingly inappropriate behaviour.
The other was indeed on topic and was critical of parts of Brian Taylor’s blog.
The comments initially did appear, for a number of hours in fact, so the suspicion is that a third party has referred them, so I would really be interested to find out the nature of the complaint.
If people going off topic is causing so much ire at the BBC then perhaps they ought to take a look at this policy that seeks to corral people into these blogs and effectively constrain both the topics under discussion and of course the accessibility of comments to the casual reader.
Imagine if the BBC in Scotland were to offer a comment facility beneath actual articles !! then they really would be offering an interactive service to the public – however, it might also serve to make many aware of some uncomfortable truths.
Finally, how many people have noticed a certain G. Campbell has began to appear regularly on Good Morning Scotland – could these early morning stints be some kind of ‘reward’ for his less than professional behaviour?
From 'toast of Tripoli' to 'toast at 05:00 AM' – enjoy the cold mornings Glenn.
Complain about this comment
Yup, time for the Party to Bite The Bullet and "explore" the issue of using our Devolved power to vary the rate of income tax.
The money for the budget is being cut. It is not being cut by the Scottish Parliament. It needs to be made clear that if we want public services and jobs and the kind of society that is not a Thatcherite-Blairite-Brownjob free-market devil-take-the-hindmost, it needs to be paid for.
If Scotland wants this, hey, our Pocket Money from Paw Broon has just been cut. We need to go out and (with apologies to the inhabitants of Auchenshoogle) ask Granny Macdonald if she needs her dug found or her messages carrying for a few pennies.
Or we dig deeper above and beyond our subventions to our Lords and Masters in Westmunster.
Alternatively, we could always take control of our own fiscal affairs like a modern nation determined to build a society different from the one we are forced to be a part of.
Say kids, can anyone say the I-word ?
Complain about this comment
Comment 57:
I don't think the Glasgow NE by-election can be called before the UK parliament resumes which I believe is Oct 12th. - if I'm wrong then I'm sure someone will correct me.
The delay is an absolute disgrace - no question, both an affront to democracy and an abuse of privilege.
Brown is about to undertake another 'Global' tour before then so we'll wait until the 'Global Gordon' headlines have run their course then the date will probably be announced.
Complain about this comment
Did anyone watch newsnicht last night? It's on the iplayer. I do wish that beeb reporters would let people speak, I realise that they have to keep a tight rein on their guests or we will be treated to a series of party political broadcasts, but Stuart Hosie's treatment on the programme last night was a bit off. If your going to ask the man a question you have to let him answer it. The contrast with treatment of John McFall was there for all to see.
Complain about this comment
#35. At 11:00pm on 16 Sep 2009, astonishedII wrote:
"However the BBC is in dire need of a honest and competent complaints system"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to the BBC complaints, I submitted a complaint about the bias shown by the BBC with regard to the release of al-Megrahi. I complained about the Shereen Nanjani Morning Extra phone in when she was begging for "the silent majority" to phone in with disapproval of the al-Megrahi release and about the BBC commissioned ICM poll which seemed to bear no relation to the reality. That was over a fortnight ago. I just called the BBC this morning to complain that I had recieved no response to this complaint. After a long silence I was advised by a very pleasant young lady that she would advise the compaints team that I had called to chase up my complaint (they are supposed to respond within 10 days) and that someone should respond to me shortly. As I ended the call I heard the young lady heave a long sigh. Obviously the Beeb is hoping that if they stick their head in the sand long enough it will all go away. It won't.
I am not an SNP supporter, but I will demand a level playing field from the BBC which I HAVE to pay for. Nothing less will do. The Unionist bias that I have seen from the BBC must be stopped.
Complain about this comment
Subrosa has some interesting info on her website.
More power for Holyrood apparently!
You can also read this news on teletext she says.
However , I would always recommend a visit to her site.
Complain about this comment
Not for the squeamish! Murphy: On track for Calman response this Autumn
Complain about this comment
ifinite amount of dead wood
OK,I admit I exaggerated the clipboard,instead as Noahbro pointed out regarding new posts, I work in the public sector and they now employ a team to make us more environmentally aware so instead of the clip board they send us reams and reams of surveys and audits(paper) -so they can tick their boxes 'so if anyone asks its "been done" BUT NOTHING EVER CHANGES.The same environmentally aware team who at night leave every light and computer on,the traveller planner who quite frankly could'nt care how you get to work but we've done an audit on it and guess what ah due to expense etc we can't actually build a bigger carpark,provide an alternative etc but the boxes have been duly ticked and my favourite we'll employ a "team" to invite the public to comment on the service received ,meanwhile we'll cut back on the people actually providing the service-there is a strange logic there but if anybody should ever ask for statistics we've got the boxes covered
Please note NOT a Daily Mail reader and did you have to use the word robust
Complain about this comment
#68
Ouch!, do we have an SNP government at Holyrood or did I just dream it? Seems we're just going to ignore that inconvenient fact.
Complain about this comment
68. At 10:32am on 17 Sep 2009, cynicalHighlander wrote:
Not for the squeamish! Murphy: On track for Calman response this Autumn
I noticed when reading this that:
"Mr Murphy also established a cross-party steering group of politicians to look at the implementation of Calman. The Secretary of State chairs the group, which has representatives from Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties at both Westminster and Holyrood."
Errr..Isn't there something missing from this? I was under the impression that there was another political party in Holyrood. I surely must have been mistaken, because on the Ministers page of the Scotland Office website it states:
"Role of Scotland Office Ministers
The primary role of the Scottish Secretary is to promote the devolution settlement and to act as guardian of it. He promotes partnership between the Government and the Scottish Government and between the two Parliaments."
This would seem to me to be a very lopsided partnership when one of the partners doesn't even figure in the cross-party steering group.
This is like having your ship berthed in Portsmouth but your rudder based in Rosyth. Navigation with this system would be difficult to say the least.
Perhaps it is the Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties that actually govern Scotland and they have just forgotten to tell the Scottish National Party....
and the electorate.
Time they were put in their place.
Complain about this comment
7. gedguy2
"Capitalism(?), don't make me laugh; this is out and out global financial dictatorship."
Yup! We're being milked like cows. Docile and domesticated, aren't we.
The thing that really bothers me is that we were told that gloabl economy would collapse if we didn't inject it with vast sums of money, so why didn't they float the economy from the bottom up? The financial sector is an incredibly efficient mechanism for hoovering up money out of the economy, so it would have got it - but it would have passed through the hands of individuals and businesses in the process allowing a more or less normal state of affairs to persist. Instead, we give it straight to them and they withold it from the economy. Scam!
Complain about this comment
# 68 cynicalHighlander
There are a lot of points that need to be answered:
1. How can it be 'cross party consensus' when the largest oparty in Scotland did not take part?
2. Is the Westminster government going to force the Scottish government to collect its own taxes (as per the Calman report) and if they are:
a. Will the Westminster government allow access to the tax office collectors to collect this tax?
b. How will the system work:
i. Will the UK government decide how much tax should be collected and and remove this from the barnett formula before the tax is collected?
ii. Is there going to an inter-governmental committee set up to decide what the amount of taxes should be collected?
3. Can the UK government force the Scottish government to follow the wishes of the Calman commission?
4. Can the UK government change or add to the report of the Calman commission?
These questions need to be answered and I suspect even more questions will probably come to light when the UK government has made up its mind.
Complain about this comment
#68 a curious lack of any reference to consultation with the Scottish Government in there. I wonder why...
Complain about this comment
From The Scottish Office website:
Jim Murphy added: "[Unionist ]Cross-party consensus was fundamental to the establishment and the successful operation of the Commission and we are all keen to maintain this [Unionist ] consensus now as we work to take the recommendations forward."
I have edited the statement in order to improve it's accuracy.
Timescale:
16 September - JMC plenary meeting will consider the inter-governmental recommendations from Calman
September - The Officials Group of civil servants will meet regularly throughout September and beyond in order to prepare advice to Ministers on the wide-ranging Calman recommendations.
September - Scottish Secretary and new House of Commons Speaker to meet to discuss Calman and possible implications for Parliament.
Anyone else not ecstatic about having someone like Jim Murphy represent the Scottish Parliament?
As for the implications for the London Parliament, I'm not at all interested in what they are - improving the governance of Scotland should be the only consideration.
Complain about this comment
4. northhighlander
"However everyone accepts the need is now to do more for less in the Public Sector. "
Why?
How much did the bank bailout cost the UK? £1.5 trillion according to the beeb.
So, for systems that we as a society have decided are sufficiently important that they ought to be publicly funded - we scrimp, save and cut, while for profit/loss(notionally) making private enterprise gone wrong we spend the majority of our gdp.
Glad to know 'everyone' has their priorites straight!
Complain about this comment
My earlier comments seem to have been OK'd by ther mods, however my online moniker 'Online_Ed' has been replaced by a unique ID 'U14094468'.
Probably something to do with the related database table, can the mods have a word with the database administrator and tell him/her to sort this out?
Either that or the BBC are considering removing my Online_Ed account.
Let's wait and see.
Complain about this comment
If as we believe swingeing cuts will be made at least many public sector workers can lose their jobs safe in the knowledge that those who created this mess are still picking up tidy sums in bonuses having already received their share from the public purse.
The bottom line is that the government has used Billions of public money to prop up the banks without a thought about the provision of funding to schools, police, fire, hospitals roads transport and the environment which are now to be cut to fund the deficit
Once again those in government have proved that they don't care about the ordinary people of the country.
And if you don't think you will be affected by the cuts then ponder it next time after your 'pride and joy' bottoms out after hitting a pothole we are all going to be worse off through these cuts and what's more we don't simply need to balance the books in this country we also need to repay some of this money...so look out for tax rises
It won't be so much a 'tax and spend' government more of a 'tax and cut' government
Complain about this comment
@50 "'bio-diversity officer', 'walking co-ordinator', 'travel to work planner'"
Believe me as noted I am sceptical of the broad picture regards the local administration of central policy and the quality of many in positions of responsibility (I too work in the public sector). I also spend much time being cynical of the Sustainable Development "industry" within the public sector and the resources it uses up (there's a bit of a contradiction there surely). However in trying to make sense of how the Govt Economic Strategy can play out in our local areas to deliver broad and equitable sustainable ECONOMIC growth, I have warmed to the environmental arguments at some levels. It comes down to a choice between some coherence across local (and national) functions and policies to deliver meaningful development fopr all our communities. In this those posts you note should be considered part of the core, if they are not it suggests your council sees them as keeping up with the next door authority or they are there to asuage the guilt of the well-heeled (along with the carbon offset from their overseas holiday).
@69 "The same environmentally aware team who at night leave every light and computer on"
You confuse human nature with appropriate policy and strategy tools.
Complain about this comment
@76 "So, for systems that we as a society have decided are sufficiently important that they ought to be publicly funded - we scrimp, save and cut, while for profit/loss(notionally) making private enterprise gone wrong we spend the majority of our gdp."
You put it far more eloquently and succinctly than my earlier bumbling attempts.
Mr B a two thumbs up on that one!
Complain about this comment
Is this not the pits?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8260088.stm
Who on earth decided to give this woman such an honourary title! How is this even possible? Where does she come from like? Pitcaple perahps, Killiekrankie? Ach...!
"Oooh, erm eh, we still have this Baroness Scotland title thingy kicking aboot, what will we do with it? Hmmm...?"
Surprised, now that I think about it, they didn't give it to Thatcher and just cut the pretentiousnes.
Maybe I'm being too harsh, did she discover a cure for cancer or something, in a Scottish Uni?
Complain about this comment
Does anyone have a clue with what's happening at the Herald site? They launched a news system a few weeks ago, but it is half baked. No comments allowed as yet. They ask for questions to be e-mailed, but so far they haven't answered any of mine, in fact I am now having e-mails returned undelivered. I suspect they didn't like the questions! The letters page seems to have disappeared which was the most interesting part of the 'paper. Why?
Complain about this comment
email to RS newsdrive:
As this is Radio Scotland could you please keep us informed as to what is happening now rather wait until your political masters give the nod to release it.
This was online yesterday and could have a serious impact on all of Scotland.
http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/12662.html
I am sure the Secretary of State for Scotland can be questioned on his actions on excluding Holyrood from these discussions.
Complain about this comment
59
"Its enough to make you stop believing"
Stopped believing in "This Town" long ago.
"To either cut down on beer or the kids new year, its a big decision...."
Complain about this comment
80. BlooToon
Hardly bumbling!
I think when you talk about the 'inspirational management textbooks' you helpfully isolate one of the key features in the degree to which we all happily play along with the idea that the public sector can always be streamlined and made more 'efficient'. It's the generalisation that the private sector knows how to run anything better than the public sector. Clearly nonsense, but still taken for granted as being the case.
Complain about this comment
# 72 mrbfaethedee
'we were told that gloabl economy would collapse if we didn't inject it with vast sums of money'
Money does not 'collapse' or even go away as money (as a real substance) is just a figment of the imagination of bankers. Money does not build houses, it cannot feed us or keep us warm. All money is, is the authority to allow someone (who has lots of it) to do something, whatever that may be. Accepting that premise then you would have to say that the money hasn't gone anywhere, someone/people at the top have decided to bankrupt the people at the bottom of the food chain (us) to keep our minds focussed on something else while they are busy doing what? They (at the top of the food chain) know that if we (at the bottom of the food chain) all said no, then their position (at the top of the food chain) would be in a very precarious position. I'm sure they will remember what happened in Russia in 1917 and what happened in France in 1789 when th poeple said no to their rulers.
The elite are more sophisticated now in their dealings with their cattle (us) and have learned from their mistakes from the past. Now they know to make sure that there is bread on our table and, to keep us occupied, that the women have crossraods to watch and the men have football to watch. Karl Marx once said that: 'Religion is the opium of the masses', now you can substitute TV for religion and see why it is easy to to control us. This global financial crises is a con to direct our attention away from something else by keeping us worried about our jobs instead of looking at what has actually happened. I advise anyone who is interested in seeing what is going on to google 9/11 conspiracy and watch some of the TV pictures of what really happened to the twin towers and the so called pentagon attack. Doesn't it seem strange that we see all those programmes on TV about the poor people who died in the towers yet hear absolutely nothing about those passengers in the 3 planes that hit the towers and hit the pentagon? Haven't you even wondered about this? Watch it and then tell me that this global financial crises is what they say it is. It's a smokescreen.
Complain about this comment
I've just been reading the report on this site about Mr Swinney's announcements anent projects being cut and belts tightened etc. On the whole a pretty straightforward piece; with the exception of the inevitable cry from Labour that the allocation is actually up £600m.
Can somebody please explain what planet the Labour Party in Scotland think we're living on? Everyone else in the UK from Mr Brown on down is admitting that financially we're in a mess and that cuts have to be made; the only argument being as to how much, where, and how its dressed up.
Yet in Scotland an austerity budget is being attacked because while there might be more cash coming our way than this time last year (assuming it isn't cut)it falls way short of what was previously predicated, hence the aforementioned austerity
Complain about this comment
#50 noahbro
Actually, in education at least, the "consultant" is a very highly efficient way of tapping into the highly specialised expertise of retired colleagues without the expense of employing them full-time.
As one myself, I can confirm that the cutbacks have been going on for some time. At first, after I retired, I was used extensively to research areas which were ring fenced initiatives from the former Scottish Executive. Since the Concordat and the removal of ring fencing, the LA has much more freedom in its finances, and uses them more wisely - specifically in my case, now only using me for 1 week a year in a very highly specialist area.
Complain about this comment
# 81 Phil_Anthropponent
One law for us...etc. etc.
Complain about this comment
#81
Patricia Scotland was elevated to the peerage as a baroness.
What else should she be called BUT "Baroness Scotland"???
Complain about this comment
#82
hamish42
‘Does anyone have a clue with what's happening at the Herald site?’
I don’t think even the Herald knows what’s happening to it. The site is absolutely dire. I don’t think there are any comments on any of their news items and the lack of letters is a big loss.
The site appears to have been cobbled together by the same committee who tried to design a horse but came up with a camel.
Complain about this comment
"Conservative leader Annabel Goldie pointed out that keeping the utility Scottish Water under state control was costing taxpayers £200m a year"
From the beeb's own article -
SNP accused of dodgy budget sums
You can always rely on the tories to be sniffing around for some national asset to throw to the private sector.
The page content isn't there anymore though, the same page has since morphed into one titled 'Ministers scrap airport rail plan' with different content. Maybe Newssniffer will pick it up.
Complain about this comment
#81,
I believe Scotland is the persons surname.
Complain about this comment
#90. At 3:59pm on 17 Sep 2009, Fae Farfar wrote:
#81
Patricia Scotland was elevated to the peerage as a baroness.
What else should she be called BUT "Baroness Scotland"???
Whoa there, ol' hoss. The American is confused. I thought members of the nobility were normally addressed by their title not their name. The Jim Jones, the Duke of Whatsit isn't usuallly called the the Duke Jones but the Duke of Whatsit. That also applies to Barons and Baronesses, doesn't it? So Barbara Scotland, the Baroness of Whatsit, would be called the Baroness Whatsit rather than the Baroness Scotland, no?
Good lord. *snickers madly*
Complain about this comment
# 94 JRMacClure
Patricia Janet Scotland, Baroness Scotland of Asthal, PC, QC (born 19 August 1955) is a barrister and the current Attorney General for England and Wales and Northern Ireland, a ministerial position in Her Majesty's Government.
Complain about this comment
So it should be Baroness Asthal unless I'm much mistaken. Does the *BBC* know this stuff if *I* do? What's up?
Or Patricia Scotland, Barosness ASthal. Not Baroness Scotland.
Complain about this comment
Not that I care what you call your peerages. After the Cash for Peearges scandals acts 1 and 2 does anyone really care?
WHY am I arguing this? Ha.
Complain about this comment
#92 Mr b - well spotted , the wolf in sheep's clothing lets the fleece slip another wee bit! she really had some of us fooled for a wee while there!
on another subject the Herald site is a nightmare they promise to send E-mails confirming your sign up but they never appear I was beginning to get a complex. thanks to the others for highlighting the issue.
and finally,
U14094468- hope you are well and you've not been sucked into cyberspace forever.
Sid
Complain about this comment
#94 JRMacClure
What is it with you women! Margaret is Baroness Thatcher, Betty ditto Boothroyd; ruining thousands of years of history and upsetting visiting Americans. Soon there won't be men in tights in Parliament at all. (£10 per pair per the John Lewis list. If you claimed for them as workwear would HMRC try to knock it back on the grounds that you could wear them at other times if you were so inclined or would they have to prove you an habitual cross-dresser?)
Complain about this comment
To those who think I was joking over my # 86 I have found some good ones:
Explosions and Pentagon and Missile strike? and Missing planes? and Fox news report and Building 7 and to back what I was saying about the banks watch all of Federal bank of the USA.
It just goes on and on.
Complain about this comment
JRMacClure
Re peers' titles (cf. Baroness Scotland):
Other than exceptionally, peers at the rank of Baron (and the male is here construed to include the female) gain a title formed by attaching their surname together with a territorial designation, the latter to distinguish among several similar titles (Lord Mackay, for example, could refer to more than one member of the House of Lords; Lord Mackay of Clashfern would never be referred to as anything less).
Where no confusion will arise, peers may request (and it is not a right) to use a shortened form of their name - a peer's 'title' BECOMES the individual's legal name, once conferred - for convenience.
"Patricia, Baroness Scotland of Asthal" is A Baroness Scotland, not THE Baroness Scotland; and it is perfectly possible that one or more Baronesses Scotlands [a clumsy but correct pluralisation of the title] might be created in the future, but these would be required to use a longer form of name.
Only peers of higher rank (esp. Earls and higher) hold titles which are designated by a geographical location alone (The Duke of Atholl, The Earl of Airlie, etc.).
The overriding rule is that no two peers may have the same name.
Complain about this comment
"Duke of Whatsit"
Hmm, wotsits.
Haven't had any of those for years....
Can you still get them?
Complain about this comment
Re my #101,
References to "geographical" might better be expressed as "territorial", when referring to the distinct designation comprised within the fuller forms of the titles of Barons/baronesses.
Complain about this comment
Why can't all the Parties present their budgets?
Find a middle road!
+ Move forward !!!
Times will be hard,but if agreement between the
parties is achieved,then the punters might want
to belief and vote!
Always hoping!
Complain about this comment
Ian Gray at First Minister's Questions yesterday:
"The people of Scotland know that the budget is going up!"
Given that it is Labour party policy for Scotland to remain shackled to Westminster's ever-tightening purse strings, given the global economic crisis, that the Chancellor has been lecturing for the past year that "Scotland must bear its share of the economic hardship", and that we were all aware of the £500 million cut from Westminster well before Brown could bring himself to announce wholesale cuts across the UK economy - what planet is Gray on, and how stupid does he think we must be to swallow the line that we are somehow 'thriving' on generous London handouts, while the rest of the civilised world struggles???
Again and again, he hold up the bail-out of the banks as a 'gift' to the Scottish taxpayer.
Given that these banks were global, private organisations with only a minor fraction of their business interests in Scotland, the reality is that it has cost the Scottish taxpayer heavily to rescue banking jobs and financial services worldwide, with little in the way of direct return.
Yet, as ever, Gray would have us believe the astronomical cost of the banking bail-out should be offset against the Scottish budget!
Taken alongside the obscene costs of Labour's London Olympics, their attacks on the modest and controlled expenditure for the Year of Homecoming, their use of public funds to establish the Calman Commission to oppose Scottish Government policy, and their subsequent attempts to railroad the implementation of the Calman recommendations to their own best advantage, can the dwindling ranks of 'Scottish' Labour honestly believe they are left with a shred of credibility in their approach to the economic or political interests of Scotland?
Complain about this comment
#105
Q. Labour credibility?
A. None
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS