The Scottish Government

#116

Sorry Gordon you appear to be a bit slow on the uptake.

Promise in manifesto: - We will provide £2,000 subsidy to first time buyers.

Action in Government: - We will stop the 'Right to Buy' for new tenants in council houses.

A bit like 'We will put 1,000 NEW police on the streets'. Problem is when? 2017?

114. Still girning-Fife
Sunday, November 18, 2007 16:43

""...ban the 'Right to buy' for new tenants, and ignore the rest...""
v's
Banning the sale of 'new' council houses.

Spotted the difference yet?

I take it that coming from Methil you are more inclined to be on the Left of the political spectrum?

If that is indeed so, I am surprised indeed to hear you argueing for financial support to local authorities founded on rateable values of property rather than on the ability of individual local citizens to be able to pay, council tax bills rising by the order of 60% with no similar rise in the incomes of those on fixed incomes?

I also take it that you'll be disappointed in the permanent right shift of the governing party in London and the recent re-affirmation of the popularity of Reganomics and Thatcherism at No.10 Downing street?
best Roads, Transport, Medical attention, Education, etc - for those that can afford it?

From your comments I presume you are idealogically opposed to income tax on the grounds that it is a form of poll tax?
Or is that only when you add the prefix 'local'?

We hear so many comments about Scotland being supported by the English. If this is true why do they want to keep us. I have never heard one person actually ask that question.

#112

Under Labour sitting tenants could ask to buy their house as sitting tenants and the council could agree to sell, but were not obliged to. Under Thatcher the councils could no longer refuse to sell to a sitting tenant. Spot the difference?

Under Thatcher everybody listed in a house over the age of schooling had a bill to pay, called 'The Poll Tax'. This led to many citizens being disenfranchised by the simple expedient of not putting themselves on the electoral roll.

When the SNP eventually replace the Community Tax with a local income tax EVERY wage earner in a house will have to contribute to the Community costs at source. This despite the fact that they are paying tax already and the taxation system uses these taxes to pay 80% of the council expenditure! The POLL tax under a different guise?

I will continue to make submissions on similar themes until the SNP get on with the job of government and stop whinging about how badly treated they are by the Westminster mob!!

Going against the trend here but Im againt Independence. There seems to be alot of harp about how Scotlands growth rate should move more in line with Irelands. I moved here from Ireland 5 years ago. Everything costs an arm and a leg and I couldnt afford any kind of a social life.
I was earning 50% more in Dublin than what I earn in Edinburgh, but my money goes alot further in Scotland. Taking one point as an example - Ireland has no NHS. You pay EUR 50 every time you go to the doctor. The majority of the population have medical insurance. SNP want free prescriptions. How will this be paid for?
As mentioned by another comment poster - the SNP also need to convince me how independence will be more economically viable.

111. Honest Politics Humbug - Fife
Thursday, November 15, 2007 22:37

What an annoying, disagreeable, whining, wee get you sound.

Do you have any positive contribution to make at all?

You don't even seem to have a full grasp on the facts, eg the right to buy 'New Homes'is being removed, not the right to buy for 'new' home buyers.

In other words councils are not to be forced to sell off newly built properies for rediculously discounted prices at less than they cost to build.

If you still want to buy your 20 year old council house nae problem. Personally I'd make you pay the full market value since the council has maintained your home and paid the upkeep for you all those years, but then that's not my shout.

This was in fact Labour policy before Thatcher came to power, it is how my parents bought their council house in the late 70's.
They had the option of a % of their monthly rent going towards buying the property or they could approach a bank for a mortguage.
They chose the latter and 25 years later in 2001 paid off their mortguage.

Unfortunately, now being 'landed' home owners they were then encouraged to indulge in the stock market, buying UK utility shares during the 80's.
That's how they lost most of their life savings.

btw Who are the 'we' you keep refering to?
Are you of the Blood Royal, an elected head of state or a close relation of Margaret Thatcher perchance?

We are not impressed.

Well the chickens have come home to roost!!

How about answering the questions that were posed following your budget?

Did you know what the settlement would be BEFORE the election?

If 'NO' how could make the manifesto commitments you made to the Scottish people?

If 'YES', how could make the manifesto commitments you made to the Scottish people?

The answer is 'YES' so you are misleading the electorate when you try to pass the buck!
Hoist by your own pitard!!

£2,000 for first home buyers. Easy, peasy, just ban the 'Right to buy' for new tenants, and ignore the rest.

18 maximum class sizes for primary, 1,2,3, give a handout to the local authority to freeze the Community charge, then blame them for failing to meet YOUR promise. 'We are in discussion' does not cut the mustard, Mr Swinney. We will remember it was YOUR promise not the councillors.

Funding free scholl meals, WHO said that?

Abolish Community Charges WHO said that.

150 new police recruits is 850 short of the promise. 2,300 retiring police in four years leaves you 1,800 short of YOUR target.

How do Universties now compete with the rest of the UK? Have you told Fiona that her lob is on a shaky nail.

Despite the notable fiasco over the Scottish parliament building, I sense an appetite for Scotland to have an increased level of autonomy. I believe that this has been prompted by a number of factors, as follows:

1) Devolotion has served to highlight conflict between Scottish national interest and UK wide interest, particuarly in respect of tuition fees, energy generation and nuclear weapons. Scottish concerns regarding these issues were previosuly somewhat subverted by the absence of a forum in which the Scottish "position" could be adequately gauged or expressed.

2) Devolition has highlighted a willingness and energy in Scotland to take the lead in these issues, most notably the smoking ban.

3) The failure to adequately address the West Lothian question has undoubtedly generated concern in the rest of the UK about Scottish participation in UK policy making. I can forsee that if the Tories were to be successful at the next election, we may have a situation once again where the national government is poorly represented in Scotland and wishes lesser Scottish say in matters affecting England, debated at Westminister. It is ironic that one of the drivers for Scottish Independence may be English concerns.

Regardless of whether one is a supporter of independece or not, I think we already started down that path in 1997 whether we realised it or not. Further devolution is likely only to postpone Scottish independence. The initial conflict on lesser policy issues would be removed, but would later arise on more serious subjects such as defence and fiscal autonomy, which are unlikely to be resolved without independece.

I believe that Scottish Labour made a serious misjudgement at the last elections (and continue to do so). They appear unable to truly represent the best interests of Scotland in the Scottish Parliament where those policy issues are at odds with the UK policy. The scaremongering tactics of both Labour and Tories has prior to the election put them on the back foot. Regardless of political persuasion, the Scottish people need a party that will be positive about Scotland and its development, even if at the expense of other Uk countries.

Clearly, divorce from the rest of of teh Uk will be a logisitcal nightmare on a practical level and there will most likely be some disspaointemnts to be had in negotiaitions with the rest of the UK or at international arbitration if it comes to that.

I am also of the view that too much emphasis is currently being placed on economic statistics to prove or disprove the economic argument for independence. Any data used is inevitably based on current information gathered when Scotland remains part of the UK. Conjecture of what the data might be in an independent Scotland is subject to much conjecture. The point is, regardless of the pros and cons, we need to accept that independece will inevitably cause some short term pain (as in any divorce!). The real question is whether there will be long-term gain.

I am all for democracy and a referrendum if thats what it takes. Bring on the debate - but lets make it positive and honest - no haggis or william wallace, no anti-english sentiment please.

"Finance and Sustainable Growth". What does this mean? Is it to do with tax and investment? Does it complement duties of, for instance, the enterprise minister?

Seems to me that one of the best things that could be done in this is to try and reverse damage done to small business by Westmonster's recent attack on small business vis a vis the corporation tax on small business.

We need to reinvest our profits in our businesses to make them grow (while somehow putting food on the table and paying the mortgage), and we need full relief from taxes to achieve this. If we make a profit of say £10,000 and decide not to take this money as a dividend, is it not right that we have the full £10,000 to invest in our own business and our future, rather than just £8,100 of it?

This full 100% tax relief for our investments could either be achieved through (when independent) a better tax system, or perhaps with compensatory offsets in the form of "grants" meanwhile.

Is this in your remit?

Many of my customers take risks and invest in their own small businesses, and year on year I see the benefits they achieve with this risk and investment. Under Westminster and through the despised Scottish Enterprise (in fairness the HIE appears to be better), the risk and investment is not supported. Is it the Scottish Government's intention to completely change this indifference, and help us to grow Scotland?

Is there any idea of matching our risk and investment with an equal sum, either on a non-repayable grant basis, or a longer-term repayment basis? Can this be done within a devolved Scotland, or do we have to wait for full independence? Does anyone care about small business?

#107

Read your first line, I assume beyond that you reverted to type.

Glad to know I had the last word.