Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


SNP and Tories close to deal on budget

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
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: 09 January 2009
By HAMISH MACDONELL
THE Tories were last night edging towards a compromise deal with the SNP which would see the Scottish Government's budget approved.
The Conservatives are asking for a number of concessions, including the trial of a new bed-by-bed monitoring scheme for hospital-acquired infections and a week of outdoor education for all schoolchildren.

Although the final negotiations are unlike
ly to be completed until just before the budget vote, in the first week of February, both sides appeared confident of a deal last night.

"We are optimistic. We believe we may see some progress on the bed-by-bed monitoring soon and also on the outdoor education," a Tory source said.

A senior government source also said he believed a deal would be reached, securing Tory support for the budget for the second year in a row.

The Liberal Democrats and Labour are both expected to oppose the budget. Together, they have 62 votes. The SNP and the Tories can muster 63 votes between them, which leaves the Greens and independent MSP Margo MacDonald holding the balance of power.

The Scottish Greens are demanding a massive £100 million-a-year insulation package. The government source said he was "less confident" of getting a deal with the Greens, because they were asking for so much.

It is understood ministers will offer the Greens some progress towards their target, hopefully enough to persuade the Greens to abstain, but not enough to get them to vote for the budget.

But, with Ms MacDonald understood to be prepared to back the budget, ministers are confident that they will get the support they need to get it through.



The full article contains 281 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 09/01/2009 01:17:27
Agree, Spook. Don't know about the costs of the high tech litmus paper in the hospitals but when I was in the army cadets outdoor education was free - as was getting out of the house and spending all day daeing something outside.

2

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 09/01/2009 01:23:26
OK, re 2, the taxpayer payed for the cadets.

Byt getting out of the house and daeing something was free. We were resourseful enough to come up with the means for things that cost money.
3

,

09/01/2009 01:53:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 09/01/2009 02:54:55
Not surprising that the SNP would rather deal with the Tories and Greens, considering the ridiculous proposals coming from both Labour and the LibDems.

Labour, still having not learned from the Skye Bridge Fiasco, wanted PFI for the Forth Bridge as their compromise.

And the LibDems where demanding a tax cut. While this may make some sense coming from Nick Clegg in Westminster, it make no sense at all for Holyrood where the rules would require that it be matched by an equal cut in Government spending. How is that supposed to be stimulative to the economy?

The LibDems and Labour left irrelevant once again by their insistence on having all their policies made in Westminster.
5

McGubbligan,

Oz 09/01/2009 03:08:42
With 80% of new SNP voters being former Labour voters it would seem that SNP is the real Labour party in Scotland.
The idea that John Smith was the last Labour leader is gaining credence and the present lot of anti-Scottish tories who control the Labour party are destined for political oblivion. If any of them are remembered in the future it will be with contempt.
6

Rodster,

Glasgow/Dubai 09/01/2009 06:21:07
20th centruy boy
hear!!
hear !!
7

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 07:15:18
7
You're absolutely correct. The SNP make lots of ludicrous promises - they're now offering golden pavements apparently. Which is slightly more believable than most of their promises, now what about that Scottish Fantasy Trust, how's that going - has it paid for the bridge yet? Mr Salmond guaranteed it so it will.......or maybe you should just stick to golden pavements and pies in the sky, eh?
8

Rodster,

Glasgow/dubai 09/01/2009 07:23:10
and just to emphasise the point half wit Grahamski arrives to rubbish anything beneficial for Scotland , democracy or especially the SNP.
being a Labourite Uncle Tom knee grovelling type he is only interested in what is good for Labour ,not the people of Scotland , not democracy only what is good for the party of trough snouters
9

David MacVicar,

web 09/01/2009 07:27:52
Labour got a good dressing down yesterday at FMQs showing that PFI was a non starter as quoted from the Westminster Governments response on funding. Grays Ridiculing SFT (some of it justified at a stretch) was not even relevant and then he ran totally out of steam.

I can't say I agree with the Tories on much of anything, yet Goldie and her team always seem to perform well and like mature adults. Her questions are usually good, fact based, challenging and constructive. It gives the impression that she is next to an open cage of hysteric baboons from the Labour seats. Salmond doesn't really help though with his weekly Baboon baiting.

The Labour rabble constantly shout and jeer and interrupt enough all on their own. Its all so very Westminster, so very British. Labours tactics have clearly got them nowhere and they haven't learned anything yet. Instead of being able to take advantage of a minority Government their overt hatred of the SNP means they are not serving those who elected them at all and not getting any of their policies or measures into the budget. Baboons indeed.
10

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 07:28:27
10
Hmmmm....just the girning and personal abuse then? You're not even going to attempt to explain when and why the Fantasy Trust was ditched?
Probably best, another SNP policy exposed for the cruel hoax on Scotland it undoubtedly was.
Now, perhaps you could explain the Uncle Tom jibe. Is that the nats getting racist again?
11

Rodster,

Glasgow /Dubai 09/01/2009 07:34:02
+12 my dear immature boy you are the racist anti scot not I.
As to SFT it has not been droped indeed the first ones are being rolled out as we speak.
perhaps you could tell us your policy of PPP/PFI how much would this cost the Scottish tax payer over hte life of the contract , and aslo which bank or private financier can afford this now that your glorious leader and his puppet Dariling have screwed the finances of the country completely?
12

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 07:37:01
11
Good point, reasonably made. The SNP's courteous behaviour in the chamber only accentuates their opponents high jinks....no, wait a moment you seem to have missed out the nats baying mob...oh well, there goes your well made, reasonable point....
13

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 07:40:11
13
arf arf
You know as well as I do that your glorious Eck has said the SFT will pay for the bridge so forget PPP/PFI and..... look into my eyes not around my eyes ...the Fantasy Trust is working, it will be pay for the bridge as promised by wee Eck...just keep looking into my eyes....
Oh and let's attack Labour whenever our lies are exposed, that'll work......
14

Rodster,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 07:45:45
Ok grahamski ,let me make it easier for you , let us assume no SFT now or in future and that you as Labour of Great Britain are correct .
How much will the PPP bill be for the £2.6 billion bridge .
How much will it cost the taxpayer , and who is going to fund it?
15

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 07:59:24
16
Let's deal in reality, PPP/PFI is finished. Kaput. Won't happen.
Where is the SFT as promised by Mr Salmond to fund the bridge?
Simple question really, is Mr Salmond a liar or an incompetent. Your choice.
16

Rodster,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 08:13:42
so wise labour one Grahamski if there is by your own admission mo SFT , or PPP/PFI how do you suggest that the bridge is funded?
The Labour Party policy is ?????
17

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 08:19:26
19
I favour the SFT to fund the bridge as promised by Mr Salmond. When can we start?
18

Rodster,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 08:27:13
so in other words Grahamski like all Labourite scum you have no idea , no ploicy , and all you can do is attack the SNP the Scottish parliament , the Scottish nation .
you have no ideas , no policies and no hope ... great that will drive hte people to vote for you.
Away back to bed son you obviously have nothing to offer here but negativity, how unionist of you
19

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 08:30:59
21,22
Horrible reality intrudes in the nationalist delusions. Faced with the fairly reasonable assertion that the SNP policy of SFT to replace PPP/PFI was a cruel hoax on the Scottish people they can do nothing but blame Labour and make personal attacks. How very nationalist of you....
20

Rodster,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 08:34:45
Still only attacks Grhamski no policy , no idea , no insight apart from attack SNP?
21

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 08:39:26
24
And still no excuse for misleading the Scottish people over SFT. Or apology.
22

Donnie Murdo,

Western Isles 09/01/2009 08:39:41
Rodster, that's all the Labourites have - is attack attack attack.

Why? Becasue thier favourtie toy has been taken from them (that being Scotland).

For some reason Labour is scared. Scared of what, I don't know but scared they are.

So, with that in mind, lets take thier fear on board and rise above it all and work to make our wee nation a big nation.

It's getting to the stage where I'd rather be poor and hungry than take any further direction from London.
23

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 09/01/2009 08:39:54
It is not in the interests of the minority Scots Tories to block the Scottish Budget?

It may appear that the Scots Tories are wielding some form of influence but it has no other option than to support the Nationalist Government.

The last thing the Scots Tories want is an impasse on the budget vote with Iain Gray emerging as new First Minister, and an unelected Labour/Lib-Dem coalition
easing into power with two and a half years to run to the next elections.
24

Rodster,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 08:54:13
Tell you what Graqhamski you kick off the apologising with an apology for 50 years of Labour inaction , corruption theft , then a nice wee apology for an illegal war the murder of tens of tohusands of innocent women and children, then perhaps we can discuss a financial model that may or may not work
25

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 08:55:43
27
And still no answer: why did Mr Salmond claim he would fund the bridge using SFT when this was impossible?
Is he a liar or an incompetent?
Obviously you have no answer so a gratuitous attack on Labour and a personal attack will do just fine.....
26

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 08:56:33
29
ha ha ha
so that's your answer is it?
Aye, very good......
27

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 09/01/2009 09:01:12
#30 "And still no answer: why did Mr Salmond claim he would fund the bridge using SFT when this was impossible?"

Tell you what - we'll give you an answer when you provide a quote of the First Minister ever actually saying such a thing. Take all the time you need.
28

Rodster,

Glasgow/Dubai 09/01/2009 09:02:21
Grahamski like most unionists you really have no debating abilities , no policy but one of attacking the legally elected government of Scotland .
you offer no alternative except that of laying yuorself prostartae at the feet of Westminster.
You bore me and most on here i would imagine.
Thisi sm y last day in dubai so I shall now retire to the swimming pool have a few drinks , you are not worth spending any more tinme on.
my grandson's puppy dog has more brains and more to say than you
29

Donnie Murdo,

Western Isles 09/01/2009 09:02:45
You know what really sticks in my craw round here? Feartie Labourites with multiple identities trying to prove an unproveable point by going over the same point like a broken letter because they have nothing else and no alternatives.

All you can smell around here is bull dung and fear from those in Red.

I'm really begining to feel sorry for the labourites as they have shown thier true colours. Those colours are red for anger and brown for fear.
30

Donnie Murdo,

09/01/2009 09:03:14
broekn record sorry, not letter.
31

Grahamski,

09/01/2009 09:11:18
33
Now the SNP are simply denying that they ever meant to fund the bridge using SFT..........but wait a minute, what about these:
Alex Salmond, Evening News, September 5, 2006 "If we have a new bridge, a bond issue is definitely the way to do it. Compared like for like, bond issue against PFI, the savings would be in tens of millions, maybe even hundreds of millions. Because it's such an iconic project, that would have a wonderful take up and resonance not just in Scotland but worldwide."

John Swinney, Newsnight Scotland , May 20, 2008 [The Forth Crossing and SFT bonds] "of course that's the type of project that could be taken forward under the auspices of this model".

Fergus Ewing, The Scotsman, December 22, 2006 "Financing the scheme through a bond issue under the SNP's proposed Scottish Futures Trust is seen by experts as significantly cheaper in the longer term than Labour's preferred option of private finance. While a replacement crossing is vital, we must ensure that we use a cost-effective method to fund the project."

SNP Manifesto P.19 "Over the first term of an SNP government we will introduce a not-for-profit Scottish Futures Trust, which will provide lower cost borrowing opportunities. We expect the Scottish Futures Trust to emerge as a more attractive source of funding for both national and local projects which will effectively crowd out PFI/PPP over time."

32

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 09/01/2009 09:17:46
#37 What about them? None of those are a promise to build the bridge with the SFT.
33

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 09:19:22
38

'None of those are a promise to build the bridge with the SFT.'

Alex Salmond, Evening News, September 5, 2006 "If we have a new bridge, a bond issue is definitely the way to do it."

WTF?
34

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 09/01/2009 09:22:44
#38 That's not a promise. That's a rather general statement that *it would be best* if the bridge could be built through *a bond issue*. We still wait for your repeated assertion that anyone in the SNP "promised" or "guaranteed" that the bridge would be built by the SFT.

And we'll keep waiting, because nobody ever did say that and you're a typical Unionist liar.
35

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 09:25:15
40
ha ha ha
So, anything Mr Salmond says shouldn't be taken seriously unless he says 'this is a promise'. Aye, right....
36

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 09:27:32
40
Oh and good of you to translate Mr Salmond; when he says 'definitely the way to do it' he actually means a more asinine 'it would be best' - and who is the liar exactly?
37

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 09/01/2009 09:30:28
#42 "Where is the SFT as promised by Mr Salmond to fund the bridge?"

"I favour the SFT to fund the bridge as promised by Mr Salmond."

"Eck has said the SFT will pay for the bridge...it will be pay for the bridge as promised by wee Eck"

"now what about that Scottish Fantasy Trust, how's that going - has it paid for the bridge yet? Mr Salmond guaranteed it "


Since you're so very clear with your language there, it seems fair to simply ask you for a single instance of a promise or guarantee - those precise words aren't needed, just a definitive statement of intent rather than a general notion of ideal preference - from the First Minister or SNP administration. You don't have one. That's all we wanted to know, thanks. Run along, son.
38

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 09/01/2009 09:37:28
#44 Oh, I know he'll never *admit* that he's talking drivel. But in the interests of fair play I gave him some rope, because it's always fun to watch him hang himself with it.

The Scottish Government/First Minister have NEVER promised to build the new Forth bridge with the SFT. They've said that was their preference. That's the whole story, and having given him every chance to prove otherwise it's amusing to watch poor Grahamski struggle.
39

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 09:39:39
43,44
Aye, just keep saying it. Nobody will notice that we're lying through our teeth. SFT? Nothing to do with the SNP, now move along, nothing to do with us, pathetic and I suspect you know it, Mr Swinney certainly does...........
40

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 09/01/2009 09:45:11
#46 Do keep trying to find us an example of a "promise", dear. We'll wait for you. Meanwhile, the SFT will continue to be worked on, in line with the SNP's manifesto commitment to introduce it by 2011.
41

alanh,

09/01/2009 10:13:57
#37 grahamski
"
Now the SNP are simply denying that they ever meant to fund the bridge using SFT..........but wait a minute, what about these:
Alex Salmond, Evening News, September 5, 2006 "If we have a new bridge, a bond issue is definitely the way to do it. Compared like for like, bond issue against PFI, the savings would be in tens of millions, maybe even hundreds of millions. Because it's such an iconic project, that would have a wonderful take up and resonance not just in Scotland but worldwide."

John Swinney, Newsnight Scotland , May 20, 2008 [The Forth Crossing and SFT bonds] "of course that's the type of project that could be taken forward under the auspices of this model".

Fergus Ewing, The Scotsman, December 22, 2006 "Financing the scheme through a bond issue under the SNP's proposed Scottish Futures Trust is seen by experts as significantly cheaper in the longer term than Labour's preferred option of private finance. While a replacement crossing is vital, we must ensure that we use a cost-effective method to fund the project."

All your quotes are about the issueing of bonds.
Since Nu Liebour , london, wont allow us to issue bonds this model cannot be used to fund the bridge even tho it would be the best way to fund the bridge.
You only point out another reason for us to have full control over our own money thanks
42

The Tin Man,

09/01/2009 10:17:08
In their favor, at least the exec did implement the Conservative policies of lowering business rates, and increasing police numbers, in order to get the last budget through.

The SNP keep their promises to the Conservatives.

Anyone think they will get the Tories to vote in favour of a referendum?
43

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 10:18:22
Nu Liebour, north Brittian dept, wont vote against the budget. They will abstain again, just in case they have to give up their cushy jobs during a recession, or in case they have to try and get thru any of their empty rhetoric that they say are policies as a minorty govt
44

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 10:19:35
#49 Tin man

why would the unionists not vote for a referendum since they are so sure they would win it?
45

David MacVicar,

web 09/01/2009 10:24:43
14 Grahamski,

Yet the Presiding Officer would beg to differ since he had to completely halt FMQs to calm down the baboons in the Labour benches. Labour benches, Not SNP, not Tory, Not LD. It i a regular occurance and even the generally laid back PO has had enough.

I wonder who has a better grasp of the situation - you or the Presiding Officer?
46

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 10:25:55
48
And why would the SNP advocate a policy that was impossible to implement?
Liars or incompetents, the choice is yours.....
47

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 10:26:33
52
Completely halt proceedings? When?
48

The Tin Man,

09/01/2009 10:37:18
#51 alanh

Possibly because it is not the policy that their members were voted into Holyrood for... There either needs to be a democratic mandate in Holyrood to hold a referendum, of the SNP needs to get other parties on-board - usually through horse-trading. Anyway, it is not going to happen, this time 'round.
49

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 10:44:32
using bonds to pay for the bridge would be the best way to fund it.
That would be the preferred option, as has been stated repeatedly by our govt in your many quotes. It is not impossible to use that model , just that Nu Liebour, london, wont allow us to
However we dont have full control over our own money yet but westmonster picking fights like this help to show that folly.
It still does not stop it being a fact that bonds would be better and cheaper than PFI, as your quotes also say.
Since that is not allowed, we are going to use public money. That was the way all major new projects were funded before Nu Liebour went to the right of Maggie. It is also a lot cheaper than any of the options open to us.
Its just a pity that Nu liebour, london, prefer to pick fights with our govt than ensure we get the best deal possible during this major downturn. Altho as the Scotsman says in its budget story, the nu liebour party, north brittian dept, would get more slack cut it by westmonster than the present govt if it were in power
50

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 10:48:01
#55 Tin Man

all parties frequently vote on issues that they were not voted in under do they not?
remember it was Wendy, who was nu liebour, north Brittian dept, leader at the time(lol) that asked our govt to hold a referendum last year and they would support the bill to hold one.
51

The Tin Man,

09/01/2009 10:51:02
#56 alanh

Bonds can only be guaranteed by arms of government with tax-raising powers, ie. central government and local authorities (LA's presumably would not be able to raise bonds if they were centrally funded by Scottish Income Tax).

The Scottish exec can raise or lower income tax, with a resultant raising or lowering of the block grant, so presumably they should be given limited bond-raising powers.

This could be discussed in the Calman commision. As far as I am aware, the Scottish exec don't talk to the Calman commision about anything, so nothing will change.
52

The Tin Man,

09/01/2009 10:52:24
#57 alanh

What, bring back Wendy A?

????
53

David MacVicar,

web 09/01/2009 10:54:13
To Grahamski and everyone else slagging off the SNP for not using SFT or PFI to fund the bridge.

At least Goldie as asking the SNP to consider their proposals though nobody knows what it is or how they might persuade Labour to come on side….

So, the SNP have changed their previous preferred method of funding the bridge – Big effing deal!
The PFI alternative Labour and proposed has even been rejected by their own London based party and masters, showing what a bunch of clowns North Brit Labour truly are. What do THEY propose instead - take it out of current budget over three years - a sure vote winner, if you are a nutcase.

The SNP has made a poor job of implementing SFT imo. However they have NOT made a poor job of finding a cost effective funding approach for the enormous bridge project. Labour always slags off the SNP without any costed or credible alternative. They have drummed on about a funding method that has a clear record of costing the public typlically double or worse. It’s nothing but the usual Labour buffoonery and baboonery.

Besides this, if Scotland was financed like any other country worthy of the name, there would be no issue whatsoever and the funding method would already be in place minus the usual hysterics and petty arguments. The big scary world of open accountability with fiscal control, is a bridge too far for the ‘Scotland, govern as region and no more’ parish council mob.

Concerning securing Capital investment outside of the term of Government. Err, over just how long a period is the UK government paying back China and for how much for the consecutive UK loans? Does anyone even know or is it not in fact a state secret? More oxymorons from the Brit morons.
54

Walter Ego,

Durness 09/01/2009 11:05:56
The Tories and the SNP jumping into bed again ... just like 1979.
55

alanh,

09/01/2009 11:19:04
#59 Tin Man

nope just reminding you that the last leader of the Nu liebour, north brittian dept, offerred to support a referendum even tho that is not in their manifesto.

so it is not inconceavable that unionist parties may vote in favour of a referendum if they think they can win it
56

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 11:21:38
#61
walter hyave alook around our country.
In areas like I live, south Lanarkshire, its the nu liebour and tories that have jumped into bed together to keep the nu liebour party in power.
But dont let facts get in the way of as good soundbite
57

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 11:24:27
#58 tin man

the calman commission is just a nu liebour talking shop.
It will come to the conclusions it was told to.

Why should our govt waste its time talking with it when it was set up with to NOT talk about all options, only the ones nu liebour wanted?
58

The Tin Man,

09/01/2009 11:48:13
#64 alanh
That is a fundamental philosophical question. Why am I debating with you, when I know that I am not going to change your basic outlook?

You are correct in saying that the basics of devolution were put in place by Labour. However, governments come and go. The Calman commision is the mechanism in place to discuss devolution.
59

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 09/01/2009 12:00:53
#61

You appear to be somewhat confused as to what happened in 1979.

Let me you jog your memory a little

The Scottish referendum of 1979 was a post-legislative referendum to decide whether there was sufficient support for the Scotland Act 1978 among the Scottish electorate. This was an act to create a deliberative assembly for Scotland.

The referendum was held on March 1, 1979. The electorate were asked to vote yes or no: "Parliament has decided to consult the electorate in Scotland on the question whether the Scotland Act 1978 should be put into effect. Do you want the provisions of the Scotland Act 1978 to be put into effect?"

On a 63.8% turnout, 51.6% of those voting said “YES”, whilst 48.4% said “NO”.

Thus, despite a turnout of over 60%, normally regarded as a high proportion of voters, devolution was not enacted. The Scotland Act 1978 was repealed in March 1979 by a vote of 301-206 in the UK House of Commons.

When the Scottish National Party subsequently withdrew support for the minority Labour government, a vote of no confidence was held and passed by one vote on 28 March 1979, forcing a general election.

This election was carried out on 3rd May 1979 and resulted in a net gain by the Tory party across the UK of 62 seats, (despite only achieving 43.9% of the total vote), and allowed them to form the UK government with Margaret Thatcher in charge.

Hence, it can be seen that the cause of a devolved Scottish Parliament was retarded by some 20 years, by the actions of the Labour Party back in 1979, in repealing the Scotland Act 1978.
There are still plenty of us around who remember this betrayal only too well.

We will not forget!
60

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 12:07:05
#65 Tin man

I could ask you the same question but surely its cos we both feel strongly about our opinions and want the other to see our logic. Its what adults do

The basics of devolution were put in place by a New Labour govt but only after a previous one stopped it in '79. The way it wa sset up was to try to ensure that no party could get a majority to try to stop SNP getting power.
The Calman commision was set up in much the same way. As a talking shop only allowed to talk about what the unionist parties want and since it is limitting its options is simply a waste of time and money, imo. It will come to the conclusions that London New Labour tell them to as we all already know
61

Observer,,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 12:49:13
Jesus wept Grahamski will you give it a rest.

So much for all Labour's grandstanding yesterday about putting forward the Gray man ha ha ha.

Bluff, as usual.
62

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 12:56:37
68
Aye, ok...it's almost unfair giving something as weak and frail as SNP promises a kick....just look at the crumbling edifice which is the pile of unachievable, undeliverable, cynical promises made by the SNP and subsequently ditched. Now they just deny ever making these promises.
'Naw ah didnae' and fingers crossed behind their backs when they speak seems to be their only get-out clauses.
The truth of the matter is that the SFT was never going to fly within current legislation. Pity the SNP couldn't have been truthful about that little caveat to their much-touted SFT policy.
Theyt now need to get this bridge built. I humbly suggest they try and do it without playing petty party politics.....
63

Observer,,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 13:01:29
69 Personally I couldn't give two hoots if SFT doesn't work out, it was a relative of PFI and I prefer conventional public procurement. But in reality Salmond and Swinney didn't promise that the SFT would pave the streets with gold, they promised to try it out. It may well work out in some format, although as I say I prefer conventional borrowing.

It's got nothing to do with this article 'though which is about the budget.
64

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 13:03:05
70
Ah the SNP budget. Thank goodness for the tories, eh?
65

Observer,,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 13:03:38
Pressed button too soon, so to end up with Grahamski what we need are prudential borrowing powers, and when do we need them, now.
66

Observer,,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 13:05:03
71 they want bed-by-bed monitoring and outdoor education. It's hardly a replay of the miners strike is it.
67

Grahamski,

Falkirk 09/01/2009 13:30:26
73
I don't know, but bed by bed monitoring and outdoor activities sounds suspiciously close to my recollections of the miners strike.......!
68

Miss H,

09/01/2009 13:58:22
69 Yes it’s a fair point that the SFT is restricted by current legislation which means the Scottish Government cannot issue bonds and has no borrowing powers.

To quote the Calman report: ‘Borrowing powers are linked to the scope for revenue raising, as the greater the dependence on uncertain flows of revenue the greater the need to be able to borrow so as to smooth over revenue fluctuations and allow consistent profiles of spending and long-term capital investment.’

The Calman Commission was of course set up by Wendy Alexander who for all her faults was at least open to the idea of developing the powers of the parliament. Where Labour stand on that now is anyone’s guess but the door seems to have been closed on London's orders.

But as the First Minister pointed out Labour can no longer evade the responsibility for funding capital projects by using PPP/PFI – the equivalent of you or I using a range of credit cards to pay our mortgage. The letter sent by the Treasury made that very clear.

Which leaves the question how – whatever funding mechanism is used – can long-term capital investment such as that required to fund the new Forth crossing be secured without borrowing powers.

For all their twisting and turning Scottish Labour have no answer to that and neither do you.

69

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 09/01/2009 14:00:53
1979

Tories + SNP = Thatcher.

Thanks SNP.

SNP seats before election 11
SNP seats after election 2

Smart move, eh?
70

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 09/01/2009 14:45:42
I've never voted Tory in my life and as a Scot i never would however they are the only party in the Parliament that are putting forward constructive proposals. The SNP Government has been a breath of fresh air and is the ONLY truely Scottish party with Scotlands interests at heart. Unfortunatly the Labour party and the Lib Dems have shown themselves as an irrelevence
71

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 09/01/2009 14:47:04
#77 Have you tried asking the SNP all these questions? I'm sure you'd get a more productive reply than you would here.
72

alanh,

ek 09/01/2009 14:53:37
#77 sm

have you come up with the cost of a PFI bridge yet or how the nu labour, north brittian dept, would pay for it?

I see calling the nu labour party by the lie-bour label is no longer allowed on here but other party names can be abused at will for some reason?
73

,

09/01/2009 15:01:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
74

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 09/01/2009 15:24:08
#76

Drivel from the Labourite simplistic tendency.

75

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 09/01/2009 15:48:19
#83
What exactly was the Labour Party pledge in their manifesto regarding their commitment regarding single sex wards in hospitals?

How long have they been in power in Westminster, and have they fulfilled this commitment yet?
76

Hugh Roscombe,

09/01/2009 16:07:28
sm753

"In the past, Miss H has claimed (or should that be "admitted"?) to work for them as a researcher."

Wasn't that MONTHS before you began posting here? How did you know?
77

,

09/01/2009 17:13:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
78

Incandescent,

09/01/2009 17:42:00
Grahamski 07:15 to 13:13
sm753 14:30 to now

Shifts? How much is the pay?
79

Hugh Roscombe,

09/01/2009 17:51:34
88 sm753

"Are you claiming that only people who post here are allowed to read the threads?"

Nope! Does this mean you were just lurking around ferreting away bits of info for use once you DECIDED to start posting? I doubt it. You've simply changed your moniker - haven't you?

Snigger.
80

Miss H,

09/01/2009 18:32:42
87 I have never worked for the SNP, I am not a researcher. There is also a theory that I am a cross dresser or trans-sexual and get paid 10p a post by SNP HQ. I was also once accused of being a Muslim fundamentalist terrorist.

It's a fun life on the Scotsman!
81

Miss H,

09/01/2009 18:35:30
77 Not sure I really get your point. The SNP has never restricted itself to what can be done within the powers of devolution.

We believe in independence so we also talk about what could be done with the powers that every other country has and Scotland doesn't.
82

Observer,,

Glasgow 09/01/2009 20:09:43
''The point is that if a party stands on the basis of manifesto promises it cannot deliver, it is a fraud''.

It is a shame then sm753 that you did not study politics more when you were studying the threads before making your debut as a poster. As no party has ever tried to work around the lack of borrowing powers, then no party was to know whether any ideas they had were workable or not until they tried them.

At least the SNP had the vision and guts to think outside the box, a quality which marks them out in great contrast to all the others, with the exception of the Greens and the now defunct SSP.

Incidentally, what do you think of parties who introduce a whole host of legislation which was not included in their manifesto ? I would say they were rather larger fraudsters, wouldn't you ?

83

,

09/01/2009 21:49:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
84

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 09/01/2009 21:51:55
At last some concencuss politics. The Leibour party are becoming increasingly irrelevent in Scotland,due to the fact they cannot make a decision on anything that will benefit Scotland, without asking london first. PATHETIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
85

snecked,

Argyll 09/01/2009 22:24:46
Could we havve a sensible level of debate here,please. The SNP anounced, almost a year ago, that it's plans for the bridge could not be achieved through SFT or the issuing of bonds as the devolutionary powers we have , designed to curb Scottish abilities, wouldn't allow it. So this is all old hat.
SFT will be rolled out soon in a number of other areas and Argyll and Bute Council are already using a similar model. The fact of the matter is that London has just had an unprecedented bonanza from Oil revenues and there appears to be a bottomless pit of money for projects in London and the South East yet an entirely sensible suggestion by the SNP for the funding of a huge Scottish project is knocked back - which I am sure is the reason the SNP asked - makes the case for fiscal autonomy for Scotland better than any arguement.
I continue to be amazed at the dense stupidity of Labour who have death wish.
PFI/PPP is indefensible
Council Tax is indefensible
Roll on the next election.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 

More Politics

More Politics >>

More Scottish National Party

More Scottish National Party >>

Features

Free financial brochures & guides Dionami
Paperboy Paperboy Customised news
Scottish Business Briefing Scottish Business Briefing ...Sign up today

Featured Advertising



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.