Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


SNP's £3.5m city handout is branded a 'slap in the face'

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 10 January 2009
THE SNP government was today accused of giving Edinburgh a "slap in the face" by allocating only a fraction of the extra cash city leaders said was needed to fulfil its role as Scotland's Capital.
Cllr Ian Murray, Labour's finance spokesman, said the £3.5 million "Capital City Supplement" announced by the Government had to be seen against an estimated £33m of spending by the authority which was linked directly to the Capital's special status.

He said: "We had long discussions on this when we were the administration and we are delighted there is this extra money, but it's another SNP con.

"The council produced a detailed report saying we needed £33m, and that was a conservative estimate. To give us £3.5m is a bit of a slap in the face."

The cash announced as part of the Scottish Government's budget, published yesterday, is the first time Edinburgh's special status has been recognised financially.

The Liberal Democrat/SNP controlled city council told the Scottish Government it had identified annual expenditure of £10.7m and a one-off requirement for £22.2m directly attributable to Edinburgh's role as Scotland's capital city.

Finance convener Lib Dem Gordon Mackenzie said the £3.5m for next year was "very welcome and a good start".

He added: "We believe we have a legitimate case for a far higher level of settlement and we will continue to make that case to the Scottish Government."

Edinburgh West Liberal Democrat MSP Margaret Smith said: "The figure falls well short of the £33m the council asked for and given the tough financial situation the council faces, will not address the range of issues, including the need for more affordable housing, which were highlighted in the council's submission."

Finance Secretary John Swinney promised a Capital City Supplement as part of a deal to win the support of independent Lothians MSP Margo MacDonald for last year's Scottish Government budget.

Ms MacDonald has welcomed the £3.5m allocation, but said: "When he first agreed to my request for the Capital City Supplement, the potential unemployment levels that may result from the current depression were almost unimaginable. That position is dramatically changed, and may demand a change in the all-over package of support."

A Government spokesman said:

"The sum of £3.5m was agreed on the basis of a detailed analysis of the unique status of Edinburgh as Scotland's capital and the extra financial demands placed on it as a consequence."

SNP Lothians MSP Shriley-Anne Somerville said 18 months of SNP government had delivered better deal than eight years of Labour. She said: "After years of Labour refusal to acknowledge the unique position Edinburgh holds as Scotland's capital this £3.5m commitment is a vindication of Edinburgh's support for the SNP."





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 10 January 2009 10:37 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

,

10/01/2009 11:30:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Jimmy Le Pie,

10/01/2009 12:12:50
Cllr Ian Murray, Labour's finance spokesman, is obviously looking for a berth at the big trough.

Utter clown!!!
3

livilion,

livingston 10/01/2009 12:14:20
Bet they never said we want £33m PLUS we also want another £500m for a new tramset.

What are Glasgow, Dundee, Perth, Stirling and Inverness getting?
4

livilion,

livingston 10/01/2009 12:16:27
An extra £33m would go a long way to sorting out Aberdeen's money worries.
5

,

10/01/2009 12:43:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

Mallory,

Edinburgh 10/01/2009 12:44:56
If Edinburgh is such a centre of wealth creation then why does it need additional funds? Have the wealthy operations not paying proper taxes and local rates?

If it cannot raise the cash then maybe services and projects need to be re-assessed or even dropped.
7

alanh,

ek 10/01/2009 12:53:02
and the previuos administration gave??????

maybe if the nu lie-bour party, london, was willing to let us spread the cost of the bridge more money may have been available.

Could the nu lie-bour , north brittian dept, councillor please tell us where he wants cuts from the budget to give him the money instead?
8

me150,

10/01/2009 13:57:23
What anyone else gave is of no consequence, if the ruling mafia can't do it they must go!!
9

,

10/01/2009 14:01:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

Billiam Wallace,

10/01/2009 14:29:00
Perhaps a wee note from the NuLiebour office in Holyrood to number 10 or 11 Downing Street asking for the withheld funding to be released to Scotland's coffers might result in budgets being met for the first time ever by a Scottish administration. Oh, I forgot, Broon Troosers spent all the money on illegal wars and suits for fat ba**ards. As stated above another non story trying to tarnish the SNP with the same rust that coats the NuLiebour party. I wish the spineless quislings who print this paper would actually start printing something approximating the truth that also reflects the aspirations of the public.
11

Billiam Wallace,

10/01/2009 14:29:07
Perhaps a wee note from the NuLiebour office in Holyrood to number 10 or 11 Downing Street asking for the withheld funding to be released to Scotland's coffers might result in budgets being met for the first time ever by a Scottish administration. Oh, I forgot, Broon Troosers spent all the money on illegal wars and suits for fat ba**ards. As stated above another non story trying to tarnish the SNP with the same rust that coats the NuLiebour party. I wish the spineless quislings who print this paper would actually start printing something approximating the truth that also reflects the aspirations of the public.
12

Billiam Wallace,

10/01/2009 14:29:13
Perhaps a wee note from the NuLiebour office in Holyrood to number 10 or 11 Downing Street asking for the withheld funding to be released to Scotland's coffers might result in budgets being met for the first time ever by a Scottish administration. Oh, I forgot, Broon Troosers spent all the money on illegal wars and suits for fat ba**ards. As stated above another non story trying to tarnish the SNP with the same rust that coats the NuLiebour party. I wish the spineless quislings who print this paper would actually start printing something approximating the truth that also reflects the aspirations of the public.
13

Billiam Wallace,

10/01/2009 14:32:39
Apologies for the multiple post but every time I tried to post I got an error message. I think the error is reading the guff put out by this rag.
14

Rufus-T-Firefly,

10/01/2009 15:26:21
17 Stefan Mack,Elgin

You got a dedicated Gaelic TV channel, what more do you want?
15

The Busman,

The USSR (United Scottish Socialist Republic) 10/01/2009 15:42:08
Abraham Lincoln's comments about making appointments seem quite apposite here:

"Every time I appoint someone to a position I create one ingrate and nine enemies".

I doubt if Edinburgh had been given the money for a tram system, but with no strings attached, it would have spent it on said tram system.

AFAIK, does its business rates income get redistributed to the rest of Scotland, all in the name of "fairness"

AFAIK does the rest of Scotland hate Edinburgh anyway?!
16

capy,

10/01/2009 16:15:47
Well i guess its 3.5 more than Labour would have given.
Labour whinge at everything the SNP do,yet what is there alternative.PPP/PFI,continuing the council tax? come on tells us what your alternative is,complain buy all means,but please put forward an alternative.Give us a choice.
#20 by the gist of your comment if we do not critise Westminster do we get the money?
17

,

10/01/2009 17:01:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

Cynicaltalk,

10/01/2009 17:02:23
I love it when a bad SNP story breaks and all the teuchter nationalists turn off their Sandi Thom CD's and put away their Shir Shean photo albums and begin to rant about how it is everyone elses fault.

Priceless!
19

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 10/01/2009 17:16:44
It was a labour plan but it required SNP executive to approve the tram disaster, which they did.

They proved then they would be cynical in government.
20

Churchill W.,

10/01/2009 17:28:51
Cynicaltalk # 23

I love seeing the Natz fighting like rats in a sack over money. It was only to be expected though! Appeasing Margo MacDonald, how low will they crawl?

I hope that rest of Scotland has noted that the Natz favour Edinburgh when it come to cash disbursements and ask themselves why? The Edinburgh establishment do not need any further blandishments. They, after all, are largely responsible for the state of the UK economy with their reckless excesses.
21

radge dug,

10/01/2009 17:36:21
So, how much did Labour give? They didn't even recognise this 'special' position.

They must think we're stupid. Even the Libdems welcomed this cash. Usual bitter politics from Labour.
22

It's life but not as we know it,

The Oort Clouds 10/01/2009 17:40:00
I wouldn't have given Edinburgh one penny - they already stole all the cash for their stupid tram system leaving the Highlands with nothing. Ugly horrible drug ridden dump Edinburgh is anyway.
23

livilion,

livingston 10/01/2009 18:03:42
#25 Churchill W
Yes we know why, Big Margo had the parliament over a barrel and got her two bob's worth. That's the realpolitik of running a minority administration.

So Gordon Brown's tenure as Chancellor and First Lord of the Treasury is passed fit, it was Edinburgh's establishment wot did it guv?

Personally if it comes to a choice between Edinburgh or London when it come to cash disbursements, pardon me if I settle for seeing to our own first.



Them pesky Natz thinking of Scotland before Britannia, yes I'm sure those who care to see will be watching.

24

livilion,

livingston 10/01/2009 18:12:41
24 GrahamH
No, what it proved is that you have a majority you get your way. The SNP don't, so they didn't.

Labour, liberals and the tories saddled Edinburgh with an outmoded white elephant, now they have the affrontry to complain: look what you let us do!

bit, bit, bit well?
25

Mr. Borat Sagdiyev,

Kuzcek, Kazakhstan 10/01/2009 18:20:55
The Snips could have given Edinburgh more cash, but there again why should we get more cash than anywhere else?

The real problem I see is that this arrogant council needs to get a grip of itself and put what money it does have to good use rather than wasting it on trams, robes for councillors, perks for councillors, overpaid non-jobs etc. and then pleasing poverty.

The problem is not the amount of money, rather it is how the money is being wasted. Cutting services does no good; what is really needed is a major cull of council perks and freebies, and indeed the number of council non-jobs and councillors themselves.
26

Road Raga,

EDINBURGH 10/01/2009 18:28:46
#30 - London gets loads of taxpayers handouts for its ''capital status''.
But that is just the tip of the London subsidy iceberg.
27

Boab1,

10/01/2009 18:55:21
Well, let's have it back then. I'm sure there are plenty of places which would welcome the extra cash.
28

arc of insolvency,

10/01/2009 19:57:25
The SNP are all smarm and no substance. Look what the SNP done to Aberdeen.
29

Breezy,

Argyll 10/01/2009 20:27:32
That was todays Labour Party broadcast, tune in tomorrow for another helping of absolute mince.
30

Otis Boone,

Sacramento 10/01/2009 20:40:50
One thing missing from the story that I would like to know (maybe I missed it, but I read twice): Why does Edinburgh need a supplemental cash injection?

IS it because Edinburgh is the capitol that it should get extra money? Is Edinburgh in a deficit and the money would be used to balance the budget?

It would be nice to know the background of the need for supplemental funds before titling a story along the lines of the New York Post tabloid ("Ford to NYC: Drop Dead" in regards to New York City asking for extra money during its budget deficit in the 1970s).
31

Drat,

Edinburgh 10/01/2009 21:01:03
If you can't afford it don't do it. Stop throwing money at stupid projects, festivals and the like. There's nothing special about Edinburgh that justifies the ammount of money asked for.
32

Tris,

10/01/2009 21:23:34
#12...Alasdair.


Brilliant. You should be writing for them.

It's true of course. In all the years that Labour had to give Edinburgh a bit of extra money to help with its status as the capital of our country, they had "discussions". And now they complain the SNP only gave them £3.5 million. The Liberals and SNP who run the council are happy with the "start", and hope for more in the future. Of course THEY are probably aware of the dire situation concerning finance in the UK, unlike Labour, who still haven't realised that there's a bit of a downturn thing going on........ It's a DUH situation really.

But Alasdair's report was brilliant!
33

Brian Hill,

10/01/2009 21:40:40
The cash announced........is the first time Edinburgh's special status has been recognised financially.

So, despite the recession, the worse for decades, the SNP makes a major effort to recognise Edinburgh's Capital status with £3.5million.

Happy to ignore his own party's failings in this regard Labour Councillor Murray manages to gripe and his unionists friends in the Scotsman are happy to print his totally unreasonable banalities as if they were headline news.

And yet STILL the SNP is ahead in the polls, doesn't it make you sick?

It does, but only if your a unionist.
34

fair scunnered,

edinburgh 10/01/2009 22:12:00
labourite moaning about only getting £3million ,christ that party has given away millions on pc projects,gender issues,etc etc
heres what edinburgh sucks dot com reportd on how labour conducts candidates for the then forth by-election
http://www.edinburghsucks.com/2008/09/17/its-done-and-dusted-isnt-it-billy-mark-malcolm-flunky/
also see what the winning candidate didnt tell the electorate
also mr day you moaned that if elected you would campaign for an access road from west pilton to the granton slip road,but it was your party who built it when in power
so why blame the present council?
http://www.edinburghsucks.com/index.php
in fact theres more labour cash rip offs on that site than you can shake a stick at
read all about the craigmiller cabal,and how public money was wasted,and jobs for the boys etc etc
35

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 11/01/2009 00:09:44
I AGREE that it would be better if Edinburgh got more, but £3.5 million is a start.
I am an SNP supporter, and I believe we should build upon that start. But its important to remember that its £3.5 million more than the previous executive would have given, and yet they still shout from the rooftops that its a 'slap in the face'. Lets suppose for a moment it is a slap in the face, then what is £0, that was their Edinburgh supplement.
36

Celtic Tiger,

Edinburgh 11/01/2009 15:02:07
Gorgie Tony

Your posts are bizarre.

On trams - SNP wanted to scrap trams but were out voted in the Scottish Parliament by the other parties.

The local income tax proposal is still progressing and it remains to be seen if it can secure a majority in Parliament.

Police numbers are increasing.

There is no evidence of any kind to say pollution has increased because of abolition of tolls - if you believe this I assume you would want tolls on every bridge and road in Scotland?

As for homophobia, there are many people in Scotland of the same views as Mr Soutar (including the Labour supporting Daily Record). Fortunately the Parliament ignored these views and got rid of discriminatory legislation so I'm not really sure what your point is.

Finnaly, the £3.5m seems fair - any more would be unfiar on other councils in my opinion.

37

Julian.,

edinburgh 12/01/2009 01:01:53
Am I missing something here? Labour's Ian Murray is complaining about this when under his party's administration there was no extra funding made available.

I must have missed something since it would be impossible for someone to be so hypocritical.
38

Julian.,

edinburgh 12/01/2009 01:05:06
Gorgie_Tony

If the £3.5m is an insult what was the £0m paid out by previous labour administrations?
39

mr angry,

ayrshire 12/01/2009 09:11:32
42# What a saddo , hopefully your nurse will arrive soon and up the medication. Methinks you protest too much about Soutar, obviously you have some major problems, get well soon.
40

livilion,

livingston 12/01/2009 18:11:21
#40 Gorgie_Tony

Are you actually a closet SNP activist? Keep it up pal, your wee rants are just what the nationalists ordered!

41

livilion,

livingston 12/01/2009 18:21:46
42 Gorgie_Tony

Supposing you are what you say you are: your transport strategy is for travel to be restricted for the poor so that those who can afford to pay can do so without hindrance from 'the help'?

How very fuedal and Thatcherite/New Labour of you!


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.