hmm I thought constitutional matters didn't have any beirings on things like health and education?

The colonial power will still try telling us what to do till we get out independence.

#2 There is no colonial power only your paranoia.

#3 There would not be many in Wick that would have your strange viewpoint. Are you sure you're from Wick, or are you an incomer?

Guga - and does it matter a damn if he is an incomer or not?

On the point of the story, the Executive may not have powers to borrow, but it does have powers to vary income tax by up to 3p. So Ministers could borrow from the people by increasing our taxes.

that is anyway what it comes back to - either the taxpayer pays for the capital spend to start with, with no interest payment due, or there is borrowing and the taxpayer pays for the interest.

Unless the First Minister is spoiling for a fight simply for the sake of it, he should use the tax varying powers to cover his immediate plans, while arguing in parallel for a change to the borrowing restriction.

And what is London if not a colonial power? It's certainly not a partner in a 'Union.' A 'Union' suggests a partnership of equals!

I thought that the "colonial power" in Wick referred to mainland Scotland.

A question for someone in the know - can local authorities and health boards raise money through bonds, or are they effectively forced to use PFI?

#6. Everyone was equal under the union before devolution. Now Scots have more advantages. The number of Westminster seats reflects the populatio size. The seats are not apportioned according to the constituent nations of the UK. If more people chose to live in Scotland than in England, Scotland would have more seats. Simple really.

Does anyone want to buy a bond issued by the Alex Salmond - even though he has ... ahem ... no authority to borrow and wasn't elected to do so?

8

Don't be so ridiculous. England still has an absolutely overwhelming advantage in seats.

RE #7 Oops - for "mainland" read "lowland" (bloody Sassenach).

The Scottish Government should set up a trust to issue bonds (borrow money) if it likes!

The colonial master down south might don't like the idea? Shame. If this devolved administration want to do it, I think they should.

What household in Scotland doesn't borrow to finance large purchases? Who in their right mind would condemn a young couple for desiring a mortgage to fund their first home?

Borrowing to fund long-term investments in infrastructure also means that everyone who will benefit from the roads, hospitals and schools in the future will contribute to the costs and not just us today.

Any government that is denied the right to borrow money for such important ends by an outside power - colonial or not - is hardly worth being called a Government.

It is clear that Scotland's Government should have the power to borrow unless its status is really no more than that of an English Parish Council...

@9

but does Alex Salmond not have the right to even ask?

Thats the way it looks to me, but simply spun negatively...
He goes to Westminster and has a word with the Lnodon Mayor who has experience in the governments attitude to bond issues, obviously in an attempt to better understand the governments position and attitiude to them.

How is that a bad thing?

"There is some indication there will be a more progressive attitude towards capital investment in the new administration."

Again, how is that a bad thing?

#14
You have to remember that this story is in a downmarket tabloid. We really shouldn't take anything that the vacuous graduate and old hack journalists who work for it "report". There isn't a decent newspaper left in Scotland, unfortunately

Alex Salmond and Red Ken Livingstone are now bosum pals!

Makes me feel sick!

What is it with all these unambitious unionist? This is a goodm ove, it's pushing devolution to its limits, being creating within its current framework...it will only help Scotland in the long run. As usual, Alex S is to be applauded...

#16

Why does it make you sick?

I am no fan of Ken, but I admire the way the guy has whipped public transport into shape here in London. He has done a lot of good for London.

Some folk on here really need to get a grip of reality.

If the Scottish Government were to issue bonds I would be more than happy to invest in them.

Could we "borrow back" that £1.5bn that Hurricane Jeck failed to spend??.

What does Westminster want us to do. Stand on Calton Hill and shout "Education, Education, Education" and hope that it turns out alright.

#8 Royster

"Everyone was equal under the union before devolution. Now Scots have more advantages. The number of Westminster seats reflects the populatio size. The seats are not apportioned according to the constituent nations of the UK. If more people chose to live in Scotland than in England, Scotland would have more seats. Simple really."

So under devolution, we are "more equal than England"?

Scotland is given a budget, in line with Westminster spending.

Westminster will borrow on our behalf, if it sees fit.

If we need more, we won't be given more, and are not allowed to borrow.

If we don't spend all of our budget, it is taken back.

Westminster will allow Holyrood to make decisions on Education and Health for Scotland.

Westminster will make decisions for Education and Health for England, and can borrow money if it needs.

Westminster will not allow Holrood to borrow money, if it needs.

How is Scotland more equal?

Bash on Alex........grab the shambo by the horns!!!

Whatever The First Minister 'Mr Alex Salmond' does he will not 'break the law' "The Scottish Executive has no powers to borrow. There are no plans to change this."

It is hard to see what his 'realistic' options are. Raising income tax. Not a
populist move and so most unlikely.One wonders if this is a 'REAL STORY'

So that's how the SNP plan to fund their grandiose plans - borrow the money.

Well, that's cleared that up.

But doesn't that suggest they're planning to spend more than they take in?

Which is exactly what the unionists accuse them of.

#23 Nick_Byrne

The ability to borrow, for investment or anything else, is a power shared by most governments, including Westminster.

At present Westminster borrows on our behalf, not necessarily in Scotland's interests, but for its interests. And we are left with our share of that debt.

If Scotland was to borrow, it would presumably be in Scotland's interests.

Borrowing money to finance schools, hospitals etc is a bad idea. Interest rates will almost certainly be higher than those paid by the UK government, simply because there is a slight doubt about repayment. In the US state governments usually have to pay higher interest on bonds than the federal government.
A better way would be to freeze pay for teachers, nurses etc in those areas where there is no difficulty about recruitment and use the money saved for new builds. Wherever possible turn labour costs into capital development. It is sound economics.

25

Correct me if I am wrong but is bond issue not the most common form of raising finance for public projects in the US and also in common use in the rest of Europe?

Are they all wrong?

26. Miss H

No you are not wrong. Bond issues are the American way to raise vast sums of money, but the voters must approve first.

However bond issues can sink a state or a country up to its eye balls in debt, if it’s not managed properly.

Back to the SNP politicians, they better be nice to Westminster, or as you call it The Colonial Power will just steam roll over the SNP, through the power of money (by withholding money from Scotland).

Just like Israel shut down the Palestine

Respectfully

Galactic cannibal

Miss H & Galactic Cannibal.
To repeat, bonds issued by devolved governments are not a good idea because (a) interest rates can be exorbitant and (b) buildings etc often need refurbishment or replacement before the bonds are repaid. This is what happened to council houses built with local authority bonds in the 1950s and 1960s.
The SNP administration is already trying to cut revenue by abolishing bridge tolls, limiting prescription charges, freezing council tax. To incur debts as well would be very silly,

If nothing else, this story illustrates quite clearly why the independence question and other constitutional matters DO matter to domestic issues that people supposedly regard as 'more important'.

they better be nice to Westminster, or as you call it The Colonial Power will just steam roll over the SNP, through the power of money (by withholding money from Scotland)

Just like Israel shut down the Palestine

Respectfully

Galactic cannibal

absolutely right on there...!
Never trust the Brits,or the wee Jock brit lapdogs on here...
The Anglo- British state that governs Scotland is losing it's grip ,I urge all freedom loving Scots to watch carefully the Black operations that will take place against us Scots.
Jock brits ,wake up and dispense with the Scotophobia. Your on the wrong side.....!

#4 Guga I was born in Inverness,and have lived in Wick since I was one week old 49 years ago.My family roots go back hundreds of years in Caithness and west Sutherland.

33

Hello Willie. Do you know Durness?

Slightly unrelated point, but does anyone else think Salmond is being a little bit dishonest by keeping his Westminster seat (and claiming full salary), even though he hardly goes there to represent his constituents any longer?

#5 indeed, why does the First Minister not simply use Holyrood tax-raising powers to fund his plans?
Possibly because he is in fact spoiling for a fight, and is blustering about the borrowing restriction to be able to blame Westminster for his administration's failure to invest in Scottish schools.
Oh but maybe a tax increase would be bad for his popularity ratings...?