Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Rail link axed as Scottish Government's budget cuts bite

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: 18 September 2009
THE Glasgow airport rail link, social housing and economic development have become the first major casualties of the Scottish Government's spending cuts.
The axing of the £115 million rail link was the most high-profile of a raft of cuts announced by finance secretary John Swinney yesterday in the draft budget for 2010-11.

Others included a proposal to cut social housing spending by £180m, while Scottish Enterprise has been allocated £77m less than last year.

Mr Swinney told MSPs that ministers faced "difficult" choices" about where to cut planned spending this year. But he went on: "I have been determined to act in a way that protects jobs, supports families and communities and keeps our investment in skills, innovation and our industries for the future."

Read Tom Peterkin's analysis here

However, opponents claimed that the loss of the airport link alone would cost 1,300 jobs and was bad news for the economy.

And sources at Glasgow City Council warned it could jeopardise the 2014 Commonwealth Games, as the project was part of the Games contract.

Other cuts included £9m from teacher-training and £14m from central government, including a £5m, or 54 per cent, reduction in its advertising budget.

Support for tourism is decreasing by £5m to £44m, even though attracting visitors to Scotland was one of the SNP's key elements of economic recovery.

Mr Swinney claimed the budget was down in real terms by £268m, or 0.9 per cent, on last year's, following a £500m reduction in what was expected from the UK government.

But Labour MSPs claimed that it was the finance secretary's overcommitment of £350m in spending that had caused the real headache.

They accused Mr Swinney of sacrificing economic recovery to protect SNP pet projects, citing increased funding for international relations, up 25 per cent to £15m, and international aid, up 50 per cent to £9m, as well as an allocation of £1m for the so-called National Conversation on independence and an extra £2m for Gaelic services, taking their funding to £21m.

Mr Swinney insisted that he intended to push through with £70m for the council tax freeze, in the face of concerted attempts by Labour and the Liberal Democrats yesterday to have it axed.

The finance secretary received applause from his fellow SNP MSPs when he said he would continue with £40m funding to make all prescriptions free.

And the controversial Scottish Futures Trust, created to fund public projects but still not properly up and running, is to have its funding almost doubled, from £3.1m to £5.9m.

Mr Swinney said he was trying to protect front-line services, promising health would not lose out from the £129m loss in capital funding that was a a result, under the Barnett formula, of NHS reductions in England.

He said the NHS revenue budget was going up 2.4 per cent to £11.3 billion, while police spending would rise £6m to £266m. There was also £27m more for colleges and universities, taking their funding to £277m. New NHS money included an extra £30m set aside to prepare for a flu pandemic.

The finance secretary claimed the building of social housing was under threat, as the Treasury had refused to bring forward capital money from future years to help with economic recovery.

And he said there were too many teachers in the system, which was why the teacher-training budget had been slashed. However, this raised questions about his party's commitment to reducing class sizes.

Mr Swinney acknowledged it was a draft budget that was open for negotiation, while the opponents claimed it was a disaster for the economy.

Labour's finance spokesman, Andy Kerr, said: "The SNP are trying to make Scotland pay the price for Alex Salmond's dodgy accounting.

"I accept that, just like any government, the SNP have to set their priorities, but they are making bad choices. It is obscene that investment projects are being cancelled and services cut while they are spending nearly £1m on the 'National Conversation'."

Liberal Democrats' finance spokesman, Jeremy Purvis, said: "This should be a budget that protects front-line local services and stops a lost generation of young people ending up on the scrapheap. Instead, we get SNP spin, a refusal to look at the changes we need, and a host of expensive SNP vanity projects."

The Tories claimed political divisions over the council tax freeze showed the shape of the election fights to come.

"The battle lines are already being drawn in this budget, between those parties that want tax rises and those who want to ease the burden on hard-working families," said Conservative finance spokesman Derek Brownlee, whose party wants a council tax reduction for many people.

And indicating that his party, is ready for a third year running, to back Mr Swinney and the SNP government, he said the loss of the Glasgow airport rail link was the result of Labour's policies in Westminster.

"The Glasgow airport rail link is another casualty of Labour's cuts, and it won't be the last, given the mess the public finances are in. We cannot avoid reductions in spending, but we can try to ensure their impact is minimised," he said.

Crucially, the SNP hopes to have the independent Lothians MSP Margo MacDonald on their side, with spending for Edinburgh protected and the capital not being included in the social housing budget cuts. It is also getting an extra 2.7 per cent for the NHS.

The cancellation of the airport rail link provoked outrage in Scotland's biggest city. A spokesman for the city council described the project's loss as "a dagger into the heart of Glasgow".

However, despite the local authority's feats, the Commonwealth Games Federation said that, even though it was disappointed by the loss of the project which was part of the 2014 Games contract, the loss was "not insurmountable."

Speaker finds 'much to learn' at Holyrood

WESTMINSTER could learn a lot from its Scottish counterpart, the Speaker of the House of Commons admitted yesterday.

John Bercow, on his first visit to the Scottish Parliament in his new role, praised the "progressive" nature of Holyrood.

He said elements such as the petitions system, which lets the public lobby parliament, may be adopted at Westminster.

Mr Bercow said: "I don't think you can change the atmosphere or culture of the House of Commons overnight, but what I can say is I respect the system here.

"I also think there are many progressive things about the Scottish Parliament beyond the atmosphere in the chamber."

He praised its committee system for openness, as minutes are "very quickly" posted online.

He added: "You have a facility to have petitions in this parliament, which we may well want to follow in our parliament, so I think there is lot we can learn from you. And in the short term I would like to encourage – which your presiding officer oversaw so successfully today – quicker progress at question time: short questions and short answers."

Mr Bercow also joked with second-year pupils from Edinburgh's Leith Academy about the rowdiness of Westminster question times.

He said: "Of the schools I've spoken to so far I've found, pupils are very much more restrained and better behaved than sometimes is the case in parliament."

Mr Bercow was on a fact-finding mission and held talks with counterpart Alex Fergusson.


Page 1 of 1

 
1

Group Captain Lionel Mandrake,

17/09/2009 22:13:55

"And the controversial Scottish Futures Trust, created to fund public projects but still not properly up and running, is to have its funding almost doubled, from £3.1m to £5.9m."

Fantastic.

An entity whose core purpose is to raise private money for public projects via "Scottish Futures Bonds" (whatever they might be - ever seen any?) is now having its costs doubled.

What does it do?

What is it for?

Why does it cost so much, since its staff are seconded civil servants?

Is Swinney just stupid, or is he a liar?
2

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 17/09/2009 22:46:34
Mandrake*

Here is the link for you as you seem to know nothing about it!

http://www.scottishfuturestrust.org.uk

3

Justin Timbercake,

17/09/2009 22:53:20
2 Nevsky;,St Petersburg 17/09/2009 22:46:34
Here is the link for you as you seem to know nothing about it!

http://www.scottishfuturestrust.org.uk
--------------------------------------------------

What a website Nevsky.

It does not explain, however, what the £23 million of taxpayer's money has been spent on.

Can you advise?
4

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 17/09/2009 23:27:31
3 Justin*

I suggest you download the annual report and report back to us all.

While you are at it can you tell us where Scotland's half a billion will go and what Westmister will do with it?
5

,

17/09/2009 23:56:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
6

gus1940,

Edinburgh 18/09/2009 00:10:00
Good decision on the rail link.

Time to grasp the nettle - close Glasgow Airport. and move all services to Prestwick which already has an excellent rail link.

When Renfrew Airport was closed services should have been moved to Prestwick instead of opening up Abbotsinch which was done purely for political reasons to satisfy Weegy egos.
7

DialMforMurdoX,

18/09/2009 00:14:02
So is Mr Maddog suggesting that Labour vote against this budget and gring down the SNP Scottish Government. Or is it the case that he sees himself as some priapic cheerleader for Iain Gray who will foment and froth pissss and fury about the budget and then abstain...again?
8

,

18/09/2009 00:23:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2009 00:30:02

Mr Bercow said ,
"pupils are very much more restrained and better behaved than sometimes is the case in parliament"

Can one dispute this?

10

AbandonAllHope,

18/09/2009 00:34:59
WIT ? Glasgow needs this investment more than some cr@ppy wee parochial east coast fermers toon does. Remember - 'Let Glasgow Flourish' and the rest of Scotland benefits.
11

Fifi la Bonbon,

18/09/2009 00:43:37
- increased funding for international relations, up 25 per cent to £15m,
- international aid, up 50 per cent to £9m
- £1m for the so-called National Conversation on independence
- an extra £2m for Gaelic services, taking their funding to £21m.
- Scottish Futurist Trust, created to fund public projects but still not properly up and running, is to have its funding almost doubled, from £3.1m to £5.9m.


Well obviously, these are all important things for the devolved Scottish administration to do. Capital spending is being cut back savagely so they double spending on their failed procurement apparatus, so that it can continue to fail twice as fast.

And Mister Salmond will want to strut and fret his hour upon the global stage even more ludicrously, now he's not welcome on Broadway and Times Square any more. Fifteen million quid on "international relations". And of course, the National Conservation. A million more pounds on this.

People are going to lose their jobs on the front line of public services and they're spending money on - well it's not exactly front line stuff, is it?
12

Fifi la Bonbon,

18/09/2009 00:58:35
You know, I personally don't object that much cutting the rail link. But the continuation of those pet projects needs to stop as well. Doubling "international aid" - that is just stupid. I mean international aid is a great thing but that's why we keep DFID in East Kilbride.

I used to be involved in my trade union branch committee, and what we found is that we got two types of people turning up to our branch meetings. The first was people who were serious about organising and recruiting and taking on the employer to defend members in trouble and to improve pay and conditions. And then we got the Trots and their like, who weren't interested in the work of the union but just wanted to get a contribution from Branch funds for their pet projects. A hundred quid to send a bus full of Trots down to scream abuse at the TUC, fifty quid to support a bee keeping collective in Nicaragua, two hundred quid to support the victims of strip searches in Northern Ireland, and so on. But ask them to do any real Union work - not a chance.

That's what the nationalists are doing with the devolved budget. Despite all their tough talk, the only thing that interests them is taking our money to spend on propaganda.

What's the betting that Osama Saeed gets his grant doubled this time round?
13

Soosider,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 01:22:03
A quote from the Herald helps to through some light on the usual party political noises "Mr Swinney had just over £29.7bn at his disposal, some £600m more than in the current year but actually equivalent to a cut of just under 1%, when adjusted for inflation, and down by £500m on what had originally been planned until the block grant was cut by Westminster.

In addition he had already spent some £350m in capital spending accelerated from next year’s allocation to combat the recession. If, as seems likely, he is not allowed to do this again next year, it will have a serious impact, particularly on the housing and regeneration budget, which is set to fall by£260m to £441m." In addition the Barnet consequential has meant a £178M reduction in the Health Budget as there are no cuts to health budgets from the SG this money has had to be made up from elsewhere.
The treasury has still to indicate if it will alow capital acceleration for another year, last year this was used to prop up the building industry and with out its continuation for another year it could have significant impact not just on the building industry but also on any economic recovery.
I think Swinney has made as good a job as he could, and I expect the budget to be passed , once all the usual posturing has passed.
14

,

18/09/2009 01:36:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 01:37:47
#11 Fifi la Bonbon - "People are going to lose their jobs on the front line of public services and they're spending money on - well it's not exactly front line stuff, is it?"

Why don't you petition your Mr Grey, asking him to vote against the budget then?
16

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 01:51:01
Well Done to Mr Swinney...He has managed to find a substantial saving that will harm no-one.

Air passengers have managed for years without a rail-link and to look at the project sensiblly...You would first have to ask -

1) who would use this? - The inconvenience compared to bumming a lift or taking a taxi, would rule out most who live within about 30 miles of the airport.

The prohibitive price of train travel, timetables, train transfers and possible delays would mitigate against, all but non-car owning, travellers coming from further afield.

2) how great would their hardship be if there was no rail-link? - Not very much because there are bus-links to and from the train stations.


17

Fifi la Bonbon,

18/09/2009 02:00:16
#15 - he's not my Mr Gray, but I do hope that something is done to challenge these relative fripperies and bits of propaganda, which taken together amount to tens of millions of pounds that serve to advance the nationalist party rather than the people of Scotland.
18

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 02:15:22
#17

Yes I agree, the Glasgow airport rail link was a bit of a frippery, it was to have been from Central Station.

IE of sod all use to anyone travelling by train from the North or East and as I said at #16, few from Glasgow, Paisley, Greenock, Dumbarton Ayr, Kilmarnock or Irvine would have found it more practical or cost-effective than a car or taxi.

I'm sure the folks from Dumfries, Stranraer and Lockerbie will learn to live without a direct train link to Glasgow Airport.

Though I'm not sure how frequent their train service to Glasgow Central is, which is fairly important if you don't want to hang around an airport for four hours before they let you check in.
19

tomi,

in exile 18/09/2009 02:53:32
Is the inept Scottish goverment determined to return Scotland to the dark ages?

Whenever there are good ideas proposed, there is so much petty squabling and infighting that, either nothing is done, or a total hash-up is made.
Examples abound! Edinburgh trams, Glasgow air port rail link, border's railway, etc., etc., etc..

SNP stink!!! And, don't gloat Labour! You stink too!!
And Conservatives and that other mob Liberals?, who are you?

Sensible people in Scotland see that the grass is greener on the other side, they might be right. That is why go many leave to see for themselves.

20

Vista,

18/09/2009 03:46:18
CUT,CUT,CUT,CUT.

Echoes of the Labour Government and the Tories before them.

I thought the SNP had said that they had found a new way.

Maybe someone turned the signpost around!!!

The more things change the more they stay the same!
21

Vista,

18/09/2009 03:50:19
Imagine Fat'n Eck as the solo tenor singing "The New Jerusalem". That should bring it all out right!!
22

Vista,

18/09/2009 03:52:20
Swinney could sing base
23

Vista,

18/09/2009 03:54:00
Doubt if there would be many pennies in the bunnet though!
24

Vista,

18/09/2009 04:00:48
Next year will be much harder for your average Scot thanks to the Small Nasty Party!
25

Vista,

18/09/2009 04:02:57
But enough of this. The SNP diehards would vote for a stuffed dinosaur if it was wearing a Saltire waistcoat!
26

Warden Resurrected,

18/09/2009 04:05:43
The Gray man by name and nature, inertia laced by ineptness, an insult to the name of traditional labour values. I could go on but you get the drift. Still this ill fitted permanent understatement for a politician and a so called leader of the Scottish (New) Labour Party was right(hold me down the room's starting to spin) when questioning the continued funding for the national conversation and the Scottish futures trust. There is no value what so ever for these two when tightening the belt at this time.
27

Baggy Troosers,

18/09/2009 04:45:15
#4
Nevski

"cam you tell us where Scotlands half a billion will go"

I dug up a few facts re the Olympics the other day, for a start £600m will be spent beefing up security at the London Olympics.

Here's a beauty ,£151m was paid to consultants last year ,who were employed with the task of keeping the COSTS of the olympics down , i kid ye not.

Seems everybody else have been hit by recession and the credit crunch etc, except London England.
28

Phil C,

18/09/2009 06:17:35
Thanks Gordon. The damage caused by your rank incompetence is becoming clearer by the day. Labour are a liability we cannot afford.

The Weegies, and other like-minded mince-for-brains voters, must surely be starting to realise that there are other options.
29

Phil C,

18/09/2009 06:40:38
When more Scots wake up to the huge potential under our noses. When the Futures Trust kicks into life. When Scotland's income is kept within our own land. Then we will deserve new capital projects. Relying on Sleazeminster for our dues is no longer an acceptable option.

It's too easy for Labour in Scotland to squeal their nonsense from under big bad Salmond's cloak. Remember the SNP form a government with just one more seat than Labour! There's no word from Gray as to how he would have filled the £500 million black hole. Just the usual petty whining and politicking.
30

Walter Ego,

Durness 18/09/2009 07:00:06
Once again the SNP demonstrates its anti Glasgow credentials. Shocking.
31

Royster,

18/09/2009 07:01:12
#29. Just out of interest, what are the huge potentials? Not the oil and lower business tax rate.
32

Justin Timbercake,

18/09/2009 07:02:13
Once again the SNP has shown that it is 'Anti-Glasgow'.

This will cost them dearly at the ballot box.
33

fife runner,

18/09/2009 07:05:35
the new car park called the M74 link is costing nearly over half a billion pounds. Now that should have been scrapped. If you thin I am worng take a look at the M77 in rush hour. In a few years the M74 link will be the same
34

New Danielrober,

18/09/2009 07:09:23
I guess this is a hint that the Spanish are going to sell Glasgow airport and use Edinburgh as a feeder for the Commonwealth Games instead.

Not quite what the games are for, but if this is a commercial decision, then maybe the new owner could invest before the games.

I also wonder if this will affect Troon, Kilmarrnok and Greenock.
35

Justin Timbercake,

18/09/2009 07:11:31
The Commonwealth Games organisers will be going ballistic. Salmond promised them the rail link would be up and running by 2014.

Just as well the athletes are fit. When they arrive at Glasgow airport they will have to jog a few miles to their hotels with their suitcases on their backs thanks to the SNP.
36

eric,

lothian 18/09/2009 07:12:51
Edinburgh now Glasgow rail link.Scotland is closed!
37

Dùn Èideann Bully Wee,

18/09/2009 07:15:14
#32 Rufus

In what way is this “anti-Glasgow” exactly?

Do you know where Glasgow Airport is?

I will give you a clue, it is not within the Glasgow city boundary.

38

Justin Timbercake,

18/09/2009 07:16:57
Some budget that was from the SNP.

Millions of pounds more for Gaelic.

Millions of pounds more for the Scottish Futures Trust.

Millions of pounds more for International Relations (whatever that is).

And a giant slap in the face for the people of Glasgow.
39

Phil C,

18/09/2009 07:19:20
#31 Rooster

Open your eyes man!

We live in a land of huge untapped resources. Our people have a proven track record of genius (the clever ones anyway!), to produce our future enterprise and industry. We have incredible natural resources, in and under our seas and on land, to produce food and energy.

We live in a land burdened by state 'help'. A bloated public sector. Huge benefits dependency. Rotten health, diet and housing. A legacy of Labour and Tory misgovernment. Get Scotland's shame working with a new found optimism and we'll go from weakness to strength.

Open your bloody eyes man and forget the fear!
40

Justin Timbercake,

18/09/2009 07:19:59
#37 Bully Boy

What would you know?

You live in Edinburgh and you think there is going to be a number 22 tram line there.
41

Phil C,

18/09/2009 07:24:29
Justine's enjoying slapping the Weegies this morning!
42

Dùn Èideann Bully Wee,

18/09/2009 07:31:20

40 Rufus
I do indeed currently live in Edinburgh, not far from the 22 bus route, which makes up the bulk of the planned tram route.

As far as knowing where Glasgow airport is, well, as a born and bred Glaswegian of Island stock I tend to know quite a lot about the city.

Here to help!
43

New Danielrober,

18/09/2009 07:32:45
# 39 Phil C

I might disagree on the extent of your solution, but still well said.
44

Jimmy Le Pie,

18/09/2009 07:33:42
Congratulations Mr Swinney. You did very well.

Another excellent Scottish Government Minister.


SNP - The ONLY party for ALL the people of Scotland.
45

John Adams,

18/09/2009 07:35:27
I have to agree with Brechin and Baggy. Tis an awful lot of posturing over a few million quid here and there. As the well-informed chaps highlighted, London is increasing its spend on its Olympics using our (yes OUR)oil and gas reserves while the ne'er do wells complain about an extra million spent on a national conversation. Jeez, who would have thought that so many Scots could be so petrified to fight for what is rightfully ours. Makes me sick to my stomach that some of you posters are so blinkered with fear. Exactly waht is it that scares so many people about seceding from the Union? One thing's for sure, if -and this is now a big if- the Oil ever runs out, don't think for one minute that Westminster won't tell us to sling our hook.
46

,

18/09/2009 07:42:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
47

eric,

lothian 18/09/2009 07:44:09
Why cant we have the trams scrapped lucky them.
48

SassyC,

18/09/2009 07:48:41
19: And the grass is greener on the other side - where are you living - Utopia? There are many merits to Scotland and sometimes it is in living away that you begin to realise this.
Wait till you need healthcare, or encounter disability, need aged care or dental treatment, unemployment benefit, a house because of homelessness and then tell me you are better off where you are! Some people can't afford to go to visit the GP or have essential dental treatment so put it off. Long term implications of not being able to access this treatment means shorter life spans. And this in Countries where people believe the grass is greener....At least the impovrished in Scotland can still get their needs met in these respects!
49

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 07:49:10
Another piece of professional play by Swinney. When someone cuts your money allocation or your manpower clearly identify what that cut has hit. Do not scrounge pennies on other projects.
When Westminster tell us what the cut backs will be in the future on Public Services then the Unions will have to decide what they will do with Scottish Labour.
Time to think about Scottish Workers not the Labour party.
50

New Danielrober,

18/09/2009 07:52:31
The loss of a £115 million rail link, must affect the Glasgow Airports Spanish owners. So it would be very interesting know what their opinion is. After all they are significant players in the Scottish economy.

SO what do they think about this drop in investment?
51

Jimmy Le Pie,

18/09/2009 07:59:12
#50

I'm sure no one would object if Grupo Ferrovial wishes to spend a heap of money funding such a rail link.

Bet they don't though!!!
52

gus1940,

Edinburgh 18/09/2009 08:07:18
I see that the opposition parties are acusing The SNP of being anti-West Of Scotland.

This is the same bunch of cretins that outvoted The SNP to force through the disgraceful disaster that is the Edinburgh Tram Scheme.

Why doesn't The SNP now, to remind the electorate of recent history on the matter, put forward a motion to scrap the Tram Scheme and cut our losses.

By challenging the opposition to support the motion and have spending cuts in both East and West it would put them really on the spot.

It would also greatly increase support for The SNP in the Edinburgh area and throughout the country in general.

Game, set and match to The SNP methinks.
53

,

18/09/2009 08:07:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
54

Mikey,

Carstairs Junction 18/09/2009 08:08:02
I see the Quisling fifth columnists are whining about some Glasgow rail link? Honest to God, you would think they actually knew where GLA was!

I know what we should do! All those that object to extra money spent on healthcare should go to England for their healthcare. Not only would that save the Exchequer money, it would also make our fifth columnists cream themselves, being treated by some man in England! And you never know - the scalpel might slip!
55

,

18/09/2009 08:09:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
56

Rob me blind,

Peterhead 18/09/2009 08:12:42
Just like the party Swinnies processes are bankrupt. His argument for getting out of a black hole is to keep on digging.

We have a shortfall in funding because we borrowed out of this years pot to keep our vote catching populist schemes going. Now how are we going to deal with that short fall? Well we will just borrow from next years and the next year ad-infinitum. Well it has to stop at some point or will the SNP just sit back and hand the poison chalice to someone else and then blame them for all the woes that Scotland will face.

Scrap some of the populist projects and sort out the real problems. I can’t believe that anyone can stand there and say there is a lot to be learned from Hollyrood, that is unless it’s the ARMY who can study their tactics for lying low and not being detected for four years. Just how many of those in that place actually do anything?

Stop whinging about the Oil if it wasn’t for foreign investment there would have been no oil and if this bunch keeps on going the way they are most of that investment will pull out.

If Salmond needs more money then maybe he should charge Trump a realistic price for the land he has arranged to give to him. I am sure they will be queuing up to visit ‘Salmond Land’ the worlds largest CRAZY golf complex. Will Trump now have to revise his plans because of the way the SNP have been doing business?
57

Rambo The Jambo,

Edinburgh 18/09/2009 08:16:40

# 37 Dùn Èideann Bully Wee

No idea why it's called 'Glasgow' arport as it isn't evemn in Glasgow, as you say.

Instead of wasting money on Weegie projests like the M74 extension, when are we going to get a proper link between Edinburgh and the M74/M6 instead of that 40 mile dirt track through Biggar?
58

Warden Resurrected,

18/09/2009 08:24:34
It’s a wonder to behold the memory of the politician scorned. At the very basic a spitting of the dummy, but at a much more calculating level a double edged sword. One edge retribution for a blow missed in the heat of battle at Glenrothes. The other edge still dripping with the gore hovering over the people of Glasgow north-east as a warning.


59

New Danielrober,

18/09/2009 08:27:00
# 51 Jimmy Le Pie

Grupo Ferrovial might invest if they owned the route. So why not sell it to an interested party and free this route from national politics.

Glasgow is a great investment in its own right, with a huge event in 2014. If the track is sold off I'm sure dozens of companies Scot/UK/EU/international would be interested in buying this route.
60

AIasdair,

18/09/2009 08:29:27
The question is: Will Joe be happy about this because he hates the weegies, especially their airport... or will he be angry about this, because claiming the SNP favour Glasgow is one of his favourite bits of drivel to post on here??

Answers on a postcard.
61

kenone,

London 18/09/2009 08:29:42
The Scottish Government have to find half a billion in cuts imposed by the Labour Government because of their mishandling of the economy.

Labour politicians in Glasgow will never be happy until the entire Scottish budget is spent on Glasgow’s whims and wishes.
62

,

18/09/2009 08:33:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
63

Phil C,

18/09/2009 08:34:12
#56 Makes you blind

You just can't see it can you! The reason for the cuts is that Sleazeminster Labour imposed a £500 million reduction on what had been projected for the Scottich government. Too hard to understand?
64

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 08:38:20
Anti-Glasgow? What nonsense. It couldn't be that Labour have a by-election or two in the offing - have they actually decided when they are to be? Labour are turning themselves into a parochial Glasgow party and losing touch with the rest of Scotland. Get rid of Gary and Kerr and get some real talent. It's starting to get embarassing.
65

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 08:39:12
oops - Gary should read Gray - I have no idea who Gary is or what he was doing in my post.
66

kenone,

London 18/09/2009 08:43:38
#65

It is Gary DisneyWorld, the Glasgow Labour Party spin doctor, you know, the guy with the Mickey Mouse brain, but then again he is the best they have from a bad lot!
67

The Strategist,

18/09/2009 08:49:38
#56

Are you seriously blaming the SNP for what's going on in the N Sea? If so then I'm afraid you really don't understand the basics. The Scottish Govt have absolutely no control over N Sea taxation or other economic levers. If they did then life might be a lot better as indeed it is in the Norwgian oil and gas industry.
68

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 08:50:04
#13 Pretty extraordinary quote from the Herald there. They genuinely think this is a 1% cut when adjusted for inflation? What inflation figure are they using? I cannot find any support for that position in the facts as far as I am aware of them.

This year's £600m increase in the Scottish budget, from £29.1 billion to 29.7 billion, represents a 2.1% rise in funding. The CPI (the so-called "headline inflation rate") last month was 1.6%, while the RPI (the actual inflation rate including mortgage payments) was -1.3%.

So can anyone explain to me why Swinney, the Herald and the frothing SNP support on here are claiming that this was a cut? Other than for political expediency, obviously...
69

Phil C,

18/09/2009 08:51:22
and oops (#63). I don't know what Scottich is. Is it a cross between the SNP (Scot) and the unionists (ostrich) maybe?
70

Gravedigger,

Livingston 18/09/2009 08:51:27
What about stopping the Bathgate to Airdrie rail link also
This would save the goverment another 300 milion pounds plus another 300 milion pounds of extras
This rail link has cause so many problems to the public and to what avail
I would expect 5% of the public will use this rail link but what about the rest of the public
Just as per the Tram Line in Edinburgh whoever thought of these two rail projects should be shot at dawn
Far better to construct a extra lane on the M8 and two giantic park and ride depots
This extra lane would save many lives per year and save 100s of injuries per year
We must go back to grass roots and common sense prevails
71

Jam Tarts 1874,

On the Rebound 18/09/2009 08:51:50
SNP = Tartan Tories = Cuts, Cuts, Cuts.
72

Phil C,

18/09/2009 08:55:46
#68 DiE

You still can't see it can you! The reason for the cuts is that Sleazeminster Labour imposed a £500 million reduction on what had been projected for the Scottish government. Too hard to understand? Stick your inflation figures where the sun don't shine!
73

Warden Resurrected,

18/09/2009 09:02:28
The new labour Westminster Government did make major errors in the economy-fact.
Another fact is this Scottish Government predicted a reduction in funding before their last budget and didn’t take precautions. This too is a major error in an economy. Cue the sound of silence from you know who.
74

kenone,

London 18/09/2009 09:02:37
Labour the future = cuts year-on-year, because they have ruined the economy.

Tories the future = cuts year-on-year, because that is what they do.

LibDem the future = dream on

SNP the future = the only viable alternative to survival of a nation

The future is clear, vote SNP






75

Andrah,

Embrugh 18/09/2009 09:05:06
#39 Phil
"We live in a land of huge untapped resources. Our people have a proven track record of genius (the clever ones anyway!), to produce our future enterprise and industry"

You are correct. Unfortunately most such people go south or overseas to realise their potential. If they stay, or even return, Scotland's long term love affair with Big Socialism means that their success is often treated with scorn and contempt.

Reminds me of the old Morrisey song, "We hate it when our friends become successful, and if they're Northern, that makes it even worse".

A sea change in attitudes will be required if Scotland is ever to become a vibrant, prosperous nation.
76

BIG EYE,

Paisley 18/09/2009 09:06:58
Labour are now in the last chance saloon. being decimated across Scotland by the SNP they fall back to their last redoubt in the City of Glasgow.

The tactic now is to spread the lie that the cancellation of the rail link is a severe blow to Glasgow (despite it being in Reenfrewshire) and that this is "evidence" of the SNP being biased against Glasgow.

Problem with this of course is that the SNP also voted against the Edinburgh Tram project (A decision that looks more inspired as each day passes) and the £500 million plus (latest estimates £718 million) would have built several rail links but Labour thought the single tram line was more important.

Tin helmets boys the election approaches and your days are numbered. Expect large Labour casualties and perhaps even mutiny in the ranks.
77

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 09:07:39
#72 I'm well aware of that, you unnecessarily rude and aggressive man. If you read my post, I am questioning the claim made in the Herald that this is a 1% cut when adjusted for inflation.

Swinney has had a year to decide how to cut his cloth for this smaller increase. He alone has decided to retain the council tax freeze, and leave councils unable to pay for flood prevention works. He alone has decided to press ahead with the M74 extension, but drop the GRL. He alone has committed more money to the so-called "National Conversation", and all the other frivolous, politically motivated nonsense the SNP loves so much.

To call these decisions "cuts" is to lie about them. He has made budgetary decisions on the basis of another budgetary increase. There are no cuts here, merely the priority choices made solely by the SNP.
78

HughB,

Edinburgh 18/09/2009 09:26:40
Who voted for the Edinburgh Trams?

The SNP voted against it, but the £600 million (and climbing) project was forced through by Labour and their chums.

Edinburgh doesn't need trams, and yet Glasgow needs a rail link.

So why oh why did Labour force through trams for Edinburgh that we didn't want, and didn't need, when they knew other projects were more urgent.

And again, Labour project, Scottish parliament, estimate £40 million, actual cost over £400 million. Labour doesn't have a clue how to run their own pet projects, let alone a country.
We can see that with the economic disaster zone that Britain has become under their watch.

Then there's all the squandered money from Scottish oil.

Then there are the wars which we've been dragged into.

Just think what could have been achieved if all that money hadn't been wasted.

Labour cannot have their cake and eat it you know.

Having thrown money at their own pet projects, and not set any aside for a rainy day, then not having prepared for crunch times, how on earth do they expect everything to be funded when there is no money left in the pot.

To add insult to injury, Labour control OUR purse strings, so manipulate things so that they can make it look as if Scotland can't manage our own affairs.

Simple solution to all this nonsense.

Everybody in Scotland knows it.
79

,

18/09/2009 09:27:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

Sedov,

18/09/2009 09:29:07
#77 Duncan - correct and well put. The blame lies squarely at the feet of the SNP who have squandered tax payers money on that ridiculous waste of time - the National Conversation! What a con!

They are all show and no go!
81

veritas1,

clacks 18/09/2009 09:30:42
The 'logic' being used here by unionists is truly that of the desperate.

The one thing ALL politicians love is popularity, these unionists bang on all the time about how Alex Salmond craves it, will do anything for it and now when he has the chance to become even more popular than all the polls show him and his party of government to be, he somehow allows John Swinney to put it and all the party has achieved and believes in at risk.........WHY?

When Gordon Brown was chancellor he raised a treasure chest of money from many sources that he tried to keep quiet, but that, bad as it was, was for a reason, to help Labour fight an election.

Can any of these deluded unionists please tell us what The Scottish government would even hope to achieve by withholding money from projects when according to them,(the unionists), it's there to be used?

Especially as we have been told that all the Scottish governments money is held in London until it needs to be used and that if not used by a certain time a warning is issued that it will be lost for good!

The ONLY logical reason for cuts by the Scottish government, which might incur risks for the government itself, is because their income has also been cut.

And we all know who controls that.
82

Miss H,

18/09/2009 09:39:33
11 To which you can add:

- Completion of the M74 motorway project (£690 million)

- Upgrade of the M80 Stepps to Haggs road (£330 million)

- Glasgow to Edinburgh rail improvements programme (£1.164 billion)

- Glasgow Central Station improvements and upgrade to Glasgow-Paisley rail corridor (£182 million)

- Going outside Glasgow a bit don't forget the Airdrie to Bathgate rail link (£300 - £375 million)

And not forgetting small matters such as the new Southern General Hospital at £842m.

83

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 09:44:54
#79 I view it as misguided and pointless. It's far too soon to be judging devolution. I would give it 20 years at least, including at least a couple of terms of opposition between Holyrood and Westminster, before we can truly see what might need to be improved in the devolution settlement.
84

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 09:47:40
#78 I do wish people like you would give up on the old lie that the original estimate for the parliament was £40m. It wasn't. It was over £100 million. A fourfold overspend is shameful enough, we don't need to pretend it was a tenfold overspend.
85

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 18/09/2009 09:48:49
#73, Warden Resurrected.
SNP can't "take precautions" as the Scottish government is not allowed to save for a rainy day, money not spent in any year lies in an account at the Treasury, and is deducted from the current year's block grant whenever it is drawn. (Incidentally drawing the money requires Treasury approval too.)
86

Miss H,

18/09/2009 09:52:17
80 On the other hand you could see it as a sensible decision in view of escalating costs.

£160 million in January 2006 to £326 million in May 2008, to the latest estimate of ££397.5 million.

If there is one thing that infuriates taxpayers it is public projects spinning wildly out of control.

The last thing Glasgow wants or needs is a trams stushie all of our own.
87

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 09:54:25
84

Just googled that. It seems £50 million was the estimate. Where do you get £100 million from?
88

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 09:57:00
#82 Are you saying that the government is spending £1.164 billion on the Glasgow to Edinburgh rail improvements programme in the coming year? Or are you just mentioning a large number and hoping people won't notice that it's not actually coming out of this year's budget? John Swinney did something similar in parliament I think.

I only ask because the budget shows a projected spend of only £330 million on rail infrastructure across the whole of Scotland. Yet you seem to suggest there are at least 3 rail projects in the budget totalling almost £1.5 billion.

I'm sure it's an oversight, and not another deliberate attempt to mislead anyone.
89

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:01:40
88

And I'm sure you are not misleading anybody by stating the original estimate of the SP was £100 million, eh? ;-)
90

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:05:06
#87 The £50 million estimate was not for the current design. The first estimate for the final Miralles design (though excluding the post-9/11 additional security requirements which added a huge amount to the costs later in the project) was £109 million in June 1999.

We should be rightly critical of a process which led to a fourfold increase, but we shouldn't be pretending that anyone had ever said the current design could be built for £50m.
91

Miss H,

18/09/2009 10:07:27
88 That's the total - GARL would not have been built in one year either you know.
92

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:09:22
90

Pretty meaningless then, eh? The estimate for the Edinburgh tram system is £500million. It will cost significantly more than that, won't it?

Guess that's the thing about estimates, they are just that, estimates based on best guess.

I would always argue for a quantified quote instead, that way it cannot be used as a political weapon.

Yes, the 4 fold increase is a disgrace. However, it's only money and as we all know, all this cash being splashed about doesn't actually exist, does it?
93

,

18/09/2009 10:13:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 10:16:07
The coverage of the draft budget is if course so much better in the Herald (being a Glasgow based paper) than here.

Speaking as a Glaswegian I don't actually give two hoots about the rail link. It seems like a waste of money to me in the present economic climate, it would no doubt over-run it's budget, and we'd rather laugh at the Edinburgh tram fiasco than have one of our own.

Anyway - where I DO think Stephen Purcell has got right on his side is in criticising the SNP Govt for failing to acknowledge that Kelvingrove and the Burrell should not be paid for by GCC alone.

Aside from that I am quite happy with the draft budget (what David Maddox missed out was that social housing benefitted from accelerated spending when the recession hit, so it is reasonable to cut the budget now, although further accelerated spending as Mr Swinney has requested could restore it again)and hope that is passes without the usual hysteria from the opposition.
95

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:17:52
#91 Right, so it was a deliberate attempt to mislead then, on both your behalf and that of John Swinney. Thanks for the clarification.
96

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:18:47
#93 The M74 extension.

I'm not a member of any political party. And I'm not a lapdog. Try being a bit more polite next time rather than calling me names.
97

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:19:40
No such thing as an honest politician.
98

AIasdair,

18/09/2009 10:20:36
Nice to see you back, Duncan.

Still claiming the trams are on-time and on-budget?
99

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 10:24:43
96 How could you cut the M74 extension? It is already being built. My bus has to natigate a building site every morning when I am going to work. Would you knock the pillars down and rebuild the buildings which have been demolished then?
100

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:26:10
#98 Hi Alasdair. Are you saying they are late and over budget? As far as I'm aware they weren't due to be completed yet, and they certainly haven't overspent the budget because there is no additional money.

Perhaps you are predicting that they *will* be late and over-budget. You may be right. But that's quite a different thing.
101

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:28:03
98 and 100

Surely that's a measurable predicition at this point though? i.e. how many yards of track done for cash spent. How many yards to go for money left in the pot?

Or am I being too simple?
102

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 10:28:13
Nobody needs a GARL costing Millions, just put a wee siding leading to the airport from Paisley.

How long are these games going to last? 3 weeks?

To heck wi' spending a fortune on that
103

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:33:41
#99 It's perfectly feasible to cut our losses at this point. It's a project which should never have been started in the first place, of course, and one which the SNP had every opportunity to cancel when they came to power but chose not to.
104

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:34:49
#101 You're probably right, it probably will be late given all the problems they have run into (some of their own making); I don't know if it will be over-budget though, I've seen no compelling evidence to suggest that.
105

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:35:35
104

Can that be applied to the London Olympics and Commonwealth games too?
106

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:37:52
Tell me Duncan (or anybody else), is it true that at one point the city fathers tried to build an underground in Edinburgh but abandoned it due to technical and financial difficulties? This was many many years ago of course.

I love Edinburgh. Was there for the Homecoming this year. Won't comment on the tram works too much though! :-)
107

Skip McClendon,

18/09/2009 10:38:44
I don't live in Glasgow (or Paisley, which is closer to the airport), but I do think that the decision to axe the Glasgow airport rail link is ridiculously short-sighted. It's a national shame that our two biggest airports don't have rail links, and shows how small-minded and backward our political "leaders" tend to be.

It's purely a political decision to axe GARL over other pet government spending priorities (pre-election bribes?) such as freezing Council Tax and scrapping prescription charges and bridge tolls. But, of course, the SNP government can't scrap any of those commitments because they are among the very few manifesto pledges that they have actually managed to keep.

To me, good train links to our airports are far more important than freezing my council tax again or giving me free prescriptions. While these things may put a few extra quid in my pocket, I'd willingly give them up and pay to cross the Forth Bridge again if it meant we could see proper integrated rail links to our airports.

However, I do wonder if this is a bit of political comeback from the SNP over the tram fiasco. The other parties forced that project on the SNP, and the scrapping of the GARL could be the price they are paying. £500M+ for Edinburgh's tramline, or a similar amount for good rail links to our airports? I know which one I would choose. If the other parties had allowed the SNP to scrap the tramline as they wanted to do, then we might have still been able to look forward to proper rail links to our airports.
108

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 10:39:07
103 No it isn't. The path for the extension has been cleared, the pillars are up, you are just being silly. It *may* have been possible to have cut our losses when the SNP came to power, but if you remember the SNP Govt had just been forced into supporting the tram project, if it had cut the M74 extension at the same time then that *would* have been a slap in the coupon for Glasgow.

109

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:40:12
Interesting to note that the budget shows almost double the amount of money being spent on new road building than on rail infrastructure. This government truly has failed to deliver on public transport, and continues to throw money into the black hole of roads building. What will they do when the new roads fill up again with traffic? Build more! Hooray for tarmac.
110

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:41:40
Public transport uses raods too you know.

It is sometimes cheaper (probably always cheaper) to build a road over certain terrain than rail track.

Lets not get carried away now.
111

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 10:43:31
#108 I remember well. The SNP came to power determined to cancel both EARL (the Edinburgh Airport Rail Link) and the trams project, and spend the money on road building in Glasgow and elsewhere. They succeeded in canning EARL, which is a bigger slap in the coupon than Glasgow has just got.

The point about the M74 extension is that it will solve nothing in the long term. It will just be a new stretch of road to be stuck in a traffic jam on. The only sensible capital investments in transport are in public transport, light and heavy rail and bus services.
112

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 10:44:44
107 Skip McClendon,

Financial decision not political, I am happy about the Frozen Council tax and prescriptions. Bridge tolls never affected me anyway.
Though I'm pro union I like what the Nats are trying to do in Scotland.

For Scotland's and it's workers sake I would like SLAB to get much closer to them before thetories take power.
113

Doh,

18/09/2009 10:49:46
#101

You are being too simple.


BTW I am in favour of the trams.
Margo is also in favour of the trams.

The SNP attitude to the trams is not based on some objective reasoning, but simply that they wished to
spend the money on other projects.

Personally I think it is unfortunate the Scottish government cannot raise its own debts to fund capital projects. That must change.

However the SNP have made many uncosted promises,
such as student debt, class sizes, and school buildings which they are not delivering.
That is certainly nothing to be proud of, although Salmond is hardly contrite.


114

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 10:50:12
111 As it happens I agree with you, but although they will make greenish gestures ALL of the mainstream parties are dedicated to making life easier for motorists, probably because they want their votes.

What I hope is that the M74 extension will take cars off other roads, which I think should then be dedicated to bus, taxis, and cyclists only.

Then we can get into the town no bother, whilst they are sitting in their little cars going nowhere fast.
115

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 10:51:42
113

In what way am I being too simple? I'm sorry, but stating that is one thing, not backing it up is quite another and no basis for a conversation.

116

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2009 10:53:17
Rail links to airports seem great as an idea but their costs are huge and practicality is often dubious. They are effective for people flying in for a day to go to a city centre and out again, but what is the demographic for users of Glasgow Airport.

I would guess it is used largely by holiday travellers from west central Scotland heading for Spain or Turkey. Most of these travellers would not be using the train anyway. They will be getting friends or a taxi to take them and their baggage direct from home to airport. There is nothing a bus cant do just as effectively. Very few people have a train station right at their doorstep. And although it was part of the plans for the Commonwealth Games 2014 the rail link was not I imagine to go to the athletes' village. They would have landed in Central Station and been transported from there. The sort of money proposed for GARL and indeed what is committed to the Edinburgh Trams would have gone a long way to deal with other more beneficial projects, the dualling of the A9, a new Forth Bridge, sorting the Rest & Be Thankful, extra lane on the M8, etc.
117

AIasdair,

18/09/2009 10:59:11
Duncan - why do you think the M74 should not be happening? It's a completion project that should have happened a long time before now. The Kingston bridge is gridlocked daily with over 11 times the traffic it was designed for.
118

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 11:05:37
#117 Because it will simply move the gridlock! The only policies which reduce gridlock are those which reduce traffic - investments in public transport, light and heavy rail, and bus services. All road building increases traffic flow because the number of vehicles increases to fill the available space. It's a global, universal truism.

The number of private vehicles on the roads in Scotland has doubled in the last 25 years. The more road space we pay for (at a cost of £50 million a mile!) the more vehicles will pile in to fill it. It's just not sustainable.
119

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 11:11:41
118

Car usuage in Scotland has remained stable for quite w hile now according to this newspaper. Additionally, there is a finite amount of people in Scotland, a finite amount eligible to drive and a finite amount able to afford car ownership. Therefore, unless you envisage massive population expansion (you have a declining population, only bouyed by immigration), where will the extra cars come from.

As we have seen recently, the impact to the economy by removing cars is huge and very negative.
120

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 11:15:59
#119 Without wishing to sound trite, the cars are all already here, just waiting to get onto the roads.
121

Gary Inserik,

Nova Scotia 18/09/2009 11:18:46
120

Without wishing to sound stupid, the cars are already on the roads and not waiting anywhere. You are at saturation, it won't get any worse.

There are other things you missed too. Haulage. Get hauling your goods by rail.

But of course, the powerful haulage lobby will stop that.

You cannot reverse the Beechings cuts.
122

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 11:23:59
#121 You're absolutely right about haulage. But you make my point for me about saturation on the roads - saturation point is defined by the available road space. If you increase the road space, more of the cars already here will join in to create a new saturation point.
123

Sedov,

18/09/2009 11:27:21
20 Vista - there is no silver bullet for the SNP, they are probably the weakest link in the political arena at the present time - and what with the state of the other parties, the next election will be famous for the record amount of voters abstaining.

However, you can vote for the Sedov Party - cheap beer and crisps and free entry into the Falkirk Wheel.
124

Publius,

London 18/09/2009 11:27:56
Some random thoughts:
(1) The M74 extension will remove some traffic from the M73 and M8 north of the Clyde. But it may create more congestion south of the Kingston Bridge: M8 from Greenock, M77 from Kilmarnock and M74 from the south will converge south of the river. We'll just have wait and see.
(2) We badly need to create an airport strategy and stick to it. Central Scotland does not need three international airports. But we do need one major intercontinental airport (like Heathrow, Gatwick or Manchester). Manchester Airport - already linked by trains to all cities and major towns in the north of England - is a focus for development and prosperity.
For my part I would let Glasgow wither and concentrate on Edinburgh and Prestwick. Edinburgh Airport should have proper rail and motorway links to all the cities and major towns in the central belt.
(3) I would also like to see a CITY development corporation set up for central Ayrshire tasked with forming a new city out of Ayr, Kilmarnock, Prestwick, Irvine etc - a city for the 21st century. The development corporation should take over all the economic and tourist development work of the various quangos, promote a technological university centred on research and postgrad teaching. It should finance itself from land sales and whatever it can get from private industry. In sum it should be the catalyst for the regernation of a large part of west Scotland.
125

Miss H,

18/09/2009 11:30:10
95 what? deceive who? You seem to have gone adrift somewhere.

The argument being made by Labour is that the decision to scrap GARL is evidence that the SNP is anti-Glasgow. OK fair enough we all know that is just rubbish for the by-election but even so it is worth while pointing out the capital spending that IS going into Glasgow from the SNP Government. Look at the list and then decide for yourself whether Stephen Purcell is right to say that the North East and Edinburgh gets all the spending and Glasgow only gets the crumbs from the table.

Some crumbs.

126

Skip McClendon,

18/09/2009 11:30:18
#123

But will you have proper rail links to the Falkirk wheel? Or, alternatively (and at twice the price) tram links?
127

Jinselkirk,

18/09/2009 11:32:47
71 Jam Tarts 1874 with a moniker like that you must be George F.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
128

David55,

18/09/2009 11:34:14
They accused Mr Swinney of sacrificing economic recovery to protect SNP pet projects, citing increased funding for international relations, up 25 per cent to £15m, and international aid, up 50 per cent to £9m, as well as an allocation of £1m for the so-called National Conversation on independence and an extra £2m for Gaelic services, taking their funding to £21m.
------------------------------------------------------

I understand that the other parties, and this paper, are just stirring it as usual. The savings from the above projects, put together wouldn't bring back the Glasgow Airport Rail Link.

However, International relations and international aid should not be things the Scottish Government is spending it's money on. To my mind, the Scottish Government should be involved in trying to make Scotland function more effectively. Leave the international stuff to Westminster, until independence is here.

As for the ridiculous amounts of money that get flung at Gaelic, that really annoys me. How many gaelic speakers are there? Most of Scotland have never speakeen Gaelic.

Getting rid of 'real' projects for diddy/vanity projects, doesn't sit well with me.
129

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 11:35:30
#125 It's you who seem to have gone adrift. You posted your "you can add to that" list in response to #11, who posted a list of frivolous spending commitments *in this budget*. No mention of Glasgow.

Did you think you were arguing with a Labour party point about Glasgow? Not sure why you should think that. If you read the exchange from the start, you effectively claimed that that all the items you listed were in this year's budget, when in fact we both know they aren't.

Crumbs indeed.
130

David55,

18/09/2009 11:35:38
Good stuff. I like the new word I created 'speakeen' (Gaelic?) but I meant spoken.
131

Laird O'Gorgie,

18/09/2009 11:36:36
Swinney is the prefect example of lack of joined uop thinking. A few weeks ago he went to Daigeo with his back of a fag packet plan in which he was throwing money at Kilmarnock and the West of the Country. After Diageo chucked his plan in the bucket he promised aid for the West of the country. Now he's cutting budegts for the West, especially the social housing.
Still never mind he can always bask in the glory of his £500m tram scheme.
132

brownlie,

18/09/2009 11:42:36
131 Laird

It is not his £500m tram scheme - it was voted in by the caring sharing Unionist parties.

Do you have an opinion on Sedov's party plans?
133

Miss H,

18/09/2009 11:43:43
129 Actually Duncan if you read Fifi's post you will see that she claims capital spending is being cut back "savagely". No it is not. GARL has been cut, yes, but the £182 million upgrade of the Glasgow-Paisley corridor is proceeding and is fully funded and tbey are funding Fastlink - which was not previously to be funded by central government. So all this talk of savage capital spending cuts is a lot of hooey isn't it?

134

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 11:47:29
#133 Is that switch of tack your way of saying you were wrong? :-)
135

BlackDouglas2,

The UK is bankrupt 18/09/2009 11:49:57
I see the moron propagandists are still beavering away.

The UK is bankrupt. Pretty soon you're going to wake up and not be in the G20.

The lack of finances in the UK means the Scottish Government gets less cash.

Not just that though. Given that the pound sterling is collapsing it can't get investment from overseas and importing labour and materials is becoming more and more expensive.

The reason the SNP are having budget problems is because the UK is bankrupt. Indeed the only reason the can conceal the bankruptcy is because of the oil money.

Scotland can avoid going into liquidation along with the UK so long as it votes for independence. Then it will be able to have as many rail links as it wants.
136

Miss H,

18/09/2009 11:51:34
134 No
137

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 11:53:05
#136 That's a shame, because you were.
138

Ben Thehoose,

18/09/2009 11:56:58
SNP/Labour, alias 'Cuts-r-us'.

Scotland should have voted Tory, then these cuts would have never been necessary.

Labour inherited a sound economy with almost no national debt. Gordon Bean lived off Tory fat for a decade. 'Things can only get better!' Remember?

We get the governments we deserve. Vote for monkeys and get peanuts. Vote SNP and now see what you get!
139

BlackDouglas2,

18/09/2009 12:02:03
If you're family have very little money to eat would you go out and buy a new car?

Building infrastructure now is insanity. The UK government is printing lots of new money just to stay afloat. That means it is devaluing the pound. Soon, you're going to have huge inflation and interest rates to take all that money out the system.

Prosperity doesn't come from debt and consumption, it comes from under consumption and savings just like it does in a family. It's called capital formation.

We should stop all these projects now, stop London creating inflation. If you don't there'll be no workers to take the trains and no business trips. These projects are propaganda bull just like the unionist imbeciles who haunt these discussion boards.

London should stop printing, stop stimulating, stop spending on wars, weapons and infrastructure.

The illusion is over. There was no growth - all it was was government borrowing to make people consume. There was the illusion of prosperity but for decades it was just debt. Now we are being asked to pay up and we can't. Scotland should take the oil, pay off her share of the debt and get out of this Ukanian empire immediately!
140

walter,

18/09/2009 12:04:15
This is the draft budget for 2010-11.
Mr Swinney insisted that he intended to push through with £70m for the council tax freeze?
Hold on a minute 2010-11 is their last year of this term and their manifesto was made out for that period of time so why is he talking of another council tax freeze, in their manifesto they stated "We will scrap the unfair Council Tax and introduce a Local Income Tax set at 3p".
He should be talking of scrapping the council tax not freezing it, Oh no he won't be talking of that will he as that was just another lie promised to the people of Scotland.
141

Scary Bear,

In the house, laughing at the mentalists on the co 18/09/2009 12:15:34
*Burp* That was more sense than half of these comments.
142

albahomeland,

18/09/2009 12:17:11
Good decision. Move on.
143

albahomeland,

18/09/2009 12:17:50
140 Idiot.
144

Exiled Bhoy in Fife,

Opposite the Ferry 18/09/2009 12:18:09
129 - Miss H - have to disagree with your points regarding spending. You quote the following:-

11 To which you can add:

- Completion of the M74 motorway project (£690 million)- a project that will benefit Scotland as a whole. And it has been promised since the M8 was built through Glasgow. Anything that relieves pressure on the Kingston Bridge is a good thing.

- Upgrade of the M80 Stepps to Haggs road (£330 million)- Being petty I could point out this is not even in Glasgow, as none of it falls within the city boundary. However, the upgrade of a national embarrassment of a road which is supposed to be the main route from England north is long overdue. Hardly a project solely for Glasgow.

- Glasgow to Edinburgh rail improvements programme (£1.164 billion) - The key word there is Edinburgh.

- Glasgow Central Station improvements and upgrade to Glasgow-Paisley rail corridor (£182 million)- Presumably, the upgrades to Waverley benefit the whole of Scotland only.

- Going outside Glasgow a bit don't forget the Airdrie to Bathgate rail link (£300 - £375 million. Just a tad outside Glasgow there - in the same way as Dundee is a tad outside Aberdeen, Again an upgrade of a line to allow more trains between Glasgow and guess what- Edinburgh! Seeing a pattern here....

And not forgetting small matters such as the new Southern General Hospital at £842m.- Clutching a straws here. I assume the new Edinburgh Royal was built for £1.50.

How about these two - Edinburgh Trams - £600 million plus and pigs will fly before that comes in on budget.

The new Forth Road Bridge - Anywhwere north of £2 Billion. I assume these benefit Glasgow as well....

The SNP have done themeselves no favours here. I suppose it was easier to cull something that has barely started but as it was a committment of the Games, some explanation is required. Hopefully, it will come back in some form in the future.

And before anyone with Labour leanings breaks out the Anti-Glasgo
145

FLUB,

a rocky outcrop in eastern central Scotland 18/09/2009 12:22:46
Does it not occur to anyone that there was never intended to be a Glasgow Airport Rail Link? That it was a mere red herring, that the SNP could pretend to dump to portray themselves in a good financial light for their supporters and to wind up their opposition?

It's actually a very clever ploy by the SNP; I don't support them but 'kudos' to them for their Machiavellian skill.

And of course, in the usual Pavlovian manner, the opposition, who are almost to a man insubstantial trumpet the usual unconstructive responses, despite the ammunition to work over the SNP being handed to them on a plate.

The result? SNP 1 - Opposition 0 (Must try harder)
146

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 12:24:57
144 Exiled Bhoy in Fife

It's just a draft budget the SLAB can cvote it down and bring on a Scottish election.
Let's face it we are all ready for an election, but are they brave enough
147

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 12:25:19
145. ''Does it not occur to anyone that there was never intended to be a Glasgow Airport Rail Link?''

No.
148

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 12:26:24
144 Do you have a point?
149

Laird O'Gorgie,

18/09/2009 12:30:38
#131 Incorrect - the tram project was presented to Parliament by the SNP.
SNP broken promises:
Invest in Scottish youth
Invest in Upgrading A9
Invest in Glasgow rail Link
Invest in Social Housing
Free prescriptions
Reducing Student loans
More police
more tecahers
More nurses

Policies carried though by SNP:
Referendum (waste of tax payers money)
Refurbishing Bute House
Edinburgh trams
Housing benefits for MEP's
Covering countryside in windmills
Allowing Trump to cement over half of Aberdeenshire
150

James,

Dundee 18/09/2009 12:34:51
Glasgow has the Old Firm.

Surely that is enough?
151

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 12:34:55
149 Laird O'Gorgie,

So bring the Holyrood Government down -- easy.
152

Arfur,

18/09/2009 12:38:35
Olympics cash - up
ID cards - still here
Trident - still here

Scotlands budget - down - says it all really.

How Scottish/North Brittian Labour have the cheek to even try and slate this budget is beyond me. On newsnight Scotland even GB turned on Mr 10% - and that takes some doing.
153

John Stonne,

No Rail Link here 18/09/2009 12:42:12
There are many people out here in Buddy country that are delighted that the Rail Link has been banjaxed.

I certainly have never been able to make any sort of sense of this project. Was it aimed at the regular users or the holiday users. Who knows.

It was projected that if all potential passengers were given a free taxi from Paisley Gilmour St to the airport that the cost would be less that 25% of the cost of running the rail link. The consultants were coming up with projected 11 passengers per train which would have entailed massive subsidy for running costs.

The social cost of construction was v high.

So what was it all about. Somebody mentioned the ego thing and he may well have a point.

Edinburgh Airport was getting a rail link so Glasgow had to have one.

Well now that there is no Rail link for Edinburgh Airport why should Glasgow have one?

Frankly it would be of no use anyway. Taxis would be much cheaper and handier. It works well just now why fix it.
154

Doh,

18/09/2009 13:01:26
#115

Dont you think there will be other projects costs to consider as well as the track? Perhaps planning, preparation (for the tracks), stations, trams, etc.
Like any project it must have some NRE.

Measuring the amount of laid track seems very simplistic to me. Sorry I dont really wont to get into a conversation about it - most views about the trams wouldnt look out of place in the Daily Mail.

155

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 13:11:07
-- It was projected that if all potential passengers were given a free taxi from Paisley Gilmour St to the airport that the cost would be less that 25% of the cost of running the rail link.

That's intelligent thinking. Allied Vehicles of Possilpark build the E7 electric taxi. Powered by Lithium-ion batteries, it has a top speed of 60mph and covers 100 miles per battery charge. The taxi costs £39,450 - £4000 more than a black cab TX4 silver auto model - but is cheaper to run. The taxi doesn't produce harmful emissions or require excise duty.

Allied Vehicles employ 400 people.
156

Exiled Bhoy in Fife,

Opposite the Ferry 18/09/2009 13:15:17
153 - John Stonne - Edinburgh never really had a case for a rail link, given is proximity to the City Centre and indeed the sheer costs of the proposal which involved a tunnel under the runway and underground station, served by diesel trains which would have struggled with the steep gradient..

Glasgow on the other hand had a case, given its distance from the city and the traffic problems on the M8. Glasgow has the most extensive local rail ntework outside London and it would have been relatively easy to add it. I seem to recall when the Subway in Glasgow was being modernised back in the late 70's there was talk of it being extended to the Airport by it branching off at Hillhead and running over ground there via Clydebank. It came to nowt.

Most major airports have a rail link and I fail to see why Scotland should be different...
157

Jimmy Le Pie,

18/09/2009 13:19:02
#149 Laird O'Gorgie,


I didn't think there was anyone dafter than Rufus.

Congratulations, Laird you're now Scotland's #1 idiot!!

Stupidity reaches a new level. Well done.
158

The Strategist,

18/09/2009 13:19:48
#155

If I remember correctly the Allied Vehicle taxi is based on a French Peugeot which of course would have to be imported and this wouldn't help our balance of payments deficit.

It may be cheaper to run but that won't last long. If electric vehicles become popular (which is unlikely) the Govt will soon come up with a way of ensuring its tax take isn't affected. It's also important to remember that EVs are only as clean as the source of the electricity.
159

,

18/09/2009 13:20:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
160

Exiled Bhoy in Fife,

Opposite the Ferry 18/09/2009 13:20:40
153 - John Stonne - please note that I am not however stating that the proposed route for GARL was correct or that fancy station at the Airport they proposed was necessary. Simply that a Rail Link was a good idea. Most people can see the case but the chosen route was open to debate.
161

D Napier,

18/09/2009 13:25:43
The SNP keep teling us that they want Scotland to be a major player internationally yet, here we are in a position where neither of the of the 2 major airports in the country have a connection to the main rail network.

This is scandalous.

If Scotland is to perform at the top level internationally, the minimum requirement is to have proper transport links to the main airports.

But, as the SNP have ruled paying for the new Forth crossing thjrough tolling, which is the most sensible option, they still don't know where the cash will be coming from. I suspect the cancellation of GARL will be the first of many projects to face the same fate in the near future. I don't think you'll hear much about the A9 upgrade for quite a while.

I have no particular political allegiance, but the sooner Salmond, Swinney and the rest of the pathetic souls from the SNP get voted out of office the better.

Scotland deserves better.
162

Jimmy Le Pie,

18/09/2009 13:30:47
#161 D Napier,

So you want a Scottish election????

Do you ever wonder why the unionist parties in Holyrood don't force an election??

After all they can out vote the minority SNP government whenever they want.

Might it be that they realise that a majority of the electorate are happy with the SNP??

You might want to ask Comrade 5% Gray.
163

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 13:32:03
#156 Argh. Like so many others you fail to understand the idea of EARL. I realise it's dead and buried now but let's please remember that EARL was never intended as a way to get from Edinburgh city centre to the airport; it was intended as a way to reduce the number of trips into the city centre and then out again to the airport by people travelling from outside Edinburgh. The buses and soon trams will give perfectly adequate connectivity to the city centre - the point was to open up access to the rest of east and central Scotland.
164

Miss H,

18/09/2009 13:34:25
144 Edinburgh trams – agreed but not the SNP’s choice. I could wish that the SNP had said stuff it to the other parties and cancelled the project anyway, however that was not really feasible at the time. As a minority government compromises must be made.

Forth Road Bridge – the Government has accepted that it is necessary as the existing bridge cannot cope. Not being an engineer, I don’t know if that is right or wrong. But I don’t see where the comparison with Glasgow comes in. If Glasgow was next to Fife and the Government decided that no it was not going to build a crossing for weegies to get into Fife but it would build a crossing for Edinburghers to get into Fife and vice versa then fair dos that would be wrong (though personally I would thank them for it). But that is not the case is it? Lots of bridges go over the Clyde, but not into Fife so unless you are demanding the SNP Government builds one I don’t see the issue.
165

Sumlogic,

18/09/2009 13:36:54

I find it rather pathetic that the anti SNP mob moan about a couple of million here and there for international relations, international aid, National Conversation on independence and for Gaelic services yet seem to miss the elephant in the room, yes that being the Edinburgh Trams project at around a minimum of half a billion!

This was forced on to the SNP government by the Opposition parties, what could that half billion be used for now I ask them?

Its really pathetic overall, we have a cut in funds from our current masters, Westminster and the SNP have to make the best of it...good for them!

Do the people of Glasgow, those who are worst off really give a dam about the Glasgow airport rail link or would they rather have continued council tax freeze, prescription relief etc.

In an era of enforced thrift (thanks to Labore and the Tories blank cheque to the Banks) I believe most would opt for council tax freeze over an airport link that they may not be able to use anyway; how many folk can afford holidays abroad on the dole!

Typical anti SNP and anti Scottish propaganda by the Unionists and the media!

Wake up Scotland Westminster and London does not give a dam about you and your oil has helped bail out the UK economy since the 70’s!
166

Miss H,

18/09/2009 13:40:14
Nothing is actually decided yet.

It's a draft budget. If Labour wants to save GARL they can go to John Swinney with costed proposals. It means of course that they would have to say what they would cut and go public on that.

There is a long time to go yet.
167

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 13:41:02
-- the Allied Vehicle taxi is based on a French Peugeot

But it's built in Glasgow. There is no British mass-prodution manufacturer. We don't even build executive saloons.

There's plenty that can be done to reduce our existing generating pollution at the stack. Battery charging is well suited to intermittent renewables. Running a fleet gets on top the evironmental considerations of producing, running and disposing of battery packs. The efficiency and range is always improving which will be used in the next generation of vehicles.
168

Andy54321,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 13:43:28
I'm shocked by the rubbish written in these comments!

To address some of the "points" made by posters above:
1 - Glasgow is still Scotland's largest city, by a long way, and it's biggest tax contributor. Of course we need a proper international airport of our own and with proper transport links.

2 - People have not been getting to the airport perfectly well for years. They have to use the motorway which as anyone here will tell you, is closed or restricted continually, particularly around the viaduct at the airport.

3 - Closing Glasgow Airport in favour of Prestwick is ridiculous. Prestwick is tiny and its rail link is a suburban commuter line that is already too full and stops about 15 times on the way to town.

4 - No one is hurt? Except for Glasgow's business and tourism workers. I suppose they don't matter?

5 - Glasgow desperately needs to turn around its economic and social problems and encourage business. Instead the government is stabbing it in the back and spending billions on Edinburgh.

Shame on everyone involved in this treachery.
169

Brianwci,

18/09/2009 13:50:51
Scotland will never get Independence without Glasgow's support, simple arithmetic dictates that.

Personally I would have shaved off £200million from across the board in order to keep this project rather than give the Brit Nats a very large 'anti Glasgow' stick to beat us with.

Obviously there is NO anti Glasgow bias in the SNP, though there are decades of evidence to show London Labour's anti Glasgow pro London/SE England bias.

Nevertheless I think John Swinney and his team should look again and find that £200million.

Shame Holyrood's London Labour group were so keen to waste £500million on an unwanted tram system in Edinburgh.
170

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 18/09/2009 13:56:37
I saw Andy Kerr / Gray / Muppet last night saying this was an anti-west, anti-glasgow government, the logic of that statement is that when Kerr and his mob were in control they were pro Glasgow and west and anti everywhere else in Scotland.

Aye like lambs to the slaughter they are.

168 Billions in Edinburgh?? Were aboot?? Not from my window, if you are referring to the glorious twam scheme, remind me who voted for and against that project again?
171

Jinselkirk,

18/09/2009 13:57:58
161 - D. NAPIER - HOW CAN YOU CLAIM TO HAVE NO POLITICAL ALLEGIANCE AND THEN MAKE SUCH A POLITICAL STATEMENT IN RESPECT OF ONE PARTY - ILLOGICAL. I TAKE IT YOU ARE NOT RELATED TO THE INVENTOR OF LOGARITHMS.
172

pwd,

Borders 18/09/2009 14:01:18
Why not cut the Scottish "parliament". That would save a bit and it would get rid of the most useless layer of government in this grossly overgoverned part of the UK.
173

GM,

18/09/2009 14:05:23
DiE

I noted the oft quoted lie that by building roads you encourage more cars onto them...

This *was* true but is no longer.
In the last 50 years we saw unprecedented car ownership growth drive by population growth and the a similar increase in 'wealth'.

Population is static or falling, and most families already have at least one and probably 2 or 3 cars.

Projections of car ownership based on previous years figures give blatantly erroneous figures.

Building roads now simply eases the pressure of the existing level of car ownership and use - a level that will remain static or grow only slowly in the decades to come (unless you think that with a static population we'll all go out and buy 2 or 3 personal cars each).

I'm sorry that you appear to attack everyone else here for 'misrepresentations' but are happy to peddle your own.
174

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 18/09/2009 14:06:00
172 I maybe wrong but I am gettin the distinct impression you are not in favour of devolution and the Scottish Parliament?
175

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 14:21:57
I return again to the confederal model as the best way to run Scotland. Bern, Zurich, Basel, Geneva, Lausanne don't bicker about being the most important Swiss city and why all money should be spent there. They each collect and spend their own taxes; that sending all revenues to Berlin or Paris and waiting for a block grant return would seem utterly insensible like sending it to London.

At one period it was thought that a single international airport, and we'd like it fog free, was the best move for Scotland. Times have changed. When there's already a rail link to Preswick it can be upgraded. Better transport to Abbotsinch can be done, when there is not alot of money to spend.
176

Andy54321,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 14:35:38
175 - The model you propose sounds good until you consider Scotland's geographical structure. The regions around Glasgow and Edinburgh account for the great majority of Scotland's economy. Who would pay for infrastructure in the vast but sparsely populated parts of the country? And, in an independence scenario, what of national costs? They would still require central taxation.

As previously stated, Prestwick is a tiny airport nearly forty miles from Glasgow. It's ridiculous to think that it would suffice for a city region of two million people. I'm sure it wouldn't be long before people starte pointing out it's nearly as far from Glasgow as Edinburgh airport is so why not just centralise everything there. That is the plan and everyone connected with Glasgow airport knows it.
177

John Stonne,

Kilmacush 18/09/2009 14:40:32
#168
You say
2 - People have not been getting to the airport perfectly well for years. They have to use the motorway which as anyone here will tell you, is closed or restricted continually, particularly around the viaduct at the airport.

You are wrong.

I have been using that airport since it was opened. Must say that have only experienced problems on one or two occasions.

Most business people that I know that use the airport get someone to drive them in and drop them off. No problem.

Alternatively they phone a taxi. I must admit that the taxi service from the airport needs to be improved and action taken on licensing by the local authority. But that would cost next to nothing.

Anyone going on holiday with the usual 2.4 weans would be daft to use a rail link with potential changes of train when a taxi is a one stop supply. Alternatively they get their pal to give them a lift.

I just cannot see who would use this creaky rail link. In fact some research on user potential produced the figure of an average of 11 users per train.

This would be rail link has nothing to do with tourism and business in Scotland or the area.

It was allways a nonsense.
178

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 14:47:04
#90 Duncan in Edinburgh

You would be hard pressed trying to find someone who agrees with you that the "current design" at £100M, was twice as good as the original concept(regardless of what it was) at £50M...far less eight times as good at £400M.

Of course the SNP's favoured option was the infinitely superior and cheaper(than £50M) Calton Hill building, which had already been converted to house the devolved Parliament of 40% rule infamy.
179

Justin Timbercake,

18/09/2009 14:48:50
The word on the street is that the SNP has not shown it's full hand and that some of the budget cash has been tucked away for contingency purposes.

The downside being though that Alex Salmond is wanting to use the money to trump Kraft's takeover bid for Cadburys.
180

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 14:50:56
#173 Your theory sounds interesting, but isn't borne out by any observations I've seen. I'd be genuinely interested to see the evidence for it. New car journeys are not dependent solely on new cars or new individuals, but also on new availability of journeys. There are a lot more cars in Scotland which aren't used in city centres or other congested areas because of the congestion. Many Edinburgh and Glasgow residents use public transport in town. So if you ease that congestion there are still plenty of cars waiting to fill up the slack.
181

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 14:51:21
177 - I most certainly am not wrong. You only need to google "M8", "Arkleston", "Glasgow Airport" and "viaduct" to see that.

I fly between Glasgow and Heathrow almost every week and the congestion on that part of the M8 is ridiculous. Every summer, including this one, it has been affected for months at a time by roadworks and bridge strengthening work.

As for tourists and business people coming here, they have the great pleasure of figuring out where to actually get a taxi in Glasgow airport and then they have a lengthy and ridiculously expensive journey into town.

Almost every major city in Europe has a direct rail link. Even Newcastle has a direct rail link. I certainly know that when I fly to other countries it is infinitely easier to get an express train to the city centre than to wander around looking for a foreign taxi driver who probably won't understand and will almost certainly rip me off.
182

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 14:52:44
#178 I'm sure I would be hard pressed to find someone who would agree with that statement. But then, I don't agree with that statement either. Which is why I never made any such statement.
183

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 15:01:35
Nobody is forcing the Union supporters to accept this draft budget, I agree with this cut and I also want Real fiscal powers so it would suit me if the budget failed and a Scottish Election was needed.
I think the Nats would win hands down in the subsequent election and that would force the unionist parties to take the constitution and political shape of the union more seriously. I really believe the union is at risk if Fiscal powers are not addresssed.
184

The Oracle Of The Higher Power,

18/09/2009 15:02:53
All successfull modern politcal parties copy aspects of the Nazis rise to power. Hitler was a great believer in making great efforts in vital areas where the Nazis were unpopular.That tactic paid big dividends.To neglect and snub Glasgow is a huge mistake by the SNP.
185

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 15:03:10
#182 Duncan in Edinburgh

So it is not in your opinion any better...just eight times as expensive?
186

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 15:07:38
-- The regions around Glasgow and Edinburgh account for the great majority of Scotland's economy

Aberdeenshire is the most successful economic region in Scotland. But they didn't run a good City Council. Various expenses were charged to them as to the security of the North Sea installations and the Royal Family that Londoners get for free but it's a quibbling issue.

-- Who would pay for infrastructure in the vast but sparsely populated parts of the country?

The people that live there. Quite a few are very well off.

Scottish cities don't work because those that most use the facilities live outside the taxbase in this motorised age. A local income tax - in fact a national income tax - is a simple immediate way of remedy. Or do you think sending it to Whitehall makes more sense?

The Northern Isles run the regional authorities.

40 miles is not a long distance from Glasgow.
187

Miss H,

18/09/2009 15:07:51
184 Garbage.

We all know what all this anti-Glasgow nonsense is about - the NE by-election.

Only the vast majority of people in the NE have never even heard of GARL.

Scrapping it will make hee haw difference to their lives as they do not spend their lives jetting in and out of Glasgow Airport.

On the other hand having more police on the beat, reduced prescriptions, the council tax freeze, free school meals - all the things Labour have argued against - directly benefit them.
188

pwd,

Borders 18/09/2009 15:10:22
# 174

You are correct, and I'm far from being the only one down here.
189

Phil C,

18/09/2009 15:12:25
The funniest comments of the day are from arch LiberoTory Duncan, that awfully nice polite man from Edinburgh. Sadly though Duncan has more bees in his bonnet than a beekeeper with a hat.

Anyway the reason for scrapping the A74, and in second place for today's silly comments, is that it will lead to gridlock. This from a man who thought all the traffic in Scotland would use the free Forth Road Bridge, leading to.....you've guessed it, gridlock!

But today's Duncan Daftie, and silly comment winner (causing me to wet myself), was that we should wait another 20 years to evaluate devolution! Someone should quickly tell Duncan, to save his blushes, that we've moved on from that a while ago, and are now considering a new concept called independence! You know the one where Scotland looks after itself and doesn't need handouts from mean and crooked masters in the south.
190

Miss H,

18/09/2009 15:14:47
169 What makes you think the people of Glasgow give two hoots about GARL?

We know the MSPs and the Labour Council are carrying on about it but what makes you think the voters give a stuff?

What is more important to them - police on the streets or an expensive rail link to an airport they use maybe once a year if that?

Don't get me wrong - there are important economic advantages in having an integrated transport network but that is not the kind of issue people actually vote on and it will make no difference at all to the SNP's vote in Glasgow. The things the SNP ARE spending money on in Glasgow will make more of a difference because people care about them more.
191

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 15:16:49
#184 The Oracle Of The Higher Power

The only weedgies who are stupid enough to shout "foul", at the side lining of a train that they were never going to use.

Are pretty much unable to engage their brain under any circumstances...never mind at an Election.

They are at the very centre of Labours crumbling core vote...Light and sound do not penetrate that deep, far less logic.

192

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 15:17:46
#186 Are you teasing me or what?

The highlands are bigger than Belgium, bigger than the Netherlands, bigger than Denmark. But less than half a million people live there and wages are low. How on earth could they provide decent infrastucture without very high rates of tax?

I agree that the structure of local government and tax collection doesn't work well. It would make infinitely more sense to have greater Glasgow and greater Edinburgh authorities. Glasgow City tax payers provide so many facilities to workers and others who live outside the city boundaries and don't pay for them. I imagine it would make strategic planning of roads and other major shared developments easier too.

But a national tax? That would only result in more bickering about its distribution.

40 miles is not a long distance from Glasgow? Trust me, as someone who flies from Glasgow airport every week on flights at 6 or 6.30am, 40 miles is definitely a very long way to travel ;)
193

Miss H,

18/09/2009 15:17:46
168 What billions is the Government spending on Edinburgh?
194

Pilrig.,

Livingston 18/09/2009 15:18:55
149 - get yer fact right the Embra trams bill was forced through the parliament ( and onto us suckers) by the unionist parties and Margo MacDonald.
195

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 15:20:22
Miss H - you might only use the airport one a year but many thousands of business people use it every single week. Glasgow's economy benefits hugely from having an airport and would benefit far more if we had the transport links we really need. I can't remember the figures off the top of my head, but the recent arguments for a third runway at Heathrow showed just how massive a contribution it makes to the London economy.

So everyone in Glasgow benefits, even if they don't personally use it.
196

John Stonne,

Kilmacush 18/09/2009 15:21:20
#181 Quoted below.
-'I most certainly am not wrong. You only need to google "M8", "Arkleston", "Glasgow Airport" and "viaduct" to see that.'

I use that part of the M8 nearly every day. There was a problem when the Kingston Bridge was being repaired and there is a sound argument another bridge at Glasgow. As for the viaduct never been more than slowed down by it.

-'As for tourists and business people coming here, they have the great pleasure of figuring out where to actually get a taxi in Glasgow airport and then they have a lengthy and ridiculously expensive journey into town.'

I agree that the Taxi service from the airport needs to be restructured. It's a licensing problem basically. I quite like the idea of a special taxi service from Gilmour St to the airport and back. However the local wisdom (amongst taxi drivers) seems to be that there would not be enough users to make it worth while.

-'Almost every major city in Europe has a direct rail link. Even Newcastle has a direct rail link. I certainly know that when I fly to other countries it is infinitely easier to get an express train to the city centre than to wander around looking for a foreign taxi driver who probably won't understand and will almost certainly rip me off.'-

As far as every other major city is concerned it is horses for courses. I used to fly to London about twice a week. Never used the rail links. Either got picked up or hired a car. I can't find anyone in business that would want anything to do with a rail link that took you into the centre of Glasgow where most simply do not want to go. You might well have a point if you are talking about image for the trendies but I just don't know anyone that would use it apart from maybe yourself.

As for Taxi cost. Now being widely advertised to and from Glasgow for £10. If you are shuttling then book your taxi back when you go. Door to door service. No hastles with trains being late stuck or struggling with your luggage through
197

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 15:21:23
193 - Current projected cost of new Forth bridge £2.3 billion, trams £600m
198

Pilrig.,

Livingston 18/09/2009 15:22:34
172 , better still why no' scrap Westminster ?
199

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 15:24:29
#185 You apparently didn't understand a word of what I said. Never mind.
200

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 15:25:50
196 - Whether or not you can use a car depends on where you are travelling to and whether or not you can actually drive. I wouldn't dream of hiring a car at Heathrow and driving to Covent Garden. When I go on holiday I want a minimum of hassle, not to navigate the roads from a foreign airport into a foreign city. As for dropping our clients off at the airport, that would be difficult since I work in the city centre and parking is prohibitively expensive so I don't have my car available.

As for your taxi cost of £10 "to and from Glasgow". To and from where? I live much closer to the airport than to the city centre and an airport taxi costs about £16. I dread to think what they would charge someone from further away.
201

Pilrig.,

Livingston 18/09/2009 15:26:44
188 - oh for the days when Scottish matters discussed at the Commons amounted to 1 hour per month !
We knew oor place in those days !
202

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 18/09/2009 15:27:09
197 It might have slipped your memory bank but the Trams was opposed by the SNP.

The bridge is over the Firth of Forth, not Edinburgh. The bridge will be used to take traffic from the south of Scotland to the north up the M90/A90.

Edinburgh must be huge then!
203

Phil C,

18/09/2009 15:31:20
#197 But Andy, the Scotsman told us yesterday that the SNP wouldn't build the bridge, so bang goes your £2.3 billion coz the Scotsman never lies to it's readers!

I agree that Glasgow needs a decent rail link to it's own airport, but not now when we're in the middle of a Labour-led recession. There are still far too many in Glasgow who sleep walk to Labour's tune. These daft Weegies need to wake up from their Labour 'hypnosis' and vote for independence. Then we might all be able to afford nice trains and roads.

At the moment Glasgow is like a strangler with his arms round Scotland's throat.
204

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2009 15:31:45
#189 Where did I say we should "wait another 20 years to evaluate devolution" Phil? I do wish you would read what I actually say and comment on that, rather than what your over-active imagination thinks I said. I said we should give devolution 20 years at least, including a couple of periods where the Scottish Government was different in political hue from the UK one, before we judge what needs fixing. In case you haven't noticed, we've already had 10 years, so that's only 10 years more. It's a perfectly reasonable, rational position, and you deride it only because you don't have an argument against it.

You may be thinking about independence, Phil, but "we" as a country are not. The vast majority of folk in Scotland are happy with being part of the UK. Please stop pretending otherwise.
205

Phil C,

18/09/2009 15:35:31
#204 Stop it! I'm going to wet my.....too late!
206

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 15:44:37
#203 Sleepwalking to the SNP's tune is just as dangerous.

Why not recognise that all politicians are cut from the same cloth and criticise bad decisions whoever makes them?

I am no more anti-SNP than I am anti-Labour, but I am deeply disturbed by the cultishness of many SNP supporters who seem to think their party can do no wrong.
207

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 15:45:28
#200

Take your point about Covent Garden and driving about London in general.

However we are talking about Glasgow. Don't see the same problem here. You can readily drive about anywhere in Glasgow though there are parking problems at its centre. More parking required in City Centre.

But to come back if you don't fancy driving take a taxi. Convenient reliable door to door.

As for the £10 trip seen on the back of Fast Blacks.

I agree that the whole of the Taxi licensing system need a fresh look. The fact that Fast Black licenses are being traded for 40 - 50 K indicates that there are just not enough of them.
208

Miss H,

18/09/2009 15:55:52
195 I am not arguing with that. What I am saying is that most voters in Glasgow don't care. Rightly or wrongly that is the case.
209

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 15:56:53
#200 - Agreed regarding city centre parking but it's not going to happen. I don't know whether it's a Scotland wide initiative, but Glasgow and Renfrewshire councils at least have restrictions on new parking spaces and if you build a new building you're only allowed one space for every seven (I think) employees.

Even building some decent multi-stories at the major rail and subway stations would make a difference the anti-car lobby seem to have one the day without providing decent alternatives.

The point I was making about driving doesn't just apply to those of us who live in Glasgow though - it puts off people who are visiting Glasgow.
210

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 15:58:19
208 - Well don't you think we should try to make people more aware of the issues? The alternative is that our city really is doomed because no one can be bothered.
211

Miss H,

18/09/2009 16:01:03
197 Edinburgh will be lucky if the trams come in at 600 million but in any case the SG contribution is 500 million and will not be a penny more. If the trams end up costing 1 billion Edinburgh will have to find that money themselves.

As regards the Forth Crossing - surely that affects Fife as much as Edinburgh? It is a two way crossing as far as I know. Not being an engineer I do not know if a second crossing is actually necessary but the SG appears to believe that it is. I don't see the logic of saying that Glasgow must have the equivalent. Does Glasgow need a new bridge across the Clyde? If not then why demand one?

Or if it is the airport link specifically you refer to - EARL was scrapped before GARL.
212

Miss H,

18/09/2009 16:04:57
210 I don't believe the city is doomed because we will not have a rail link that stops at Glasgow Airport in time for the Commonwealth Games.

213

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:12:42
211 - Are you serious? The Kingston bridge is one of the most congested routes in Europe. It's a daily trial for tens of thousands of people. Glasgow has been crying out for an alternative for as long as I can remember but we're always told it would be too expensive. As if tens of thousands of lost man hours a day isn't expensive. People in Glasgow, particularly the south of Glasgow, always have to figure "the bridge" into how long a journey will take. It's ridiculous.

As for the rail link - Glasgow airport is less accessible from the city by road than Edinburgh's airport is and Glasgow was for many years much bigger than Edinburgh airport but various dodgy decisions have resulted in Glasgow's passenger numbers actually declining while Edinburgh's have grown so Edinburgh has overtaken Glasgow, despite the Glasgow area having three times the population.
214

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:13:46
212 It's just one of the problems Miss H and the decision shows that the current government has no real intention of turning Glasgow's fortunes around.

Or honouring promises made to the bid committee.
215

Paul710714,

18/09/2009 16:16:55
Perhaps the way to look at this is not that the SNP is being forced to make cuts in Scotland because of Labour incompetence at Westminster, rather that cuts are being made across the UK after eye-watering amounts of (predominantly, English) tax-payer money have been diverted into saving the two main Scottish banks?
216

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:18:34
215 - I pay just as much tax as any English tax payer and Halifax were the senior partner in HBOS, not the Bank of Scotland. You're also forgetting Northern Rock and Bradford and Bingley.
217

Phil C,

18/09/2009 16:19:23
#206 Andy

Sleepwalking to anyone's tune is dangerous! I would argue that knowingly supporting Labour is suicidal though! They are proven incompetents, cheating and lying their way to power. I agree that many SNP supporters may be cultish. That's because many are passionate.

Many SNP supporters question aspects of SNP policy- Megrahi's release, booze prices, LIT...but most are united by one thing. That is bringing about a reborn Scotland. Our own country where we can plan our own future, celebrate our successes and make our own mistakes. And all without dancing to the tune of distant government.

I know that there are plenty who don't see the attraction, who don't want to 'risk' it, who can't be bothered. I just don't understand why.
218

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:25:13
#217 Which is all well and good Phil, but many people have displayed distinct anti-Glasgow feelings over this issue. Just look on this and other forums today. Apparently Glasgow is just a big problem for the rest of Scotland and you'd be better off without us. Apparently Glaswegians are all just subsidy junkies living off the rest of you. Sounds like the same old rubbish the tories used to trot out.

Anyone claiming to believe in the SNP's original values would be horrified by this. There was always a danger that in an independent Scotland, Edinburgh would just replace London as the focus of centralisation. Once upon a time the SNP went out of their way to reassure people that this wouldn't happen.

But now people claiming to support them think Scotland would be better off without Glasgow.

I don't want such clueless people running any aspect of my country or my life.
219

Phil C,

18/09/2009 16:32:54
#218 Andy

As I said, get your fellow citizens involved in the independence movement. Glasgow does seem to have a slight leaning towards suicidal politics. I don't know if this explains the fact that Glasgow is about the most unhealthy city in the world and has about the highest benefit dependency in the country. Glasgow has it's nice sides, but take a look at your politicians...@!?(***. I rest my case.
220

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 16:33:43
218 Andy*

Indeed why on earth would you want the SNP running the country when after 50 years of Labour representation in Westminster, Holyrood and all counsils the people of Glsagow have been served so well?
221

Paul710714,

18/09/2009 16:34:36
#216 I was just being provocative as it's a bit tedious listening to the stock nationalist self-delusion that every problem and Scottish political decision can be explained in terms of oil and gas reserves and the English 'theft' of them.

On the other hand, you misread my comments. I didn't say that tax revenues were being used only to prop up Scottish banks: obviously some other banks such as the ones you mention, albeit two of them much smaller in scale, were also rescued. It is undeniable though that there some major English banks like Barclays that were better run and didn't require a bail out; the situation is not comparable in Scotland as all (both) its major banks had to be rescued. It's also amusing to see the Andy Murray phenomenon in return: when HBOS is doing well it's Scottish, when it's doing badly it's English.

If the tax money being used for the bail out is predominantly 'English', as it is, this is simply down to the fact that there are a hell of a lot more English tax payers than Scottish ones by virtue of the differently-sized populations. I also doubt that you pay as much tax as 'any' English tax payer: with the greatest of respect, I am sure there are a few English, Scottish and Welsh people who pay more tax than you (or I) do.
222

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 18/09/2009 16:35:55
218 I don't understand why you would think that the SNP are anti-Glasgow, if that was the case surely they would have cancelled more capital projects and removed a disproportinate amount of funding?
223

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:36:37
#220 When SNP supporters start discussing issues rationally instead of frothing at the mouth and saving everything Labour does is bad and everything the SNP does is good, then maybe I'll have some time for them.

In the meantime Glasgow airport - which is very close to my heart - has been deal another death blow. By the SNP.
224

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 18/09/2009 16:37:36
On a further note has anybody read any of the documentation released by Megrahi about the SCRCC decision to allow his second appeal?
225

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 18/09/2009 16:38:47
223 Again in what way?
226

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:44:34
#221 Well I actually agree with you about "blaming the English", but I didn't see anyone making such claims here.

As for saying "major English banks like Barclays were better run", I do have a number of points to make. For example, was HBOS a "Scottish" bank? What proportion of its workers were actually Scottish? It's chief exec certainly wasn't Scottish. As for Barclays, I would agree it was better run that HBOS or RBS but it was still very badly run and only survived by seeking massive investment from foreign countries.

Calling either bank "Scottish" or "English" is as silly an oversimplification as the constant claims that "English" taxpayers pay for everything, as if we in Scotland are exempt from VAT and income tax.

As for the point about how much tax I pay - sure, of course there are people who pay more tax than me, but since I earn rather more than twice the national average wage it is rather likely that I pay more tax than the great majority of people, be they Scottish or English and I resent the implication that I am a sponger.
227

Paul710714,

18/09/2009 16:48:05
It's a particular pity that the Glasgow Airport raillink has been canceled following the Scottish Government's omission of the Glasgow Crossrail project form its recent 20-year transport strategy. Not to pursue one of these long-term and much-discussed objectives looks unfortunate, not to pursue either of them looks something more.
228

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 16:48:41
223 Andy*

Sorry to break it to you but sucessive Labour (and Tory) administrations have brought Glasgow from being an industrial powerhouse and 'second city of the empire' to one of the most deprived cities in the developed world in the space of 50 years!

Fail completely to see how you can blame the SNP for any of Glasgow's ills so your point is just ridiculous!

Out of interest what would you have cut instead of this project?


229

Phil C,

18/09/2009 16:49:16
#223 Andy, I do think you're being over-sensitive and don't for a minute think that this was an anti-Glasgow thing. Edinburgh's similar link was stopped long ago. These worthwhile projects may well be renewed when finances are better in the future. But other things take precedence for now.

In the meantime, see it as another black mark against Labour, for removing the funding and destroying the UK economy. Why not help by trying to get Scotland up on our own two legs as an independent nation. Glasgow will have it's fair say, but you must ditch the horrible Labour thing first.
230

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:51:54
228 Nevsky - perhaps if you read what I've actually written you would understand ;)

I have not blamed the SNP for the city's past ills. I have already stated that successive governments of all kinds have caused the problems.

But I am blaming the SNP for what they are doing today and that includes kicking Glasgow airport when it's already down.
231

pwd,

Borders 18/09/2009 16:56:14
218 Andy

You and some previous posters have touched on something we should all be concerned about. SNP supporters may want the breakup of the UK. That is a prospect which concerns me very much, but of equal concern is that it would almost certainly also lead to the breakup of Scotland and that concerns me too. The deep divisions are already beginning to appear and it would get very much worse if separation actually happened. Just for starters, the Glasgow/Edinburgh thing has been around for years and is not getting any better; the religious divide is as ugly as ever; very large numbers of Borderers would certainly not give up their UK citizenship (yes, the UK would still exist) for a shift of power from one city to another. In the unlikely event of a vote for independence the new dispensation would include very large numbers of seriously disgruntled opponents of independence. For anybody like me who cares about Scotland and Britain the likely results of a breakup are grim.
232

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 16:56:19
230 Andy*

What would you have cut to pay for it?
233

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 16:57:08
#223 Phil, you have to put this in the context of what is going on in the Scottish aviation market.

Glasgow was for many years Scotland's biggest airport by a long way. Then there was a consultation which suggested we should have a single hub somewhere between Glasgow and Edinburgh. Various sites were suggested but on the whole they were an awful lot closer to the west of Edinburgh than the west of Glasgow.

Those plans were dropped for a variety of good reasons but as soon as devolution kicked in and the post-2000 boom stoked up the Edinburgh economy, Edinburgh airport grew quickly, then Glasgow began to decline and airlines started switching away from Glasgow.

Anyone who uses Glasgow airport or wants a city with a health economy should be very worried already. It now looks likely BAA will sell Glasgow instead of Edinburgh and it looks like the buyers are likely to be treat Glasgow as a small feeder airport (The Manchester airport group are one of the rumoured suitors). This would be disastrous for the Glasgow economy.

So further news of Glasgow being downgraded or put on the backburner only encourages airlines to abandon it.
234

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 16:59:02
Glasgow has voted Labour all my 60+ years and we know this

" If you always do what you've always done"
" You'll always get what you always got"


Hopefully experience will triumph.
235

Paul710714,

18/09/2009 17:00:30
Andy #226 - I am not sure why you thought there was any implication that you were a sponger..? Indeed I was careful to say that many people pay more tax than I do too.

My whole point was implicitly to agree with the point you then made explicitly in #226 that trying to divide up complex national and international economic situations into simple 'Scottish' or 'English' components and to apportion credit or blame simplistically is somewhat naive at best. I'm also not sure why say there's no blaming of the English going on in this forum: I was merely picking up on the usual whining about the expropriation of Scottish natural resources as evidenced in many of the posts above.

I feel that there was a certain anti-Glasgow agenda in the decision to cancel the raillink, to the extent that I doubt the SNP would have cut it had it been of greater direct benefit to its core demographic rather than a comparatively solid Labour city. Although the SNP is forced to make cuts, it is its own responsibility to decide which and I don't think that responsibility can just be fobbed off to Westminster by inapposite references to natural resources or national self-determination.
236

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 17:01:50
#231 pwd, I agree with every word you have said. I have often tried to get independence supporters to answer questions like these (and many, many more of the same nature) but invariably they fall back on vague romantic notions and provide no answers.

I've been right through the whole gamut of opinions on this one. I grew up in the Thatcher years and was a fervent nationalist. I wanted away from England more than anything else. Then I grew up and realised it was actually the Tories I wanted away from. I realised that my family are a mixture of Scots, English and others. I realised that my brother lives in London and could end up with a different nationality. I realised that our businesses would experience currency fluctuation when trading with English customers - our biggest market. I realised that we would have millions of people who would deeply resent their British nationality being forceably stripped from them. I could go on all day :)
237

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 17:02:44
#232 I already answered that exact question much further up the thread.
238

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 17:03:30
Not saying i don't have sympathy as there should of course be rail links to both Glasgow and Edinburgh airports.

From my point of view Scotland need a new international airport with high speed rail links to all cities, going to Manchester or Heathrow/Luton/Gatwick is a joke for a country like Scotland.

A central and major international airport is what is required which could be a hub for inter-continental flight..especially from the US and Canada.

239

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 17:05:37
#235 Sorry Paul, I meant the implication from the very many people on forums such as the BBC website and various newspapers who keep claiming that we are spongers.

If there were posts blaming the English on here they must have been further up before I joined the discussion. I certainly see this particular issue as 100% Scottish.

Completely agree with your last paragraph.
240

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 17:09:34
#238 Nevsky, a study was conducted years ago into building a new large hub airport between Glasgow and Edinburgh with the intention of replacing both existing airports. It was rejected for many (pretty valid) reasons and decided to concentrate on expanding the existing airports.

Sadly BAA was more interesting in trying to force every flight in Britain through Heathrow and successive governments didn't seem to care.

241

Phil C,

18/09/2009 17:15:21
#233 Andy

I was born and raised in Edinburgh, and now live in Fife. If I fly then I have tended to go from Edinburgh, Glasgow, Newcastle or Manchester in order of preference, but I would go from any of them for the right flight.

I hadn't heard of the plans to merge Edinburgh and Glasgow airports but would be in favour of this (with a good rail link both ways!). They're talking about a new railway between Glasgow and Edinburgh anyway, so why not merge it all together with an airport in the middle. Who knows, Edinburgh and Glasgow could become bestest friends and share prosperity!

I repeat my advice though- Glasgow must ditch it's old friends, the incompetent and and self-serving Labourites.
242

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 17:16:01
Andy54321 - "Sadly BAA was more interesting in trying to force every flight in Britain through Heathrow and successive governments didn't seem to care."

That is the nature of the beast...Some call it the Union Dividend.

243

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 17:22:50
240 Andy*

Have no idea why this is not a viable option. I spend a lot of time in Schipol airport and maybe 20% offload into Holland. The airport is a hub for panam/quantas/aeroflot and all the others.

Seems to me that ceratinly for US and Canadian flights at least a Scottish airport would be more cost effective and certainly as viable as Schipol as Scotland is directly on their flight path.

Anyway..one for the future. I agree about BAA they have been milking Scots for years and must have racked up a few billion in charges by now!
244

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 17:23:30
What do we want to get to Glasgow Airport? A taxi. Is not a made in Glasgow electric taxi service a good idea? It's not obvious, except to Jack McConnel who bought a villa there, that a holiday in Spain does wonders for the scottish economy apart from travel agents.

And suffering from lack of sunshine, weegies will return totally invigorated to do wonders in Glasgow.
245

Miss H,

18/09/2009 17:28:16
213 I am completely serious. If there is a compelling case that the Kingston Bridge needs to be replaced or that there needs to be an additional crossing over the Clyde then that case should be made to the Scottish Government. You say "we're always told it would be too expensive." Who has told you?

As far as I was aware the City Council has been punting the line that the M74 extension will relieve pressure on the Kingston Bridge. Don't quite see the logic of that myself but the SNP Government accepted the case and provided the money.

Now you are saying that in fact we need to build a new road bridge over the Clyde.


246

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 17:28:20
Phil

I quite like the single big Airport Idea, there would be a much better frequency of scheduled flights, to a grater range of destinations. Making it much less likely that you had to go to or change at London, Manchester or Schiphol.

Which in it's self would be a tremendous boost to our economy.

Somewhere between Falkirk and Whitburn or better still...Robert De Bruce International Airport, between Larbert and Bannockburn.
247

Miss H,

18/09/2009 17:29:34
214 BTE the bid committe have said they see no problem.

248

Phil C,

18/09/2009 17:32:09
#246 The Col

Bannockburn Airport sounds great!
249

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 17:35:21
248 Phil*

MCI ...Margaret Curren International is my preferred choice :-)
250

,

18/09/2009 17:37:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
251

TWC,

exLabour 18/09/2009 17:39:10
249 Nevsky

The MCI with the Greetin' Face Departure Lounge.
252

Miss H,

18/09/2009 17:40:38
218 I see what you mean Andy but you need to understand that lots of other parts of Scotland really do resent Glasgow.

Glasgow in fact gets more funding than anywhere else on mainland Scotland. Not only in terns of capital projects but also revenue funding. Local authority funding to Glasgow City Council is £2517 per person, compared to £1755 in Edinburgh or £1729 in Aberdeen.

So you will appreciate that when people in Aberdeen hear Margaret Curran shrieking about Aberdeen maybe getting an extra 3 million from the budget and demanding that Glasgow gets the same they think hold on a minite missus, you already get 788 pounds more per person than we do.

There is a kind of victim mentality among some Labour councilors and MSPs that irritates the heck out of people.
253

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 17:56:45
#242 It's hardly just Glasgow or Scotland that has suffered as a result of aviation policy in this country. Even Londoners suffer as a result because Heathrow is a rather unpleasant place and is subject to much greater delays than airports up here are.

The real problem is that one company was allowed to build up a monopoly and no one challenged it. However, BAA are now being forced to sell Gatwick and Stansted and either Glasgow or Edinburgh so things will change at long last.
254

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:00:00
#243 The consultation produced a multi-hundred page report which is actually available online if you care to google for it.

As I remember there were many reasons. Off the top of my head:
.Job losses at the existing airport sites
.Economic effects on the areas and companies surrounding existing airports
.Cost of new road and rail links (not just to city centres)
.Cost of actually building a very large new airport
.Impact of a large new development on the site of the airport
.Increased journey times for people in both Glasgow and Edinburgh no matter what you do and even greater for those in places such as Ayrshire or Fife
255

,

18/09/2009 18:04:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
256

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:06:45
#245 Claiming that the SNP are responsible for the M74 is rather dishonest. That project has been underway for many, many years but suffered from continual planning objections.

As for saying Glasgow needs a new bridge - I'm open to suggestions. Maybe a new tunnel would be a better solution. But it desperately needs something because traffic through town is utterly ridiculous now. If I left my home on the southwest edge of Glasgow at any time during the day it would take as long to get to the other side of Glasgow as it would to get from east Glasgow all the way to Edinburgh.
257

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:08:18
#246 You're correct that it would probably have a greater range of flights, but the majority of airport users are frequent-flier business users and they simply won't be willing to make a long journey for an early morning flight every week and then have a long journey home at the end of the day.
258

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 18:09:04
#253 Miss H
You say

-'Glasgow in fact gets more funding than anywhere else on mainland Scotland. Not only in terns of capital projects but also revenue funding. Local authority funding to Glasgow City Council is £2517 per person, compared to £1755 in Edinburgh or £1729 in Aberdeen.'

You make this sound like some sort of hand out. Maybe you could identify just what you mean.

You also say
-'I see what you mean Andy but you need to understand that lots of other parts of Scotland really do resent Glasgow.'

Aye and weegies hate Edinburgh and the fishy people of the north etc etc.

It's called divide and conquer. All part of the black propaganda brigade's standard output.

Don't fall for it.

As for the original topic. - Glasgow did not need a rail link.

Perhaps the curtailment of the budget has forced a bit of common sense into the world of spin.

259

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:09:55
#250 You're post is easily as stupid as those you criticise.

If you want an independent Scotland you have to bring all of us with you and insulting people for having valid concerns will not have that effect.
260

Phil C,

18/09/2009 18:11:03
#249 Nevsky

How about the Donald Dewar Father of Scotland (my ar*e) Airport?
261

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:11:48
#252 Miss H, do you realise that Edinburgh is also resented in much of Scotland, and not just the Glasgow area (where 40% of Scots live)?

How will an independent Scotland thrive if we all resent each other so much?
262

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:13:52
#255 And how will you persuade business people, who are responsible for a massive proportion of airport and airline income, to travel to a distant airport at 5.30am and travel home again late at night?

I want an airport with lots of holiday destinations as much as the next person, but it's the business traffic that would drive our economy.
263

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 18:17:48
#261
You're right Andy.

This encouragement to area resentment is simply a tool to break up any consensus in Scotland. I agree also that the SNP has a duty to generate this consensus by persuasion. Simply ranting and deviding should be left to the so called unionist parties.
264

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:21:37
#263 Well, that I can agree with John ;)
265

,

18/09/2009 18:23:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
266

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:35:39
#252 Miss H, could you provide similar figures for the LAs surrounding Glasgow (e.g. Renfrewshire, East Renfrewshire, N/S Lanarkshire, East Dunbartonshire etc)?

The reason I ask is that Glasgow provides infrastructure that is used daily by many hundreds of thousands of people who live outside its boundaries, because they come to work or shop there or simply pass through.
267

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 18:36:49
#265 You say

-'It is not the Nationalists that need to bring you on board ,it is up to ANY uninoist to articulate why we should stay in the unholy union.'

Now I completely disagree with that.

The status quo is a Brit Union. It's up to 'Nationalists' to represent the case for an Independent Scotland and persuade others that this is a valid case.

Now I consider that there is a strong case for this position. My judgement.

The strongest argument for me is the ability to paddle our own canoe in principled as well as economic ways. I also am aware that theneed to establish an economic argument is essential.
268

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:37:58
#265 You're doing it again. Rather than persuade people or answer questions you insult them and call them unionists, labour drones or whatever.

You are the one who wants to change the status quo so it's up to you to justify it. You don't have a majority government and the polls do not show a majority in support of independence.

So again, if you want those things, you'll have to persuade the rest of us. Hurling insults and refusing to answer valid questions will not have that effect.
269

Seoras67,

Edinburgh 18/09/2009 18:38:26
To all those criticising the decision to stop this link to Glasgow Airport, a simple question for you to answer.
If this link is so important why was it not built years ago when Labour controlled both Holyrood and Westminster?
Seems ironic that so many Labour supporters stress that this link is essential but don't explain why if it is so essential it wasn't built in the past.
270

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 18:39:00
265 Scot*

I agree it is up to unionists now. That fact is that Westminster along with the forthcoming Tory government are gradually becoming an irrelevance to Scotland.

The question has to be asked soon is why would any Scot trust 400 odd English Tory MPs in London to act on their behalf instead of Scots elected by the people of Scotland sitting in Edinburgh?





271

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:44:49
#269 Who are these "labour supporters"? I don't recall anyone professing to support them on this thread.
272

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:46:17
#270 If Westminster is an irrelevance, who do you think rescued RBS and Bank of Scotland? Does John Swinney have £120 billion under his bed for just such emergencies?
273

,

18/09/2009 18:46:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
274

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 18:48:15
-- Glasgow provides infrastructure that is used daily by many hundreds of thousands of people who live outside its boundaries, because they come to work or shop there or simply pass through.

Then how do you achieve a tax base, Andy?

Maybe the SNP's LIT was as stop-gap solution but it would be a big improvement. We need taxes easy to collect and not needing big overheads to run. Like costing 50p in the £ which is not unusual.

The present rating system taxes the city centre when most large commercial operations are in the suburbs. How do you deal with that?
275

The Oracle Of The Higher Power,

18/09/2009 18:50:58
RE Andy #266 54321,18/09/2009 18:35:39


You are right Andy. Miss H is shameless in the way she uses stats to create a false impression.
276

,

18/09/2009 18:51:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
277

The Strategist,

18/09/2009 18:54:53
Talking of cuts I received a link today to a petition to try to stop the Westminster Govt from scrapping the British Forces Post Office.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/SaveBFPO/sign

I'd encourage you all to sign this..
278

The Oracle Of The Higher Power,

18/09/2009 18:55:53
RE Andy54321,18/09/2009 18:44:49
#269 Who are these "labour supporters"? I don't recall anyone professing to support them on this thread.
...............................................

The cybernats tend to see things in terms of SNP v Labour and how any issue may affect the prospect of independence.
279

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:56:37
#274 I've spent a lot of time on forums and the SNP fanboys always refuse to answer my questions and resort to insults - which you're doing again.

I am not simply going to agree with you because you want me to. If you want to change the status quo and massively disrupt my life it's up to you to persuade the rest of us.

I daresay supporters of the Green party would like me to ditch my car and switch the powerstations off but thankfully they don't have majority support either.

You may not like it but that's the way it is.
280

John Stonne,

Party? 18/09/2009 18:57:18
# 277

How does it come about that we need to declare a party loyalty. Is this not the outcome of what could be described as 'black' posters. Posters that express an opinion that is no more than party black propanda or at least that is how they see it.

That does not seem to be true of Andy. He is open to persuasion.
281

Warden Resurrected,

18/09/2009 18:58:17
Auld Twa
85- To be honest when this Scottish government started predicting a £500m reduction in real terms on the block grant before the last budget I took it as a signal it would trim its agenda in expectation. Who would have guessed they would ignore there own prediction.
Precautions were not taken to review the scope the budget would cover. Money saved on not extending government spending would not be any good for the next year its true due to our unusual savings account with the treasury with no advantages. The benefit however would show in less of a spread in the coming budget to be paid for.

On another subject I was trying to check back data on this Scottish government and what do I find, almost nothing. Can anyone advise me where the Scottish government has done with their data and how can I find it.
282

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 18:58:56
#275 A very good question and sadly not one I've heard a good answer too. LIT on its own would be very unfair to Glasgow and the average wage is lower but they have the costs of supporting all that infrastructure. It could only work if the local area in question was the whole of greater Glasgow, but successive governments have slowly nibbled away at Glasgow so I don't see anyone supporting effectively making it much bigger.
283

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:02:01
#277 You just can't help yourself can you?

Clearly your understanding of Scottish politics is more limited than I realised. I suggest you go and read up on some of the other parties such as the Tories and the Lib Dems.

For what it's worth though, I support no party. None of them deserve it.

(This is where you throw some random insult, call me a liar and assert I'm a labour supporter, right?)
284

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 19:02:20
273 Andy*

Westminster did not have the money. They borrowed it!
285

BlackDouglas2,

18/09/2009 19:03:36
@Andy54321,18/09/2009 18:46:17
"#270 If Westminster is an irrelevance, who do you think rescued RBS and Bank of Scotland? Does John Swinney have £120 billion under his bed for just such emergencies?"

The British government just printed the money - they didn't have it. We should have let these companies go out of business. Bail-outs are immoral. An independent Scotland would have borrowing potential and cash funds because of the oil and so a real bail-out would have been possible.

The UK is bankrupt and the sooner Scots get out before Brown turns us into Zimbabwe the better. Look at this article. It's an understatement, believe me.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1214309/Britain-facing-immediate-risk-financial-crisis.html
286

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 19:07:56
#262 Andy54321

Andy if their "Local" Airport wasn't there any more, they wouldn't have a choice.

On a less flippant note, If you live in say Ballieston or Motherwell your journey time to a Central Airport would be much the same.

The worst case scenario is an extra 30 mins by car or taxi once a week, which for someone who commutes 400+ miles to their work, is frankly nothing in either time or expense...And to the holidaymaker a positive boon, if the trade-off in extra destinations, flights and reduced costs, saves a detour to an English Airport even once every ten years.
287

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:08:28
#285 Sadly true nevsky, but they fact is their credit rating is rather greater than Holyrood's, by virtue of their size. Scotland alone would have ended up like Iceland, and it really pains me to say that.
288

,

18/09/2009 19:09:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
289

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:12:33
#286 Not strictly accurate. Their QE programme is effectively printing money but that's not where the money for the bailout came from, it's on top of it!

I'm no fan of Brown but the fact is greedy corporate morons saddled us with unimaginable debts that an independent Scotland couldn't possibly have dealt with alone.

I don't think people really understand the true scale of the disaster. To put it in perspective, RBS had assets and liabilities of very nearly equal proportions - at just under £2 trillion pounds - and on one knew how much of that was toxic.

The GDP of the entire UK economy is about £1.4 trillion.
290

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:15:35
#287 One of the points the consultation document made was that a large proportion of frequent travellers had already moved closer to their airports of choice so if the airport move they would be faced with either moving or getting another job.

I live pretty close to the airport now but getting up for a 6am flight, doing a days work with clients and getting home at 9pm+ still kills me. If I had an extra hour each way I simply couldn't continue doing my job. It's that simple.
291

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:18:57
#289 I have repeatedly told you that I have no allegiance. I support no party. At the next election I will decide which party or local candidate I like the most or dislike the least.

Just because you are a cult member doesn't mean the rest of us are (which is a good thing because democracy, voting and campaigning would be pretty pointless if everyone just voted the same way no matter what).

The rest of your post is just insults and lies. Where exactly did I say "SNP bad Westminster good", although I would have thought "Holyrood bad Westminster good" would be a more sensible lie.

What are you trying to achieve here? Do you think I or other posters will suddenly convert to your way of thinking if you post enough insults and lies?

Why don't you try discussing policy instead, it would be a lot more effective.
292

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 19:24:41
The most effective cut that could be made is in the hands of the voting public.

Cut the ball and chain placed around Scotland by the London Vampires who put it there to bleed Scotland dry and deny equal opportunities in all spheres of life to Scots living in Scotland.

It is no surprise that for a Scot to succeed he/she has to leave Scotland.

50 years of Labour control has taught Glasgow council nothing for they are Labour controlled - albeit perhaps diminishing a bit - and are part of the problem Scots have when it comes to running a business in Glasgow. Glasgow Council are useless and most likely still as corrupt as ever, hence the opposition to the SNP and Scottish Independence.

Some of us have terrible experiences of dealing with Glasgow Mafia Council.

293

The Oracle Of The Higher Power,

18/09/2009 19:27:18
RE289 Scottish and Still Proud,Glasgow 18/09/2009 19:09:40

You are a tedious bigot.
294

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 19:28:40
288 Andy*

Patently not true and a bit sad you fall for the unionist line.

Ireland did not lose 1 bank and Scotland (being independent could have taken a raft of measures to remove liability for Scotland such as nationalising the banks and selling their assets...like you say 2 trillion is slightly above the accumulated debt that was required to maintain them.

Scotland could certainly have borrowed against oil until the crisis has become more stable...everyone here has been buying time nothing more.

Iceland is not Scotland...neither is any other country Scotland so the comparison does not weigh up.
295

,

18/09/2009 19:34:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
296

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:37:29
#296 Eh, nevsky, I think you need to do some reading.

Ireland's credit rating was reduced (something that hasn't happened to the UK) and as a result their government now has to pay far more to borrow money. Which is a bit of a shame since they've been bailing out their banks and pumping money into the economy on a massive scale (including another 54 billion Euros announced just yesterday). Their unemployment rate has also risen to 12.4% (versus 7% in Scotland).

And all that despite that the fact that RBS alone was an order of magnitude bigger than the Irish banks.
297

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:39:18
#297 I'm not going to keep answering the same questions and certainly not when you won't answer any. As I said, if you want a large proportion of the Scottish electorate to vote for your chosen party, you need to persuade us. That's how it works.
298

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:40:51
#297 Incidentally, you appear to think that there are only two options on the ballot paper - "unionist" and "SNP". You have a lot to learn.
299

PointOf View,

Bonny Scotland 18/09/2009 19:43:54
As per expected from Maddox, anti Scotland pi**sh.
Where's the bit about Westminster cutting the Scottish budget, by a darn sight more than £115m both this year and next. Perhaps if the Scotish budget weren't cut we could afford this and a lot more. As i say anti Scotland and independence pi**sh. Expect nothing more from Johnston (lie-bour gutter) press.

300

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 19:44:30
Andy's saying that Glasgow is the centre of Scottish industry and commerce but can't run it's own infrastructure and airport. Do you know 2-3 products made in Glasgow of any international standing? I do. Do you?

Greater London is home to many international corporate HQs. A new runway at Heathrow may be of great benefit. So pay for it. Why do they need to plunder the rest of the UK for this when they're so economically successful?
301

,

18/09/2009 19:48:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
302

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:50:11
#302 Richard, ask me a real question and I'll answer it honestly. Post rhetorical $h!te and I will ignore it.
303

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 19:52:14
I suspect Andy of being a troll. Do you know how many people have mentioned this to me today? In glasgow, where I live and work?

Not one.
304

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 19:52:15
Andy*

I am afraid it is you that needs to do the reading. Scottish GDP is around 90 billion...bailing out the banks (with no oil fund) would have ammounted to much less that the UK borrowing to GDP ratio to date (not predicted0 is nearly 60% of GDP!



305

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:52:30
#303 And where exactly did I say Glasgow can't run its own infrastructure and airport?

Why do people on here keep putting words in my mouth?

(I actually agree with your second paragraph, something that wouldn't come as a surprise to anyone if they actually bothered to read what I write instead of putting words in my mouth).
306

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:54:01
#306 Right, I have continually asked people to discuss the issues and that makes me a troll, but not the people who keep insulting me and putting words in my mouth? Pathetic.
307

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:54:50
#309 The last time I voted there were approximately 12 candidates on my ballot paper.

If you continue to post rubbish I'll simply ignore you.
308

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 19:55:24
As I said earlier on on this thread I think the only grievance that Glasgow has is that it doesn't receive funding from the SG for it's national, indeed international, level Museums and Galleries although they are a huge boost to Scotland, not just here.

Apart from that, which I know for a fact the SG are looking at, I think it's a East v West divide and rule game that Labour are playing here.
309

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:55:54
#307 Nev, I think maybe you mistyped something there. Could you try again?
310

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 19:57:13
310 What issue? You have been posting here all day. Do you honestly think that the Glasgow Airport Rail Link is vital to Glasgow? Why? No one else does.
311

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 19:59:18
#314 No one else does? Now who's trolling?

As for the issues, things have moved on a bit. Somewhere along the line some idiots turned it into an independence thread then got all defensive when others had the temerity not to agree with them.
312

,

18/09/2009 19:59:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
313

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 20:00:14
315 Well Richard in fairness you could vote Green, or SSP/Solidarity as they support independence too.

The rest are all unionist parties as far as I know
314

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 20:02:36
316 I said vital. The rail link is desirable, like connecting Queen St to Central or extending the U. It's on a wish list of things but it ain't vital and we don't have the money right now. I fail to see what the big deal is quite honestly.
315

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:02:54
#317 And this would be another example of you not insulting me, I suppose?

Have you actually posted *anything* about the rail link or about the policies of the SNP or any other party? It just seems to be endless insults.
316

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:06:54
#319 It may not be vital in the sense that, say, hospitals are but Glasgow is still struggling desperately and that has an impact on many lives that really is as deadly as lack of medical care.

Proper transport infrastructure is a vital if we want to attract businesses, tourists and inhabitants to Glasgow. The rail link was an important part of that and it has been cancelled at a time when Glasgow airport has begun to decline and is likely to be sold off. It will have a real impact.
317

,

18/09/2009 20:08:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
318

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 20:09:28
FFS Stop prattling about.

What is an effective vote is perhaps what is meant.

Who else can be voted for in Scotland other than SNP if any real difference is to be made in changing the long term second rate status of Scotland that has resulted from the unfair and totally biased in London's favour Union that was IMPOSED in Scotland undemocratically?

The other Independence parties are a better option than the well worn and failed Labour and Conservative options, imo.
319

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 18/09/2009 20:10:16
-- And where exactly did I say Glasgow can't run its own infrastructure and airport?

Then why doesn't it? At one time the blue train electric network was visited and admired from abroad.

What's been done since? The strathclyde motorways are not in good condition and the routine roads and bridges are coming apart. Did Glasgow Labour embrace Thatcherism? They were the ones in charge and blame must fall. They certainly took the extravagant CEO salaries.
320

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:10:20
#322 I have answered that bleeding question several times. As I said to Richard, I will happily discuss the issues but repeated insults and repeatedly asking the same question will be ignored. End of.
321

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 20:11:46
321 We DO attract business tourists and inhabitants to Glasgow.

We are the major conference centre in Scotland.

We attract as many tourists as any other City, including Edinburgh.

The planned decline of Glasgow Airport, if that is on the cards, is a separate issue.

There are alternatives to the Rail Link, the budget is quite scary and apparently moveable, we are in the middle of a global recession and have the level of debt hanging around our necks as we did at the end of WW2 - may I humbly suggest it would be rather imprudent to start major capital works in that context unless they are actually vital rather than desirable.
322

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:12:40
#324 I'm not sure what you mean. Glasgow has budget constraints like everywhere else and in terms of motorways and train lines things get very complicated because they straddle many local authorities, not just Glasgow.
323

The Col. of Monte Cristo,

18/09/2009 20:14:45
Why are we treating Andy as if he was some kind of New Unionist Poster?

I would say that he is "Oor Andy"...hiding in plain view.
324

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:15:22
#327 Observer, that's as maybe, but Glasgow's population has halved since 1950 and it's still falling. We have the highest unemployment rates, the worst health, the shortest lifespans, the greatest deprivation and if last night's news is to be believe the most people with alcohol problems too.

Glasgow is my home and I love it but I can't just ignore the fact that it has massive problems and has been shrinking my whole life.

And while £120million is a lot of money, it's not particularly big compared to many other projects.
325

European Scot,

18/09/2009 20:20:36
321 Andy 54321

"Proper transport infrastructure is a vital if we want to attract businesses, tourists and inhabitants to Glasgow. The rail link was an important part of that and it has been cancelled at a time when Glasgow airport has begun to decline and is likely to be sold off. It will have a real impact."

So would you have preferred the Unionist Parties to have given up on their horrendously expensive tram set, and targeted some of that half billion or so on the above rail link ?
326

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 18/09/2009 20:20:47
International aid is often increased to support specific projects that aid the donor country. Denmark, for example, may grant foreign aid to third world countries to buy wind turbines. The turbines are manufactured in Denmark, so the government thereby helps Danish companies, without overtly subsidising them. It's difficult to criticise such grants because it looks as if you are condemning aid to poor countries. So before condemning foreign aid, take a look at how it is being spent. Your own job may depend on it!
327

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 20:21:14
300 I bet you don't like Glasgow half as much as me.

Of course the population has dropped since 1950 - we moved loads of people out of the slums.

The population is not still in decline it is now growing incrementally.

Regards to the health and unemployment rates they are shocking - in certain areas.

The Glasgow Airport Rail Link will do nothing to help those people affected by multiple deprivation they never see the inside of an Airport.

If you want to tackle poverty and inequality as much as I do then I can assure you a rail link to an Airport will do hee haw in that regard.
328

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 20:22:09
333 for 330
329

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:23:14
#331 I think the Edinburgh tram project is a joke, but no, I am not saying that the money should necessarily have been diverted from Edinburgh to Glasgow. The fact that so much money is being spent on a scheme that will likely make things worse in Edinburgh while a much needed link is cancelled here does rankle though.
330

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:28:27
#333 Over half of Glasgow's population has moved out of Glasgow but Glasgow is still the centre for jobs, leisure and transport. But most of the people benefitting from it don't pay council tax in Glasgow (I know, I'm one of them now!). If the population is now growing incrementally that must have changed in just the last year or so.

As to the rail link - as I have said previously, its not just about people going on holiday. Most airport passengers are business people, not holiday makers. It's business that primarily benefits from a good airport and encouraging businesses of all kinds across Glasgow is a benefit to everyone, even if they never fly in their whole life.

Just do a google on the benefits Heathrow provides to the entire London economy.
331

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 18/09/2009 20:29:58
#331: It makes me ill to think of the £590 million, 12 mile Edinburgh tram link. Especially in the current economic climate. A blunder of this magnitude cannot be forgiven. The political parties responsible know damn well who they are, as do we all. Many people could have had much better lives had the money been spent otherwise. The fact that Lothian Bus users will be subsidising the tram to the tune of £5 million per year says it all. Slam the damn tram sham!
332

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 20:31:14
330 Andy 54321,

Since you live in Glasgow and have seen it's population decimated not only in numbers but with increased deprivation and problems with health amongst others due partly to a lack of interests to pursue and being ignored by the powers that built over the top of them pushing them out with nothing to do because of the stagnation and cynical sacrifice of public interest as opposed to sycophantically courting corporate manipulation and the cash "rewards", who do you hold responsible?

a) Glasgow Council.

b) Westminster Government.

c) The previous Scottish Administration.

d) The SNP Scottish Government.

333

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 20:33:46
336 OK now you are singing my song. Yes indeed all the outlying areas which were stripped from Glasgow's tax base use the City to work and party in without contributing. I would change that. And looking at transport infrastructure I would look at it Strathclyde-wide. I would do a lot of things very differently. But what I wouldn't do if I was John Swinney was commit to the rail link now.
334

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:34:03
#338 I'm just repeating myself now. But as I said some time ago, successive governments of all flavours are responsible for what has happened to Glasgow. I don't blame the SNP for the past, but I do blame them for the decisions they make today and that includes cancelling this link.
335

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:34:57
#340 Well it is nice to agree with you for a change Observer (apart from that last bit) ;)
336

,

18/09/2009 20:38:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
337

European Scot,

18/09/2009 20:38:30
337 Caora Dubh

Just so.
A criminal waste of money, which will not be forgotten.
338

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 20:42:52
313 Andy*

Mistyped what? Scottish GDP is around 90 to 100 billion, were you unaware of this fact?
339

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:46:17
#345 No, that's not what I meant. The bailout of RBS and HBOS/Lloyds has been estimated to cost up to £1.5 trillion.

How would a country with a GDP of £100 billion deal with such a problem?
340

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 20:48:35
#341 Andy

Long way round a circle.

I still cannot see how a rail link would in anyway help the business user of air transport from Glasgow.

It may well be essential in grid locked London but not here.

Personally I have no problem flying where ever I wont.
341

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 20:50:46
341 Andy 54321,

So who do you blame for the cuts?

Are the SNP who wish to see Scotland flourish and it's people attain the status of citizens of a real Country the real culprits in cutting certain expenses reluctantly,

OR,

are the culprits those, who, through selfish, profligate spending on themselves and their own pet projects, not to mention incurring the terrible expenses of having the Country being coerced into wars AGAINST the wishes of the public, brought our Country to it's knees whilst they STILL enjoy luxurious profligacy themselves under the guise of MPs and friends of the Westminster Parliament in London?
342

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:53:18
#347 The company I work for has very few customers left in Scotland. Most are in England now with a few international ones and we hear the same complaints from them about travelling to Glasgow all the time, and frankly I can understand it because I know how awkward it can be flying into an unfamiliar city and trying to get to your final destination. I'm also horrifyingly familiar with the traffic problems between the city centre and the airport.
343

New Danielrober,

18/09/2009 20:56:30
# 338 Fitba Krazy

Glasgow has always been ignored, that’s the beauty of the place. Its like a ship on dry land, where experiments and new ideas can be tested. True not all of them work, but wow - some do. After all there has to be somewhere in these islands that experiments can be conducted - professionally.

As to a ‘lack of interests to pursue and being ignored by the powers’ is just wonderful to some of us. Now what really scares many of us is when governments take interest in Glasgow, seeking to cure what ‘some see, as a problem. Rather than backing up the successes.

Take this railway link. As it not a part of any national network and will only be of material benefit to the Airport owner - why not sell it, to the Airport owners. Problem lessened now lets plan the party - I mean the Commonwealth Games. :-)
344

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:57:22
#348 The difference between you and me is that you still really believe the SNP want all that, but I'm afraid you're missing an important point. They're human just like the rest of us, and many of them have become focussed on the romantic aspects of independence and nationalism and can no longer rationally assess the pros and cons. That's what I was getting at earlier when I said SNP supporters never answer any real questions about independence.

I really do want Scotland and its people to flourish. If independence is the way to do it then so be it. It so happens I don't think it is but I'm open to debate. I've never had anyone genuinely try to discuss the problems independence raises though, it always ends up either with insults or empty assertions that independence is the only way to go.
345

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 20:58:32
#350 That's probably the most sensible post I've read all day :)
346

Nevsky;,

St Petersburg 18/09/2009 20:58:45
346 Andy*

Now you are writing complete nonsense so no point in continuing.

Think you are confused as to what the money was for.

It was not to buy evey asset and every laibility of the banks as that would never happen anyway?????

Once again the cash spent on HBOS and RBS would amount to less than current Westminster debt levels.

Here is a tip for you..don't believe unionist scare stories and try and do a bit of independent thinking..otherwise you just end up looking a bit foolish!
347

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:00:57
349, Andy54321,

If you think getting from Glasgow City Centre to Glasgow is a nightmare you want to try getting from Coatbridge to Glasgow City Centre.

Who was in charge when the whole transport debacle was planned and introduced?
348

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:03:12
346 Andy these banks were UK/global banks. The liabilities wouoldn't have rested with Scotland. That's a scare story.

349

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:05:29
350 New DanielRober,

Well Daniel, I was born and brought up in Glasgow and if what you say is true, why was I not "ignored" by Glasgow Council and allowed to run my recording/rehearsal studios in the way that I had done prior to them taking over the "running" of the premises. Successfully?
350

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:07:44
357 Hey - you used to post on the Herald didn't you? I thought I recognised your style.
351

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:09:39
358 Observer,

Nae Kiddin?
352

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:10:33
349 I think a lot of problems there are to do with the airport - it's rubbish, and that awful taxi rank that seems to feature drivers from 'Deliverance'.
353

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:11:29
359 I'm trying to remember yer moniker I'm embarrassed it escapes me.
354

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 21:11:31
#349 Andy

Perhaps our business is less London centric

Last month we had people from Paris. We had the courtesy to pick them up from the airport. Their complaint concerned Heathrow.

The drive from the GA typically takes 20 minutes. Door to door.

Perhaps what we need are better European connections.
355

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:13:45
360 Observer,

AND, the 40mph "speed" limit at the Glasgow airport flyover that I personally have yet to observe anyone sticking to except when there is a traffic jam.
356

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:14:39
#353 Nevsky, Westminster debt levels are irrelevant unless you believe an independent Scotland would have no debt, which is just ridiculous.

The government invested tens of billions of pounds directly in both RBS and Lloyds. It further guaranteed hundreds of billions in what was effectively an insurance policy because no one knew the scale of their toxic assets.

Even the direct investment in the banks alone in your fantasy scenario where Scotland had no initial debt would have resulted in Scotland having a debt in excess of 100% of GDP.
357

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:16:08
#354 Why do people keep asking me to defend or attack Labour? I must said twenty times that I'm not a labour supporter. Labour is not the issue here. Labour are not in power.
358

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:16:12
363 Yeah. I think there's a lot that could be done without spending money we don't precisely have at this moment.

I think it's spending money you don't have when you don't need to that got us into this mess.
359

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:17:18
#356 Right, so we take all the good stuff and deny responsibility for all the bad stuff? You'll have a very hard time negotiating an independence treat like that.
360

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:17:58
361, Observer,

There is no need to be embarrassed as it's my real name and there are lots of us about, so, your forgetfulness is understandable and easily forgiven.
361

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:19:28
#360 It's a lot worse since they put in the new security arrangements where you have to check in at one end of the airport, go to security at the other then walk all the way back to where you started so you can go to the departure lounge. Looking on the bright side, I'm getting more exercise now.
362

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:19:31
365 Ah well you see they are Andy - at Westminster. And they control the purse strings. The Scottish Government have no borrowing powers. They have less powers than a local authority.

And regards the banks - the *Labour* Govt have pumped in about, oh I think it's £1.3 trillion, to the economy to bail it out. Well we have to pay it back.

Hence no rail link to the airport.
363

New Danielrober,

18/09/2009 21:20:26
# 357 Fitba Krazy

Good man, but still not the point.

Money will not be spent on an airport upgrade. If hard cash is not spent, then when will Glasgow be connected to her airport by rail? (though I always found the bus more than suitable).

If tax payers money is spent, who will commercially benefit?

The airport is a private affairs, as such why not make the link a private affair too. If Glasgow council are asked to put cash in, then just like Manchester is should have a share. This seems an issue of private -public partnership, not politics.
364

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:21:36
367 No take a proportionate share of the debt.

I think independence would be financially neutral.
365

Darien,

Panama 18/09/2009 21:22:26
#364 Andy:

The so-called 'Scottish' banks were actually London traded banks, owned outwith Scotland, and with virtually all their toxic debts also outwith Scotland. They were bailed out to prevent wipeout of the economy south of the border and in particular to secure survival of the city of London global financial centre. A brass plate on a door in Edinburgh means zip. An independent Scotland could have and would have let the non-Scottish parts of these banks go down the pan, which is where the GB economy is headed. Bailing out the Scottish parts of these banks, if that were necessary, would not have been much trouble for an independent Scotland.
366

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:24:30
365, Andy54321,

Labour are in power in London and they hold OUR money which THEY hand out according to how much THEY think is appropriate for the Scottish people whom THEY have no time for, especially when WE wish to UNDERSTANDABLY run OUR own Country.

Get the drift?
367

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:25:24
#362 I completely agree that we need better European connections. Coincidentally my very first customer at my current employer was based just outside Paris and we frequently visited each others' sites but that ended when Air France cancelled their direct service from Glasgow and made us go via Birmingham. They're no longer do business with us and it really was down to travel problems.

Thankfully EasyJet now do the Glasgow / Charles de Gaulle route.
368

Phil C,

18/09/2009 21:25:41
#lots

Andy54321, you started out being quite sensibly today. You're now sounding like a desperate weegie apologist. Glasgow has bigger problems than New York, Paris, Edinburgh or London (put together!), thanks to Labour. You can either tackle it with a deep fried Mars Bar on each shoulder or listen to the mountain of common sense and help being offered by the rest of Scotland.

You can either stick to your traditions of supporting wrecking Labour, come what may, or switch a real future with the help of a new Scotland under the guidance of the SNP and future independence. Andy, I know you're not Labour, but if you can't persuade the rest of your Glasgow citizens to turn Labour off then you're (and we're) f*cked!
369

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:26:43
#370 If everything else was getting canned too I might agree.
370

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:27:21
371, Daniel,

Not if it means knocking down peoples hooses and business premises and most importantly more Fitba pitches.

Noo, forgive me if I am wrong, but that IS politics.
371

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 21:27:48
#369
So there you are Andy. Maybe some restructuring of the security arrangements would be more helpful than a rail link.

What do you say??
372

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:30:06
#372 That's the point though. If we had been independent at the time of the crash we would already have had a debt equivalent to around 40% of GDP, assuming our new government did borrow more afterwards.

Even if we only had to pay one twelfth of the debt created by the banking crash (since we have one twelfth of the population) that would still have meant finding or creating £110 billion (based on your £1.3 billion figure).

That would have left us with a debt of 150% of GDP based on nevsky's £100bn GDP figure.
373

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:31:21
376 Excuse me. I think your general anti-Glaswegian rant is out of order.

Not everyone here is a deep fried mars bar eater or a Labour supporter.

Any more than all Edinburgh folk have fur coats and nae knickers and Aberdonians all sh@g sheep.

Do please try and be a grown up.
374

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:32:32
#373 Do you have any idea how many well paid jobs in Edinburgh are provided directly by the Royal Bank? Or how many other Edinburgh jobs depend on the spending they create? Have you even seen their HQ in Edinburgh? Large and plush don't quite cover it - it's like a massive shopping mall, leisure centre, campus and office complex all in one.

Believe me, if RBS had failed it would have been an absolute disaster for Edinburgh and for Scotland as a whole.
375

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:34:55
#374 By "we" you mean yourself. The last time I checked, the SNP only got 32% of the vote at the last election and independence is still not supported by a majority in opinion polls.
376

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:35:38
380 We are in a huge amount of debt whether we remain with the UK or go independent. And no the oil will not make us rich that is a myth. I personally feel that within the UK we are subject to London/South-centric policies because they have the most votes and it is entirely natural that politicians will chase those votes.

I think an independent Scotland could pursue Scotland-centric policies within the safety of the EU.

That is my preferred option.
377

Phil C,

18/09/2009 21:35:47
Andy #365 (days a year) "Why do people keep asking me to defend or attack Labour?"

Because you appear to be a rare diamond. Because there seem to be so few people in Glasgow who don't support filthy Labour. Because the rest of Scotland detests Glasgow's self-important and destructive cheap socialist views.
378

New Danielrober,

18/09/2009 21:36:45
# 378 Fitba Krazy,

Engineering and politics come face to face with each other in infrastructure projects. Sometimes they work in cooperation other times in confrontation - its the way of competition that often makes things better.

Yet others times the plans are obvious and straight forward, which makes it tempting to add additions. Its a simple rail link, cheap and effective. With the side benefit of acting as a quick route into Glasgow and onwards to Edinburgh for many resident on the south side of the Clyde Estuary.

All in all a very profitable venture for all Engineers and Politicians.
379

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:37:48
Phil - I have lost count of how many times I have said I don't support labour. I can only assume that the continued accusations from people on here that I do mean you think I'm a liar.

There's not a lot I can do about that except point out that you and your chosen party are never going to succeed until you can get it through your heads that not supporting the SNP doesn't automatically make you a labour supporter.

I mean, why not accuse me of supporting some other random parties? Why not call me a communist or a BNP supporter? It would make just as much sense.
380

Thistledhu,

18/09/2009 21:38:19
I dont think too many are going to lose sleep over the demise of the airport Rail link.

But what i am surprised about is the lack of comment on the fact that we will not recognise our local goverment in 5 years time. For good or bad downsized it will be across scotland.
381

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:39:12
#379 Much as I would like to see the layout changed, the airports problem predate it by many years.
382

Phil C,

18/09/2009 21:40:07
#381 It's called a generalisation. I'm sure you're a fine upstanding chap, but Glasgow and their politics have dragged the rest of Scotland into a huge pile of unionist shi..!
383

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:40:37
388 Good evening Thistledhu - explain please.
384

Observer,,

Glasgow 18/09/2009 21:42:59
390 Chapess if you don't mind and my MSP is Nicola Sturgeon. If Glasgow falls to the SNP then so will Scotland but slagging us all off is not the best way to achieve that:-)
385

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:43:10
#384 That was my preferred option for many years too but the fact is the EU now has a population of around 500 million. Scotland would have no influence. We would account for around 1% of the population and are geographically peripheral.

There is also the fact that France, Italy and Spain may make it difficult for Scotland to rejoin the EU as an independent entity because they have concerns about their own separatist regions. And newer members have less commissioners and MEPs than the original ones so we would have less influence even than similarly sized countries such as Denmark.

I assume we would also be dumping the pound, which would subject us to currency exchange costs and fluctuations with by far our biggest market - the rest of the UK.
386

Phil C,

18/09/2009 21:45:30
Andy #387 "Phil - I have lost count of how many times I have said I don't support labour."

I paste (#376) - 'Andy, I know you're not Labour, but if you can't persuade the rest of your Glasgow citizens to turn Labour off then you're (and we're) f*cked!'
387

Andy54321,

18/09/2009 21:46:26
#385 I've just pulled up the results of the 2007 election on the BBC website. Here are some figures:

Glasgow Anniesland: 53% voted non-Labour
Glasgow Baillieston: 47% voted non-Labour
Glasgow Cathcart: 61% voted non-Labour
Glasgow Govan: 62%
etc
etc
etc

Not so rare.
388

John Stonne,

18/09/2009 21:48:30
#389 Andy
I must say the biggest probs with outbound are internal airport ones. Some to do with so called security checking in 1 hour before flight etc.

Inwards (well you have the same probs from outbound from your departure) but very little this end except find a taxi and I have commented on this previously. Best to pick up your customer yourself.

Still do not see the relavence of a rail link
389

Fitba Krazy,

18/09/2009 21:48:50
Andy54321, 383,

My reply was in answer to you saying Labour was not in power and I explained they were in Westminster.

I would prefer Independence from Westminster as do many, however, you apparently do not, which means you appear to prefer a Labour run Westminster that Scotland is overseen by rather than the much more sensible, in my view, Independent Scotland who are governed by who the Scottish people actually vote for, unlike the current situation where Scotland is an afterthought of the London plutocracy, if even that, and, of course outvoted by English voters every time. Is that correct?

390

Thistledhu,

18/09/2009 21:49:14
Evening Observer ,

Many like me will have noticed that all local authority's will be expected to take a porportinate cut in block grant funding this year and years to come (perhaps as long as five years) now there is fat to be cut off Local goverment but when will we start triming the muscle(front line services) ?