So this afternoon Alex Salmond has announced that he stepping down as leader of the Scottish National Party and First Minister of Scotland. So as well as asking what next for the UK nation as a whole we are now asking what next for the SNP?
Firstly as has long been muted Salmond himself has already been grooming his successor, it was she who had a major role in planning the referendum agenda and steering the Yes Campaign. Nicola Sturgeon the MSP for Glasgow Southside has been the Deputy First Minister since 2007 and been the Depute Leader of the SNP for the last 10 years. If she were to fulfill what many see as her destiny, if a little earlier than they expected she would be the first women to lead any devolved power in the UK.
But the question is would there be a coronation or would there be a challenger? If the latter who might the competition come from.
One possibility is like Alex Salmond an alumni of Linlithgow Academy and with his was also expelled from the party for being part of the 79 Group his long term friend Kenny MacAskill. While Alex has mellowed on the demand for a republican socialist stance, MacAskill has said that once Scotland voted for Independence there would be a referendum on whether to keep the monarchy. He stepped down from standing with Sturgeon on a joint ticket to be her Depute when Salmond decided to restand for the leadership himself on a ticket with her instead. It is possible that that loyalty may be repaid with him become her deputy ten years on so that may be one reason why he wouldn't want to upset the apple cart.
Another alternative might be John Swinney who had been leader between Alex Salmond and Alex Salmond from 2000-2004. Since 2007 he has been the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth a job which many within the party would say he has be great at. Especially in his first four years when he had to get through his budget as a minority administration. He is closely associated with the gradualist wing of the party, which in light of the failure to secure independence might come to the fore of people's thinking as something that is needed to make the most of the negotiations that will ensue for more powers for Scotland. The down side to a Swinney bid is that in his previous term in charge, unlike Salmond who had been successful first time, he saw the parties fortunes slump.
The only other person with potential serious intent to lead the party is the man who challenged Swinney back in 2000. Alex Neil had the backing of the fundamentalist wing of the party. Instead of looking for a gradulaist approach it may be that some within the party are seeking a figure head to keep up the fundamentalist approach, if so Neil would be the natural figurehead for such feelings. Some may well feel that Salmond wasn't seeking to separate enough from the rest of the UK and was really fighting on a ticket of keeping the best bits of being in the UK and therefore the voters knew it wasn't real independence. Only if that is the case would Neil stand a serious chance of taking the leadership but it is the mood of the party that is important.
Nicola is in pole position, but as she also was heavily involved in the referendum campaign it is unlikely that she will go totally unchallenged from within. It depends which wing of the party is most angry with the way the referendum campaign was built up to be a success only to fall 10% short that may well decide who will take her on, and such a challenge may even come from both wings.
One thing though is certain. We live in interesting times.
Showing posts with label John Swinney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Swinney. Show all posts
Friday, 19 September 2014
Thursday, 24 October 2013
Ineos go all in, Unite fold
The best analogy of the deal that was reached over the Grangemouth plants future this morning comes from the world of poker.
Ineos possibly sick of the infighting and continuous threat of strikes from the Unite Union yesterday announced they were shutting down the petrochemical part of the plant and considering the future of refinery. It was the equivalent of putting all your chips unto the table and being prepared to lose everything.
Unite had rejected the 'last chance survival' plan offered by Ineos, but this morning with 800 jobs apparently already gone and 570 others threatened they capitulated. Accepted all the conditions laid down by that plan as they say "warts and all". Equivalent to throwing all your cards away in poker.
Addressing the press after that meeting Mr Carmichael said:
"We are in a much better place today in relation to the future of the plant than we were yesterday.
"There remains, of course, a great deal to be done."
Mr Swinney added:
"This plant has got a great future, everybody accepts that Grangemouth has got a great future.
"What we need to do is resolve these outstanding issues, get the investment plan implemented and take forward and improve the prospects for the people that that work in this plant."
The past 24 hours has certainly proved to be a long time in the life of 1,370 highly skilled jobs in Grangemouth and I hope that in the future both sides will sit down and discuss differences in a constructive and respectful manner long, coming to a conclusion long before it escalates to such potentially damaging circumstances.
Wednesday, 20 January 2010
Are SNP Considering a Budget to Do Some Good?
On the first day of debate in the Scottish budget both Nick Clegg in Westminster and Tavish Scott in Holyrood highlighted in different ways the failure of our banks to lend. While Nick asked in the Commons how a bank we bailed out, which is not lending to domestic businesses to protect jobs, is leading to an American takeover of a UK company that will lead to losses, Tavish tried to deal with the SNP budget.
Writing to all members he says:
He went on to point out that the total salary bill for those earning more that £100,000 is £413million and is £651million for those over £80,000. And that is just 5,300 people out of half a million in the public sector. Pointing out that ordinary people cannot understand how the highest earners in the NHS are also able to nominate themselves for bonuses worth up to £75,000 a year on top of such salaries.
As well as the pay of the top civil servants he also urges the SNP Government to have a hard look at the quangos, including the Scottish Futures Trust continues to consume millions of tax pounds but builds absolutely nothing.
At the time he wrote that email he said:
Within hours though the BBC reported that John Swinney is looking to freeze the pay of top civil servants and is also considering Lib Dem demands to cut the pay of the highest public sector earners.
Writing to all members he says:
"The economic background is serious. Unemployment continues to rise in Scotland, when it is falling in the rest of Britain. The gap in economic growth between Scotland and the UK is now widening to Scotland’s disadvantage.
"Liberal Democrats have taken up the challenge to work with the SNP Government to persuade them to take forward our proposals that will build a fairer society and a sustainable economy.
"We are discussing practical plans. We can do more to give Scottish business a fighting chance of getting through the recession. Many businesses still can't get the lending they need from their banks. Scottish manufacturing – including the Borders textiles industry that I highlighted in Parliament last week – needs help. The Scottish Budget needs to help strengthen these businesses, putting them in a good place to reap the rewards of economic recovery."
He went on to point out that the total salary bill for those earning more that £100,000 is £413million and is £651million for those over £80,000. And that is just 5,300 people out of half a million in the public sector. Pointing out that ordinary people cannot understand how the highest earners in the NHS are also able to nominate themselves for bonuses worth up to £75,000 a year on top of such salaries.
As well as the pay of the top civil servants he also urges the SNP Government to have a hard look at the quangos, including the Scottish Futures Trust continues to consume millions of tax pounds but builds absolutely nothing.
At the time he wrote that email he said:
"It is disappointing that the SNP Government has not moved to change its Budget yet. That is why we couldn't vote for the Budget today. We have given them the benefit of three more weeks to respond to our positive and constructive approach."
Within hours though the BBC reported that John Swinney is looking to freeze the pay of top civil servants and is also considering Lib Dem demands to cut the pay of the highest public sector earners.
Thursday, 16 July 2009
The Swinney Flu
The art of Governance is often defined by the ability to Govern in a crisis.
Love them or loathe them although they got the UK into the fine mess they gotten us into over the Banks collapsing Labour did at least find a way to do something about it. While it may not be the right thing in the long term they did something.
However, with the swine flu issue the SNP are failing to display the art of Governance. The £33bn budget for the current year was only passed in February but already John Swinney is running cap in hand to the Treasury in Westminster asking for more money. Instead of looking for where the funds may be available for repatriation to the vaccination of Scottish citizenry the first reaction in the crisis is the SNP default position blame it on Westminster.
Yes there is a £11.2m health budget surely somewhere in the whole Scottish budget £100m that Nicola Sturgeon the Health Minister claims is 'owed' to deal with swine flu can be found. Having worked in the Civil Service I'm aware that while budgets have been allocated to projects for the 12 months not all of these are going to be on time, therefore there is bound to be a little surplus in some departments budgets. I also know that even if there is this will find some way of getting spent at the end of the budget cycle.
Put another way John Swinney claims that out of all the department budgets under the SNP control it is impossible for him to find 0.0003% of savings from his budget*, with half the year still to come to be able to find the £100,000 required for the inoculation of Scotland against Swine flu. That sounds like lousy, slipshod and poor financial management to me.
*You can tell I work with stats can't you?
Love them or loathe them although they got the UK into the fine mess they gotten us into over the Banks collapsing Labour did at least find a way to do something about it. While it may not be the right thing in the long term they did something.
However, with the swine flu issue the SNP are failing to display the art of Governance. The £33bn budget for the current year was only passed in February but already John Swinney is running cap in hand to the Treasury in Westminster asking for more money. Instead of looking for where the funds may be available for repatriation to the vaccination of Scottish citizenry the first reaction in the crisis is the SNP default position blame it on Westminster.
Yes there is a £11.2m health budget surely somewhere in the whole Scottish budget £100m that Nicola Sturgeon the Health Minister claims is 'owed' to deal with swine flu can be found. Having worked in the Civil Service I'm aware that while budgets have been allocated to projects for the 12 months not all of these are going to be on time, therefore there is bound to be a little surplus in some departments budgets. I also know that even if there is this will find some way of getting spent at the end of the budget cycle.
Put another way John Swinney claims that out of all the department budgets under the SNP control it is impossible for him to find 0.0003% of savings from his budget*, with half the year still to come to be able to find the £100,000 required for the inoculation of Scotland against Swine flu. That sounds like lousy, slipshod and poor financial management to me.
*You can tell I work with stats can't you?
Monday, 2 March 2009
No Tory Helping Hand to Nats
The SNP may well have thought the hand of friendship was going to be offered to them, especially in light of the favourable agreement that the Ulster Conservatives and Unionists seem to have struck for Northern Ireland. However, George Osbourne has spelled out to Alex Salmond and John Swinney that they will have to make efficiency savings even when a Tory government is elected. Osbourne said on yesterday's BBC Politics Show:
adding:
So the SNP should stop their whinging as it will appear to fall on deaf ears from both the Labour and Tory camps and get on with doing things, and doing them more efficiently. Osbourne has also echoed the call of Tavish Scott the Lib Dem leader to get over the idea of independence just now and focus on the economy saying, "the SNP's obsession with independence needs to be put on one side while we all deal with Gordon Brown's recession".
Seeing as how interdependent all the global economies are right now on each other this is not the time to go messing with the status quo. Throwing in further uncertainty to the mix at the moment will only have one effect, that would an accelerated negative effect on the Scottish economy. Alex Salmond is obsessing about the rather precise number of 8,664 jobs (heaven knows how he came up with that detailed a number) rather than looking at the bigger picture. It is a time for macroeconomics not microeconomics. Especially at Government level who should get too bogged down in that sort of minutiae in the first place.
"Gordon Brown has left the UK in a complete mess and some of the burden of restraint has to be borne by Scotland as a whole."
adding:
"There needs to be restraint. Britain, Scotland needs to live within its means, the party's over."
So the SNP should stop their whinging as it will appear to fall on deaf ears from both the Labour and Tory camps and get on with doing things, and doing them more efficiently. Osbourne has also echoed the call of Tavish Scott the Lib Dem leader to get over the idea of independence just now and focus on the economy saying, "the SNP's obsession with independence needs to be put on one side while we all deal with Gordon Brown's recession".
Seeing as how interdependent all the global economies are right now on each other this is not the time to go messing with the status quo. Throwing in further uncertainty to the mix at the moment will only have one effect, that would an accelerated negative effect on the Scottish economy. Alex Salmond is obsessing about the rather precise number of 8,664 jobs (heaven knows how he came up with that detailed a number) rather than looking at the bigger picture. It is a time for macroeconomics not microeconomics. Especially at Government level who should get too bogged down in that sort of minutiae in the first place.
Wednesday, 11 February 2009
SNP Axe Their Pledge to Axe the Tax
One of the things I agreed about in principle if not the means of execution of the SNP Government was their pledge to scrap the council tax and replace it with a local income tax based on the ability to pay.Just this morning some of the press were praising Salmond for bringing in some heavy hitters today he is reeling against the ropes. One of his key pledges to get elected lying in tatters.
John Swinney, the Finance Minister claimed it would be politically very difficult to introduce the tax in the current political and financial climate at a time when the recession will see year-on-year cuts in public spending. Blaming political difficulty is hardly by itself a valid reason to bring about a change that leads to fairness.
Then there is also the adjustments being made under the Barnett formula £1bn over the next two years, so Westminster takes the blame. But surely an independent Scotland wouldn't have a cash payout from Westminster so if the SNP are truly intent on Independence such trivialities should not be the reason that they can hide behind.
No the problem of why the SNP's proposals from why LIT failed is intransigence of their proposals. They wanted a fixed rate set centrally. One that did not take into account local needs. They also wanted to set a rate below what was recommended giving themselves an inbuilt shortfall before they even started to look for other scapegoats. Like the first budget that failed to pass last month they refused to budge.
LIT can work and it can be fair. It needs to meet the requirements of the councils that need to spend it. Sadly the SNP administration has been failing them on too many counts by limiting their money while increasing their responsibility.
The SNP pretty much lifted the Liberal Democrat policy on Local Income Tax I remember being handed a leaflet about it in 2005 and noticed only 2 or 3 words difference from the policy as described in our pre-manifesto document. But they have betrayed the people who voted for them believing that maybe they could offer a faier local tax.
This is after all Scotland the test bed of Maggie's Poll Tax. Therefore to let the people of Scotland down over local taxation is liable to be one sin that may not be overlooked too easily.
Friday, 30 January 2009
3 U-Turns to Unanimity for Budget Mk II?
Well from having a dead tie it appears that the SNP have knuckles down and are attempting to bring all three opposition parties on board with concessions to their initial budget. Unanimity could be the ultimate prize if the negotiations com off.
The Lib Dems were first up to the plate yesterday offering to take the Income Tax break off the agenda and instead look for a level of greater fiscal autonomy is working with the Nats to lobby Westminster to allow the Scottish Parliament the power to borrow outwith the block grant. This could in theory path the way for future income tax reductions without necessarily affecting the level of spending to fully compensate.
Labour's Iain Grey that his party's demands for 7,800 new apprentices over the next 3 years could be reduced to two years. It is believed this will cost between £45million and £90 million, but after talks with the Finance Minister John Swinney it was believed that to ensure unanimity that these funds could be found.
Which leads to the Greens who is such addition funds had been available for their insulation in homes proposal on Wednesday Mk I of the budget may well have passed. If the £33million that was granted to them on Wednesday can come out of fresh funds and not affect other fuel poverty funding they may well in a place to accept the budget. Their issue was that to be green in one area the Nats were being less green elsewhere.
So with discussions already underway yesterday and the Greens going for talks today their is a tight timetable to try and get Mk II of the 2009 Budget through its various stages by 11 February. If Alex Salmond does manage to get full unanimity it may be worth his while in starting talks for next years budget immediately so we don't have to go through this whole rigmarole again in twelve months time.
The Lib Dems were first up to the plate yesterday offering to take the Income Tax break off the agenda and instead look for a level of greater fiscal autonomy is working with the Nats to lobby Westminster to allow the Scottish Parliament the power to borrow outwith the block grant. This could in theory path the way for future income tax reductions without necessarily affecting the level of spending to fully compensate.
Labour's Iain Grey that his party's demands for 7,800 new apprentices over the next 3 years could be reduced to two years. It is believed this will cost between £45million and £90 million, but after talks with the Finance Minister John Swinney it was believed that to ensure unanimity that these funds could be found.
Which leads to the Greens who is such addition funds had been available for their insulation in homes proposal on Wednesday Mk I of the budget may well have passed. If the £33million that was granted to them on Wednesday can come out of fresh funds and not affect other fuel poverty funding they may well in a place to accept the budget. Their issue was that to be green in one area the Nats were being less green elsewhere.
So with discussions already underway yesterday and the Greens going for talks today their is a tight timetable to try and get Mk II of the 2009 Budget through its various stages by 11 February. If Alex Salmond does manage to get full unanimity it may be worth his while in starting talks for next years budget immediately so we don't have to go through this whole rigmarole again in twelve months time.
Thursday, 29 January 2009
Threatening Behaviour not the Best for Scotland
While some are accusing the Lib Dems of playground behaviour*. While the Scotsman thinks it only took two men to bring down the Budget. The far more telling thing is the hissy fit being carried out by the Ego that is the First Minister.
Yet again the great Ego of Banff, Buchan & Gordon though lesserly of Westminster and formerly of this parish is threatening to take his ball away. All of this when the lesson learnt from the three parties who voted against his was that he wasn't doing enough. Admittedly there was not agreement on what the enough should entail. But this limp budget, on the same day that latest GDP figures were published showing that Scotland is accelerating into the recession quicker than the rest of the UK, just didn't cut the mustard.
Somebody pointed out that the Tories had got just exactly what they had been looking for last year, but the Nats were not much better. Despite the shift in the economic tectonic plates in the past twelve months this budget is barely changed from that which was laid out in 2007 in the Spending Review. While a week is often cited as being a long time in politics the last year has been one heck of a ride. Although it would appear to have passed unnoticed by John Swinney.
Instead of threatening to talk his ball away by resigning and calling an election the First Minister should learn the lesson. After all it was he who chose to go into a minority administration in the first place, therefore he really ahs to listen to more than just his own voice in order to get things done for Scotland. He doesn't have a mandate to steamroller all his ideas over the people of Scotland he merely (and only just) has a mandate to reside at Bute House and hold the office of First Minister of Scotland.
But with that comes the responsibility. The responsibility to listen to the people of Scotland not just to Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond. The responsibility to do more to help them in reality rather that filter only the statistics, or adjust those that make you look good.
The people know the reality they are facing it, time for Salmond and his sheep to wake up and smell the coffee too.
*Nice quiet week for me to be editing the Scottish Round Up then.
Wednesday, 28 January 2009
Time to Move Alex
The message was clear just over an hour ago. When the SNPs budget failed to be passed when Labour, Lib Dem and Green MSP all voted against it. The Tories had changed it by 0.171% which was not enough for either Labour or the rest. Patrick Harvie said the the £22million injection was not enough and the Nats had eroded what less than a month ago looked like the two votes that would have tipped the balance.
So what exactly went wrong. The Greens said there were too many caveats announced by Finance Minister John Swinney in his summing up of the motion. But the eleventh hour horse trading by sum was blamed on the Lib Dems using Mike Rumbles to negotiate, but when it appears that even those that looked more likely to be on board Harvie and Robin Harper of the Greens it all came down to the Presiding Officer's casting vote. Who voted as precedent dictates for the status quo.
So is this the end of the honeymoon? Must Alex Salmond stop spouting the hyperbole and actually start to work at being a minority government? He has to be able to build bridges (and I don't mean over the Forth) in order to be able to move on. But move on he must do. The message of this messy budget is that moving on was not what he was doing energetically enough.
Three parties said it wasn't enough, the Tories decided that the miniscule addition they achieved was enough once more to side with the Nats. Scotland needs a strong budget and for all but the Nationalist members that wasn't what they saw and many of the remainder had doubts. Doubts which were not assuaged by Salmond or Swinney.
It is a disaster for the First Minister to have in the past mouth had a agreement with the Greens and then to see that ripped up in his face at the eleventh hour. The budget slipped like sand through his hands quite possibly because like King Canute he refused to budge even when the waves were lapping at his throne.
So what exactly went wrong. The Greens said there were too many caveats announced by Finance Minister John Swinney in his summing up of the motion. But the eleventh hour horse trading by sum was blamed on the Lib Dems using Mike Rumbles to negotiate, but when it appears that even those that looked more likely to be on board Harvie and Robin Harper of the Greens it all came down to the Presiding Officer's casting vote. Who voted as precedent dictates for the status quo.
So is this the end of the honeymoon? Must Alex Salmond stop spouting the hyperbole and actually start to work at being a minority government? He has to be able to build bridges (and I don't mean over the Forth) in order to be able to move on. But move on he must do. The message of this messy budget is that moving on was not what he was doing energetically enough.
Three parties said it wasn't enough, the Tories decided that the miniscule addition they achieved was enough once more to side with the Nats. Scotland needs a strong budget and for all but the Nationalist members that wasn't what they saw and many of the remainder had doubts. Doubts which were not assuaged by Salmond or Swinney.
It is a disaster for the First Minister to have in the past mouth had a agreement with the Greens and then to see that ripped up in his face at the eleventh hour. The budget slipped like sand through his hands quite possibly because like King Canute he refused to budge even when the waves were lapping at his throne.
Wednesday, 14 January 2009
The Lib Dems Aren't for Playing With Scotland's Future
I see that Jeff has taken time out from his extended break in the Far East and down under to ask ""what are the Lib Dems Playing at?". Well strangely I think exactly the same with regards to John Swinney.
In October 2007 the spending review issued plans for this budget period. This was long before most parties the SNP or Labour woke up to just what was going on in the world around them. It was indeed a long time before John Swinney or Alex Salmond told us that an "economic storm" had engulfed Scotland. The change is this budget over those spending plans is only 1%. That is the weakest, most miniscule reaction and attempt to boast their economy of ANY Western democracy to the current crisis. It is indeed the budget of do nothingness when everyone is crying out for action.
Jeff earlier today also passed comment on here that the Lib Dems should not vote against the budget stage 1, as they did, but sit down and get some of our 2007 manifesto pledges discussed. In case Jeff hasn't noticed while swanning around the Far East and Australia, on his banking bonuses I guess, people have moved on from the 2007 manifesto. They are concerned about the budget, that of their own pockets. People are now more likely to shop around for a bargain. Indeed you now see far more people scouring the reductions at supermarkets before they get marked down than a year ago when hey merely waited.
The Lib Dem proposals offer £330 pounds back into the pockets of the low and medium earners of Scotland. £330 pounds that in the words of one person I saw on TV last week would make the difference between having to decide whether to heat or to eat but allow the luxury, shame though it is to say that, to do both.
While his and his fellow Nats criticise the Lib Dems for not knowing fully where the savings can come from what is clear is that at least we are looking they clearly haven't had a major rethink. Oh and as for there needing to be more spending as well. That is because while giving money to the poorest will instil some economic stimulus it is also the time for Government to step up to the plate.
So what are the Lib Dems doing to answer the question? We're not looking for a quick fix we know that isn't possible. We're also not prepared to sit back and take a lily livered approach to Scotland Future as we trust that by doing next to nothing Scotland will end up going deeper and staying longer in this downturn. This is most definitely not a time for business as usual budgets which is what the SNP have offered up, in that actually both Labour and the Conservatives so somewhat agree even if they allowed the passage of stage one. Neither of those other parties support can be said to be in the back.
Vince Cable, who is widely regarded as one of the few who saw this coming, has back Nick Clegg's proposal for real and permanent tax cuts for the lower earners as part, not all, of the required stimulus at this time. While the Lib Dem position has been ignored at Westminster with their sizable Labour majority, We here in Scotland through Tavish Scott and Mike Rumbles who was sent to show intent have a Parliament that is meant to rely on consensus so we laid down a challenge to not be as timid as Gordon and Alistair the Scots running thing for the UK. However, Alex and John are actually proposing less than even the little that those other Scots are doing.
In October 2007 the spending review issued plans for this budget period. This was long before most parties the SNP or Labour woke up to just what was going on in the world around them. It was indeed a long time before John Swinney or Alex Salmond told us that an "economic storm" had engulfed Scotland. The change is this budget over those spending plans is only 1%. That is the weakest, most miniscule reaction and attempt to boast their economy of ANY Western democracy to the current crisis. It is indeed the budget of do nothingness when everyone is crying out for action.
Jeff earlier today also passed comment on here that the Lib Dems should not vote against the budget stage 1, as they did, but sit down and get some of our 2007 manifesto pledges discussed. In case Jeff hasn't noticed while swanning around the Far East and Australia, on his banking bonuses I guess, people have moved on from the 2007 manifesto. They are concerned about the budget, that of their own pockets. People are now more likely to shop around for a bargain. Indeed you now see far more people scouring the reductions at supermarkets before they get marked down than a year ago when hey merely waited.
The Lib Dem proposals offer £330 pounds back into the pockets of the low and medium earners of Scotland. £330 pounds that in the words of one person I saw on TV last week would make the difference between having to decide whether to heat or to eat but allow the luxury, shame though it is to say that, to do both.
While his and his fellow Nats criticise the Lib Dems for not knowing fully where the savings can come from what is clear is that at least we are looking they clearly haven't had a major rethink. Oh and as for there needing to be more spending as well. That is because while giving money to the poorest will instil some economic stimulus it is also the time for Government to step up to the plate.
So what are the Lib Dems doing to answer the question? We're not looking for a quick fix we know that isn't possible. We're also not prepared to sit back and take a lily livered approach to Scotland Future as we trust that by doing next to nothing Scotland will end up going deeper and staying longer in this downturn. This is most definitely not a time for business as usual budgets which is what the SNP have offered up, in that actually both Labour and the Conservatives so somewhat agree even if they allowed the passage of stage one. Neither of those other parties support can be said to be in the back.
Vince Cable, who is widely regarded as one of the few who saw this coming, has back Nick Clegg's proposal for real and permanent tax cuts for the lower earners as part, not all, of the required stimulus at this time. While the Lib Dem position has been ignored at Westminster with their sizable Labour majority, We here in Scotland through Tavish Scott and Mike Rumbles who was sent to show intent have a Parliament that is meant to rely on consensus so we laid down a challenge to not be as timid as Gordon and Alistair the Scots running thing for the UK. However, Alex and John are actually proposing less than even the little that those other Scots are doing.
Swinney Calling For Budget Unity on Difficult Voyage
John Swinney looks certain to clear the first hurdle in getting the SNP Government's budget past its first stage this week after Labour have said they will not vote against it, yet. He still faces and uphill task to secure the votes necessary to pass it later this month as all three of the other main parties have issues with the £33bn spending plans. Although he has already secured the two Green Party votes.
Labour have said that while they will not block it at this first step they "are looking for some big concessions on jobs and there will be some tough negotiations over the next fortnight."
Annabel Goldie and the Conservatives, whose support secured the budget last year, has said her party will not support it if plans to drop last year's concessions to fund extra police officers, a national drugs strategy, and business rate cuts for small firms are included. Or if their aren't proposals in the new budget to help hard-pressed families and businesses.
However, both the Tories and Labour are prepared to support, or at least not vote against it at this first vote tomorrow. The Lib Dems have already indicated that they will vote against it. Leader Tavish Scott saying "No other government, national or devolved, in western Europe has made such a meagre response to this economic storm" backing his call for a 2p cut in income tax.
Whilst calling for support Swinney has also said:
So if as looks likely it passes this first vote and passed on to the scrutiny stage it looks as if there will terse and tense negotiations ahead.
Labour have said that while they will not block it at this first step they "are looking for some big concessions on jobs and there will be some tough negotiations over the next fortnight."
Annabel Goldie and the Conservatives, whose support secured the budget last year, has said her party will not support it if plans to drop last year's concessions to fund extra police officers, a national drugs strategy, and business rate cuts for small firms are included. Or if their aren't proposals in the new budget to help hard-pressed families and businesses.
However, both the Tories and Labour are prepared to support, or at least not vote against it at this first vote tomorrow. The Lib Dems have already indicated that they will vote against it. Leader Tavish Scott saying "No other government, national or devolved, in western Europe has made such a meagre response to this economic storm" backing his call for a 2p cut in income tax.
Whilst calling for support Swinney has also said:
"We are prepared to listen to reasonable ideas and proposals from across
the parliament.
"In these difficult times, there is a responsibility on parliament, as
well as the government, to meet that challenge and not jeopardise the
accelerated investment and jobs by standing in the way of the budget."
So if as looks likely it passes this first vote and passed on to the scrutiny stage it looks as if there will terse and tense negotiations ahead.
Wednesday, 29 October 2008
Please Don't U-Turn into a Cul-de-sac Swinney
After my initial joy at the news that the SNP are looking to localise their Local Income Tax (LIT)proposals I was a little shocked about some of the apparent revelations that have emerged.
John Swinney had said that he had raised the issue of LIT with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC), it is the least one would expect 17 months into an administration that had this proposal as one of its linchpins. However, HMRC have apparently said they have not been involved in discussions. Yet the The Times had reported that the whole thing blew up at the weekend because of a leak of emails obtained by the BBC:
So if last month the Scottish Government wanted to review some things already sent to HMRC surely that means that consultation with them over the issue of LIT had to be underway.
Heaven forbid that the Sir Humphrey Appleby* equivalent at HMRC had been house trained after 11 years of Labour masters not to look at alternatives. Even it that alternative does come from a legislature overseeing a devolved part of the UK, after all devolution was a linchpin of New Labours sweep to power in 1997.
John Swinney has to be careful that this double talk, of misinformation coming from the HMRC is not allowed to cloud the agenda over LIT.
He also though has to not U-turn on his own U-turn having accepted that he has made one. When one Government official made a statement on Monday night saying:
It makes it appear that the Nats have not moved away from we'll do it our way first, with a National Income Tax before giving way to council setting their own rate. This approach has already be vehemently rejected by the Lib Dems as not being a Local Income Tax. So if the statement on Sunday by Swinney was meant to appease Liberal Democrats the statement the next night when fending off the attacks needs either clarification or rejection.
* The current Permanent Secretary of HMRC is Dave Hartnett who was only appointed earlier this month.
John Swinney had said that he had raised the issue of LIT with Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC), it is the least one would expect 17 months into an administration that had this proposal as one of its linchpins. However, HMRC have apparently said they have not been involved in discussions. Yet the The Times had reported that the whole thing blew up at the weekend because of a leak of emails obtained by the BBC:
"E-mails obtained by the BBC under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that
some unpopular aspects of the proposal are under review. Correspondence sent from the Scottish Government to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs last month show that the SNP now wants etc.."
So if last month the Scottish Government wanted to review some things already sent to HMRC surely that means that consultation with them over the issue of LIT had to be underway.
Heaven forbid that the Sir Humphrey Appleby* equivalent at HMRC had been house trained after 11 years of Labour masters not to look at alternatives. Even it that alternative does come from a legislature overseeing a devolved part of the UK, after all devolution was a linchpin of New Labours sweep to power in 1997.
John Swinney has to be careful that this double talk, of misinformation coming from the HMRC is not allowed to cloud the agenda over LIT.
He also though has to not U-turn on his own U-turn having accepted that he has made one. When one Government official made a statement on Monday night saying:
"We favour HMRC as the most efficient way to collect a local income tax as it
already has experience of administering income tax. After introducing local
income tax at the same level in all local authority areas, in the medium term we
are considering options for local variability in a downward direction. HMRC
would still collect the tax in the most efficient manner - we are not proposing
to transfer collection to councils at any stage."
It makes it appear that the Nats have not moved away from we'll do it our way first, with a National Income Tax before giving way to council setting their own rate. This approach has already be vehemently rejected by the Lib Dems as not being a Local Income Tax. So if the statement on Sunday by Swinney was meant to appease Liberal Democrats the statement the next night when fending off the attacks needs either clarification or rejection.
* The current Permanent Secretary of HMRC is Dave Hartnett who was only appointed earlier this month.
Monday, 13 October 2008
The Truth, The Half Truth, The Spun Nationalist Part
I was out delivering in Cowley Street yesterday. No not the Westminster one, this one is in Buckhaven, Fife and part of the Glenrothes constituency. But yes Lib Dem friends it did have number 4 and they did get the Lib Dem message of Harry Wills posted through their letter box.
However, I just loved the timing of the SNP postcard and its message that was going out over the weekend.
What the SNP tell you:
What they failed to mention:
At the same time we are asking you local council to do more and more. Provide access to a full time nursery teacher for all nursery child. Provide free school meals to every child in primaries 1-3. We've also appointed Ebenezer Swinney in charge of Holyrood's budget and he's not going to give you sufficient additional funding to pay for all this if any.
What the SNP tell you:
What they fail to mention:
They want to do away with a local councils ability to raise their own finances, replacing it with a National Income Tax. They want to centralise all power at the centre, in their case Holyrood, in ways that surpass anything birthday girl Baroness Thatcher or NuLabour would have dreamed of. They want more power for Scotland but they don't want your council to maintain the power's it has had to best serve you on the ground for key local services.
Considering that just before the weekend COSLA was meeting due to the majority of councils realising that the concordat they were suckered into is being stretched beyond all limits by additional spending powers being heaped upon them by the Scottish Government, the timing of these messages must backfire. People will be seeing just that the Nats are saying, know exactly just what it ends up doing and doesn't lead to a lot of trust in what they will end up promising over the coming weeks.
Meanwhile on the Labour side as I navigated the Forth, Clyde, Tay, Tweed and Don and surrounding streets I did see my first signs, a handful admittedly, of Labour support. But just how can Lindsay Roy be a new voice for Buckhaven or Fife? Surely he is only a different person declaring the same tired, old, increasingly redundant Labour message? It's like John McCain advocating change hardly a new voice, just a different one singing from the same stained hymn sheet.
However, I just loved the timing of the SNP postcard and its message that was going out over the weekend.
What the SNP tell you:
We have frozen Council Tax.
What they failed to mention:
At the same time we are asking you local council to do more and more. Provide access to a full time nursery teacher for all nursery child. Provide free school meals to every child in primaries 1-3. We've also appointed Ebenezer Swinney in charge of Holyrood's budget and he's not going to give you sufficient additional funding to pay for all this if any.
What the SNP tell you:
We will axe the council tax altogether.
What they fail to mention:
They want to do away with a local councils ability to raise their own finances, replacing it with a National Income Tax. They want to centralise all power at the centre, in their case Holyrood, in ways that surpass anything birthday girl Baroness Thatcher or NuLabour would have dreamed of. They want more power for Scotland but they don't want your council to maintain the power's it has had to best serve you on the ground for key local services.
Considering that just before the weekend COSLA was meeting due to the majority of councils realising that the concordat they were suckered into is being stretched beyond all limits by additional spending powers being heaped upon them by the Scottish Government, the timing of these messages must backfire. People will be seeing just that the Nats are saying, know exactly just what it ends up doing and doesn't lead to a lot of trust in what they will end up promising over the coming weeks.
Meanwhile on the Labour side as I navigated the Forth, Clyde, Tay, Tweed and Don and surrounding streets I did see my first signs, a handful admittedly, of Labour support. But just how can Lindsay Roy be a new voice for Buckhaven or Fife? Surely he is only a different person declaring the same tired, old, increasingly redundant Labour message? It's like John McCain advocating change hardly a new voice, just a different one singing from the same stained hymn sheet.
Thursday, 29 May 2008
Wobbly Wednesday for the Nats
Alex Salmond may well have been jealous of Gordon Brown yesterday. Sure the Tim'rous Beastie of Downing Street has had his trouble but they haven't hit three main policy threads on the same day to quite the same devastating effect.
Yesterday it was Alex's turn to miscalculate, face tax problems and be attack whilst on the U-Turn. The Nats have been quick to attack Labour on the illegality of donations and awards for donations, yet seem content to draw a fine line over what legally they themselves can do, under the powers vested in them.
The miscalculation comes in education, which must be an embarrassment, especially for a former Economist like Alex. The SNP had set aside £40 million to reduce class sizes in primary 1 through 3 to 18. It now appears that the figure they told us was undersold in Holyrood building size proportions as just over a year later we find it is actually going to cost £420 million.
Now where is this revenue going to come from? I did hint yesterday that the Finance Minister was looking for help from the Unionist Parties on that one. He'd better first of all sort out local government taxation. The SNP seem set to carry on regardless with their centrally set rate for Local Income Tax to replace the Council Tax. However, Alan Page a professor of public law at Dundee University has warned that because of the legality issues arising out of what is allowed under the Scotland act it could become another Poll Tax scenario. People may end up refusing to pay stating that the Scottish Parliament does not have the right to do what they are attempting.
Finally the whole PFI-lite, sorry Scottish Futures Trust debacle also reached the floor of Holyrood. The plans to remove the PFI funding mechanism and the £150 million a year that raises looks like being replaced by a plan that is awfully similar if less clear. John Swinney made a statement which failed to reassure MSPs when he said the SFT was of the 'PFI Family' and that he would be using the local councils as the borrowing mechanism to raise the Private investment in their projects, again something that the administration has no legal powers to do.
So while Wendy's House on the opposition benches does teeter, Alex's foundations also look far from secure.
Yesterday it was Alex's turn to miscalculate, face tax problems and be attack whilst on the U-Turn. The Nats have been quick to attack Labour on the illegality of donations and awards for donations, yet seem content to draw a fine line over what legally they themselves can do, under the powers vested in them.
The miscalculation comes in education, which must be an embarrassment, especially for a former Economist like Alex. The SNP had set aside £40 million to reduce class sizes in primary 1 through 3 to 18. It now appears that the figure they told us was undersold in Holyrood building size proportions as just over a year later we find it is actually going to cost £420 million.
Now where is this revenue going to come from? I did hint yesterday that the Finance Minister was looking for help from the Unionist Parties on that one. He'd better first of all sort out local government taxation. The SNP seem set to carry on regardless with their centrally set rate for Local Income Tax to replace the Council Tax. However, Alan Page a professor of public law at Dundee University has warned that because of the legality issues arising out of what is allowed under the Scotland act it could become another Poll Tax scenario. People may end up refusing to pay stating that the Scottish Parliament does not have the right to do what they are attempting.
Finally the whole PFI-lite, sorry Scottish Futures Trust debacle also reached the floor of Holyrood. The plans to remove the PFI funding mechanism and the £150 million a year that raises looks like being replaced by a plan that is awfully similar if less clear. John Swinney made a statement which failed to reassure MSPs when he said the SFT was of the 'PFI Family' and that he would be using the local councils as the borrowing mechanism to raise the Private investment in their projects, again something that the administration has no legal powers to do.
So while Wendy's House on the opposition benches does teeter, Alex's foundations also look far from secure.
Wednesday, 28 May 2008
The Swinney: Episode 1- Help Me Borrow
We have all heard the protestation from the SNP regarding the Calman Commission set up by Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats in Scotland. How they will not get involved. How they would rather focus on their own one issue, one sided national conversation. Yes not since Shakespeare has a Scottish soliloquy had so much attention, only in this case it is the alternative dialogue that some people dare not name.
That is until the Nats Finance Minister John Swinney noticed a little something. You see local councils can issue bonds to borrow money and the Westminster Parliament can do the same thing. But Holyrood is unable to raise any additional revenue of it's own except through the Tax raises powers voted on in the devolution referendum's second question, and even that has limitations. While being asked about the Scottish Futures Trust, aka PFI-lite, yesterday Mr Swinney actually linked this list of words in one sentence:-
enhanced
powers
Parliament
sense
In fact what he did say was:
"There are legitimate areas where it would make sense for the powers of the parliament to be enhanced in a fashion which allows the parliament to be more effective; the government to be more effective in securing greater opportunities for taxpayers within Scotland.
"The ability to borrow would strike me as one example of how that might take place."
Now greater financial powers is one of the areas being looked at by the Calman Commission. But surely an independent Scotland would have all the powers it would need, one would assume. However, the Finance Minster is saying that there are legitimate areas where enhanced powers should be sought.
Does this mean that the Nats aren't that confident of winning a referendum on independence in 2010?
Are they secretly hoping that the Calman Commission does come up with some good proposals after all to strengthen Scotland's governance under devolution?
Apart from PFI, sorry Scottish Futures Trust investment where public borrowing could be finance at the council, why is there a need for the Scottish Government to borrow? Are the Nats admitting that their grand schemes are going to cost more than they let on leading up to last May's elections. something that some of us did realise and tried to point out.
Why if they need more money are they not using existing means to do so? They have the power to raise income tax by up to 3% over that set in the Westminster budget. But then we all saw how unpopular even taking a little bit more income tax from everyone put egg on Gordon Brown's face. So are the SNP Labour in disguise looking for stealthy ways to raise money which the Scottish taxpayer will eventually have to pay back rather than being up front about it?
Tune in next time (I'm sure there will be one) for another installment of The Swinney.
Wednesday, 9 April 2008
May I Offer a Couple of Suggestions Mr Salmond
Oh dear the SNP's palns to set their 'local' income tax LIT centrally at Holyrood has run into the buffers at the Treasury.
Apparently the SNP trying to control the ammount set central as well as using the Inland Revenue to collect the taxation throws it outwith the powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament.
Of course there are alternatives. One is to maintiain the local link by allowing council to set their own rate of LIT. This is of course one of the key differences between Liberal Democrat proposals and those that the Nats took up once they realised it was a pretty neat idea. It would maintain the local level, the collection issue is probably less of an issue for the Treasury than the loss of setting the rate.
So I'm offering Alex Salmond and his Finance Minister John Swinney, these sage pieces of advice. First take on the Lib Dem local accountability element for LIT and not set it from your offices in Holyrood, local taxes have always been set by the local authorities who need to fund their spending from that revenue. Second if you don't want to do that you're more that welcome to join the other parties to get more power and greater fiscal autonomy by revisiting the Scotland Act.
Apparently the SNP trying to control the ammount set central as well as using the Inland Revenue to collect the taxation throws it outwith the powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament.
Of course there are alternatives. One is to maintiain the local link by allowing council to set their own rate of LIT. This is of course one of the key differences between Liberal Democrat proposals and those that the Nats took up once they realised it was a pretty neat idea. It would maintain the local level, the collection issue is probably less of an issue for the Treasury than the loss of setting the rate.
So I'm offering Alex Salmond and his Finance Minister John Swinney, these sage pieces of advice. First take on the Lib Dem local accountability element for LIT and not set it from your offices in Holyrood, local taxes have always been set by the local authorities who need to fund their spending from that revenue. Second if you don't want to do that you're more that welcome to join the other parties to get more power and greater fiscal autonomy by revisiting the Scotland Act.
Sunday, 16 December 2007
A Probe of Their Own
Well they like lauching probes look at their one into cash for Honours and now it looks like the SNP are about to be probed themselves. The Lib Dems in Scotland are to call for a Parliamentary enquiry into the SNP's governments handling of the Donald Trump golfing resort planning application over recent weeks.
We need transparancy and confidence in our planning procedures and just how the Government at Holyrood can get involved. There is a tangled web of subdefuge and different stories from different sides to allow this to exist at present.
Obviously the SNP are up in arms about all this. But just what were Swinney who called in the application and the First Minister Alex Salmond doing and talking about at luxury locations with Trump represnetatives and the man himself on 3rd and 4th December.
However, the man whose planning application caused all this political fallout has shown a far greater sense of honour and responsibilty than the Government. Donald Trump has apologised to Martin Ford the former chair of Aberdeenshire Council's infrastructure services committee for the way things worked out. Mr Ford was the man whose casting vote vetoed Trumps plans the other week.
The latest twist in the Trumpgate saga now is that the pressure group Sustainable Aberdeenshire are looking at mounting a legal challenge against the Scottish Goverment's decision to call in this planning applicaation a mere 5 days after it was rejected by the council committee.
We need transparancy and confidence in our planning procedures and just how the Government at Holyrood can get involved. There is a tangled web of subdefuge and different stories from different sides to allow this to exist at present.
Obviously the SNP are up in arms about all this. But just what were Swinney who called in the application and the First Minister Alex Salmond doing and talking about at luxury locations with Trump represnetatives and the man himself on 3rd and 4th December.
However, the man whose planning application caused all this political fallout has shown a far greater sense of honour and responsibilty than the Government. Donald Trump has apologised to Martin Ford the former chair of Aberdeenshire Council's infrastructure services committee for the way things worked out. Mr Ford was the man whose casting vote vetoed Trumps plans the other week.
The latest twist in the Trumpgate saga now is that the pressure group Sustainable Aberdeenshire are looking at mounting a legal challenge against the Scottish Goverment's decision to call in this planning applicaation a mere 5 days after it was rejected by the council committee.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)