Westminster – Page 53 – The NEN

Game show to replace Referendum Special?

‘Referendum makes for tedious television’

There has been a furious reaction to the BBC’s decision to replace ‘serious’ coverage of the Scottish referendum debate with a referendum game show. First Minister Alex Salmond says it is a slap in the face for democracy but BBC chiefs claim they are simply giving viewers what they want.

BBC chiefs had originally planned a series of factual programmes and documentaries in the run-up to the September referendum, supplemented by three set piece debates on the week of the big vote itself. A through the night Referendum Special, jointly hosted by ‘dream team’ David Dimbleby and Jackie Bird, was also scheduled.

However BBC bosses have decided instead to scrap the lot and will now air ‘The Yes No Show’, a light-hearted game show in which will give viewers an ‘alternative opportunity’ to cast their vote on Scotland’s future.

A BBC spokesman said: “I’ve only ever been to Scotland for the Edinburgh Festival but chums tell me the natives up there are getting decidedly restless – lots of anger, claim and counter-claim and the level of debate has been decidedly dire. Wasn’t it P.G.Wodehouse who said: ‘’It has never been hard to tell the difference between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine’?

“Well, after careful consideration we thought it might be helpful to diffuse some of the heat by screening a game show that the whole family can enjoy – and not only the Jocks, either! Plans are at an advanced stage and we are really excited about the new show – we reckon it’s a real winner and we believe the public will really take to the format of the show”.

All-round entertainer Dale Winton (pictured above) has been approached to front the referendum show. “I feel sorry for the Scotch, I really do – I mean, really – ‘yes’, ‘no’, sometimes there’s just too much choice! Their heads must be buzzing, it’s no wonder they get so angry and aggressive! I’m sworn to secrecy about the details of The Yes No Show, it’s all very cloak and dagger but very exciting. I’d really love to spill the beans but I’ve been warned that if I say anything at all I’ll be trussed up by the Trossachs, so for the moment at least I’m keeping mum!”

It’s understood that famous Scots entertainers like The Krankies, John Barrrowman, Susan Boyle and Sir Sean Connery were ruled out at an early stage as they are seen as ‘too Scotch’, but as a sop to nationalists ‘Go Compare’ tenor Wynne Evans, who was born in Carmarthen near Glasgow, has been pencilled in for a guest slot.

Another big name to miss out is showbiz legend Sir Bruce Forsyth (pictured above). The self-styled superstar of light entertainment was said to be devastated at missing out on the referendum special. “Bitter? Me? Never. It’s their loss – I’m probably the only all-round entertainer and variety superstar who was alive at the Treaty of the Union. I remember the Glasgow Empire – if they like you they let you live! – and the Jocks loved me, they just couldn’t get enough. Up there, they show their appreciation by throwing missiles onto the stage and goodness, was I bombarded that night? The more gags I cracked, the more the bottles rained down. Wonderful, wonderful memories as I remember saying to the ambulance driver”.

Forsyth went on (and on): “They had a few good comics of their own, like Harry Lauder, Will Fyfe and Little David Steel, but none in my league and I ask you – where are they now? And did any of them come up with a memorable catchphrase like ‘Nice to see you, to see you nice’? I don’t think so. Bitter? Keep dancing, that’s what I say”.

The highlight of the show is expected to be a surprise guest appearance by two former Prime Ministers. An entertainment insider said: “Double acts have always been very popular – Laurel and Hardy, Abbot and Costello and Cannon and Ball, for example – and we think we’ve unearthed two more comedy greats in Tony and Gordon. We’ve dubbed them the Prime Ministers of Mirth and we think viewers will be blown away. Tony is a natural who can turn his hand to anything, but it’s Gordon who really steals the show. In one sketch Gordon has to hit Tony over the head with a large plank of wood – and we had to redo this take twelve times because everyone was laughing so much, particularly Gordon! Well, maybe not everyone – Tony was a bit miffed but he soon cheered up when we confirmed the details of his fee! He told us he’s going to speak to Ken Dodd for some tax advice and asked to be paid in used notes – what a guy!”

The sketch – ‘Mr Brown’s Boys’ – is also expected to feature Douglas Alexander, Jim Murphy and Lord Foulkes as Granddad, and the ladies aren’t forgotten – Margaret Curran and Johann Lamont have confirmed that they will be taking part.

However while some politicians see the show as just a bit of fun some Holyrood politicians are furious that referendum coverage is to be scaled back and are particularly scathing about the game show phone vote plans.

Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond said: “This decision is almost beyond belief and it shows the depths to which the Londoncentric BBC has plummeted – it takes ‘dumbing down’ to a whole new level. Perhaps the BBC is punishing Scotland for River City and our Hogmanay Specials, but this is a step too far. I have nothing against Dale Winton, or any other orange people – indeed I remain a huge fan of Supermarket Sweep – but the future of our nation cannot be decided by a phone-in during a game show, no matter how entertaining that game show may be. Scotland deserves better”.

A spokesperson for the Electoral Reform Society was less dismissive, however. “Lots of people just can’t be bothered voting, and as we believe that as many people as possible should take part in the democratic process we welcome this bold initiative. Eyebrows have been raised about the cost of phoning in to register your vote, but everything costs money these days and let’s be blunt: poor people don’t normally vote anyway, and if they can’t afford to phone in but still want to vote they can troop down to their local polling station if they want to. More affluent viewers will have the opportunity of voting as often as they can afford without having to leave the comfort of their own armchair.

“As we see it, you’ll get more people voting, which is great for democracy, and the premium rate phone numbers will boost the much-loved BBC’s income. It’s a win, win situation but we would remind voters – particularly younger callers – to get the bill payer’s permission before phoning in”.

He went on: “The BBC is clearly thinking outside the box – the box, geddit? – and we hope that this new form of engagement will encourage more people to participate. We think it deserves to be a success, and if it works in Scotland in September I’m sure it will be rolled out across the rest of the UK – I believe that’s happened before. This could be a bold new dawn, both for democracy and for public service broadcasting.”

It’s understood that STV are now also rethinking their referendum coverage. While refusing to comment on programme plan details, a senior executive confirmed: “What the BBC broadcasts is up to them. Our own plans are a closely-guarded secret and will remain so until nearer the time – October or November perhaps. Yes, we have been speaking to both Johnny Beattie and Ronnie Corbett but we talk to top showbiz celebrities all the time – some mischievous media people are clearly speculating, putting two and two together and coming up with four.”

Budget: ‘government is leaving retirement to chance’

‘Pensions ‘fiddle’ proves government is leaving retirement to chance‘

Britain’s biggest pensioners’ organisation The National Pensioners Convention (NPC) say pension changes in the recent Budget will simply store up bigger problems for later. The group adds that the private pensions industry might ‘make a killing’ but changes proposed by the Chancellor do not address the underlying problems of funding an adequate income in retirement.

The NPC’s main objective is to promote the welfare and interests of all pensioners, as a way of securing dignity, respect and financial security in retirement, and the organisation believes that the Chancellor’s real intention is to place further responsibility for retirement onto individuals and the market, rather than seeing it as a role for the government. The campaigning group adds that welfare caps, pensioner bonds and changes to pensions prove government ‘is leaving retirement to chance’.

Dot Gibson, NPC general secretary said: “Pensioners will be concerned that benefits such as the winter fuel allowance, cold weather payments and the Christmas Bonus have all been placed into the welfare cap, which could lead to cuts in the future, at a time when fuel bills in particular are continuing to rise. The announcements regarding a new Pensioner Bond and changes to ISAs were also rather rose-tinted. 55 per cent of all pensioners receive less than £10 from their savings and 29 per cent of older couples have less than £1500 put aside.

“The idea that older people therefore have huge amounts of money to invest is rather optimistic, but the most serious change was related to defined contribution pensions. These reveal that more has to be done to improve the prospects for future pensioners. The state pension is one of the worst in Europe and the high water mark of decent company pensions has long gone.”

She went on: “However, allowing people to take all their pension pot doesn’t make the pot any bigger and belies the fact that the average worker will have a pension pot of little more than £30,000 to cover all of their retirement. Enabling people to take their pensions from aged 55 also shows the chancellor has realised there is a huge problem coming down the line which has to be funded. His plans to raise the state pension age to 68 will create an army of older workers, who if lose their jobs in their late fifties will be unable to find work. The only way they will have to fund this period of limbo until they reach retirement age will be to use their pensions – which might solve the problem in the short-term but will store up bigger problems later on when their money starts to run out.

“Once again it’s a pensions’ fiddle and those left to carry the burden will be some of the lowest paid workers.

“The reality is money purchase defined contribution pension schemes are simply not the answer to funding a decent income in retirement. The private pensions industry might make a killing from the schemes but most workers end up with much less than they thought.”

For further information about the National Pensioners Convention visit www.npcuk.org or email npc.scotland@yahoo.co.uk

Six months to go: gamble or golden opportunity?

With just six months to go until Scotland’s date with destiny the politicians have been having their say once again. To varying degrees the Better Together parties – Conservative, Labour and the Lib Dems – all now support the granting of further powers to the Scottish Parliament, the ‘Devo Max’ option, but the SNP and Greens argue that Scotland can only fulfill it’s potential through independence.

Prime Minister David Cameron told the Conservative Party conference in Edinburgh last weekend: “A vote for No is not a vote for no change. We are committed to making devolution work better still – not because we want to give Alex Salmond a consolation prize if Scotland votes No, but because it’s the right thing to do. Giving the Scottish Parliament greater responsibility for raising more of the money it spends – that’s what Ruth (Davidson) believes, and I believe it too.”

The prime minister added: “Here’s the re-cap. Vote ‘Yes’ – that is total separation. Vote ‘No’ – that can mean further devolution, more power to the Scottish people and their parliament, but with the crucial insurance policy that comes with being part of the UK.”

He was supported today by Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael, who said: “With just six months to go until voters make their choice in the Scottish independence referendum, voters need to remember that a referendum is not like an election. You cannot change your mind in five years’ time if you do not like the choice you make. Once the union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland has been unpicked there will be no going back.

“The UK has been the most successful social, political and economic union that the world has ever seen. The decision to end it is not one that any sensible person would want to take lightly.

“It’s important to realise that a vote for independence is a gamble – there are simply too many unanswered questions, particularly regarding currency, pensions and the economy. Why would anyone want to leave a successful union – which has helped Scotland prosper for generations – for such an uncertain future?

“That’s why, as a Scot, I appeal to all voters to get the facts and consider what is best for our future. And we also need to remember that it’s not just our future which is at stake – what kind of Scotland do we want our children and grandchildren to inherit?”

Scottish Labour chose to launch their devolution commission findings today. Introducing the report, Leader Johann Lamont said: “I set up Scottish Labour’s devolution commission because it was clear that while the majority of Scots want to stay part of the United Kingdom, they want a stronger Scottish Parliament.

“With colleagues from Holyrood, Westminster, the European Parliament, local government, the trade unions and party members, I wanted to have a debate about where power should best lie to serve the people of Scotland, so I am pleased to publish our plans to strengthen devolution today before putting them to our party conference on Friday.

“The commission has worked hard to ensure that our proposals are consistent with Scotland remaining strong in the United Kingdom but also give us the flexibility to do things differently where we want to.

“We have engaged widely with business, trade unions, academics and constitutional experts and believe this is the most comprehensive package of devolution while also allowing Scotland the security and certainty of the United Kingdom.

“I believe it will make our parliament more accountable and more progressive. We also want to see power devolved from Holyrood down to local government and our communities.

“Labour should be proud of our record on devolution. It was a Labour Government that brought about the Scottish Parliament 15 years ago and we initiated the Calman process which resulted in greater tax and borrowing powers for Holyrood through the Scotland Act.

“With six months to go until Scotland decides on its future, our devolution proposals set out part of our positive alternative to the narrow politics of nationalism. Labour has always been the party of change, and we will change Scotland for the better.”

However ‘Yes Scotland’ supporters argue that the changes being proposed by the Unionist parties do not go far enough and will not solve Scotland’s problems.

Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said a ‘No’ vote would mean handing control “straight back to Westminster” and she gave six reasons why Scotland should vote for independence: more jobs, control of taxes, protecting the NHS, not ending up with Conservative governments we don’t vote for, the prospect of retiring later than south of the Border and the creation of an oil fund to make the most of Scotland’s North Sea resources.

“Today I am setting out six reasons for Yes with six months to go,” Ms Sturgeon said. “The referendum is a choice between taking Scotland’s future into Scotland’s hands or leaving our future in the hands of an out-of-touch Westminster establishment.

“The No campaign call themselves Project Fear but we have seen a move to Project Threat in recent days with increasingly over-the-top comments. So it’s no wonder that support for Yes continues to advance in the polls while the No campaign has stalled, with a swing of only around 5 per cent now needed to secure a Yes vote.”

Scottish Green Party leader Patrick Harvie also believes that a ‘yes’ vote could transform Scotland. He said: “I urge those who are as yet undecided to seize the opportunity to challenge both sides in this debate, and consider whether a Yes or a No gives the best chance of transforming Scotland into the more equal, more sustainable and more democratic society we’re capable of becoming.

“Green Yes campaigners are reaching out to communities across Scotland. For us a Yes vote gives the best chance of achieving the kind of Scotland where wealth is more fairly shared, where nuclear weapons have no place and where communities have real power.”

Gloves come off over currency union

A currency union in the event of a vote for independence ‘would not be in the interests of either the people of Scotland or the remaining UK’, Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne told an Edinburgh audience on Thursday. Unsurprisingly his claims have been rubbished by supporters of independence, but while the two sides disagree over currency union, one thing is clear – the gloves are well and truly off …

Mr Osborne’s speech follows official Treasury advice that in the event of independence they would not recommend a currency union to the Government of the continuing UK, and in an unusual departure from procedure he also published the advice he received from the Treasury Permanent Secretary on whether to join a currency union should Scotland become independent.

Speaking at the Point Hotel on Thursday, the Chancellor said: “I hope passionately that the people of Scotland choose to stay within our family of nations in the United Kingdom. I want Scotland to keep the pound and the economic security that it brings. But it is clear to me I could not as Chancellor recommend that we could share the pound with an independent Scotland. The evidence shows it wouldn’t work. It would cost jobs and cost money and wouldn’t provide economic security for Scotland or for the rest of the UK.I don’t think any other Chancellor of the Exchequer would come to a different view.

“The Scottish government says that if Scotland becomes independent there will be a currency union and Scotland will share the pound. People need to know – that is not going to happen.”

The Treasury also published the detailed analysis on the economics of a currency union which underpins its advice to the Chancellor. The paper states that while the United Kingdom is one of the most successful monetary, fiscal and political unions in history, the fiscal and financial risks of entering into a currency union with a separate Scottish state would be too great.

The analysis states:

UK is a successful union because taxation, spending, monetary policy and financial stability policy are coordinated across the whole UK, with risks pooled and clear political accountability

Scotland’s economy would be more exposed in the event of independence, with greater risks from shocks in the financial and energy sectors
in a currency union, the continuing UK would be exposed to much greater risk from a separate Scotland, with the possibility of continuing UK taxpayers being asked to support that state in the event of a fiscal or financial shock
if people in Scotland vote for independence, the Treasury would advise the continuing UK Government against entering into a currency union with an independent Scotland

The Chancellor’s view was supported by the finance spokespersons of both the other main Westminster parties.

The announcement was also welcomed by the Better Together campaign. Former Chancellor Alistair Darling, who leads the campaign, said: “If we vote to leave the UK in September, Scotland will not be able to keep the pound. That is the message Scotland must keep in mind when deciding how to vote. This was the day on which Alex Salmond’s bluff and bluster about independence came face to face with reality.

“Why would taxpayers in England want to bail out the banks of what would be a foreign country? Why would a continuing UK Treasury accept a veto from what would be a foreign government over tax, spending and borrowing?

“And why would Scotland agree to have its budget subject to a veto by the rest of the UK? That’s how a currency union works. You only have to look at the problems of the eurozone to see that. It makes little sense. Yet everything about the First Minister’s case for breaking up the UK rests on keeping the pound. The jobs of thousands of Scots in our financial services industry depend on using the pound. Without the pound, all of these are at risk. That is a big gamble we simply don’t have to take.”

The Better Together campaign called on Yes Scotland to explain what currency Scotland would use if we vote to leave the UK – would we join the euro, or maybe even set up a new, separate currency? Put simply, if yer no’ gettin’ the pound, what’s your Plan B?

Calling for clarity, Better Together campaign director Blair McDougall said:

“The nationalists have been in chaos on currency over the last few days. Alex Salmond is a man without a plan. First he says we will keep the Pound, even though it is now clearly off the table. Now Yes Scotland tell us we can keep the Pound without a formal agreement, even though the SNP’s own Fiscal Commission Working Group ruled this out. And Patrick Harvie, a Yes Scotland board member, today said that Alex Salmond needs to set out an alternative to the Pound.

“It is time they got their line straight. If Plan B really is the Panama plan that would mean if something like the collapse of RBS happened again a crisis would become a disaster in an independent Scotland.

“Leaving the UK and losing the Pound would mean higher mortgage repayments, more expensive credit card bills and a big risk to thousands of jobs in our financial services industry. Alex Salmond is gambling with the livelihoods of the people of Scotland.

“The message from those of us who support Scotland remaining in the UK is very simple – a vote for separation is a vote to lose the Pound. The only way to keep the Pound is to stay in the UK.”

However, supporters of independence have cast doubt on the Chancellor’s assertions. First Minister Alex Salmond accused Mr Osborne of ‘bluff, bluster and bullying’ and former Labour Scottish First Minister Henry McLeish also expressed concern over Osborne’s ‘misguided’ intervention, saying the Chancellor’s heavy-handed tactics could push more Scots into voting Yes.

Mr McLeish said: “He is basically saying vote yes and we won’t allow you to join a currency union. We will withdraw any goodwill and sacrifice the best interests of Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales.

“Do we really believe that would be the response if Scotland voted to exit the Union? I don’t think so. Wisdom and sanity would return. It would help if the Union would spell out their vision, provide an alternative to independence and offer a bit more carrot and less stick to Scots voters.

“Let’s remember that Osborne’s party want to take us out of the EU. It is the Union that is on trial, not Scotland. Creating a currency union is first and foremost a political decision, not a financial or technical one.

The UK and Scotland would have to settle the politics of this in their respective parliaments or at the polls, so the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland could have a say in this significant decision.”

Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney maintains that an independent Scotland will continue to use the pound as it is in the best interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK .

Responding to the Chancellor’s comments on a currency union, the Finance Secretary said that the Treasury analysis has been developed without any discussion with the Scottish Government – and without acknowledging the independent expert work of the Fiscal Commission Working Group (FCWG).

The Scottish Government last year published comprehensive analysis of the different currency options available to an independent Scotland. This analysis by the Fiscal Commission Working Group, consisting of four pre-eminent economists including two Nobel laureates, considered the full range of options and concluded that a monetary union would be in the best interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK.

The Fiscal Commission provided advice on:

Banking union
Risk sharing
Monetary and exchange rate policy
Duration of a currency union

The HM Treasury has had no discussion with the Scottish Government on any of these points.

Responding to the Chancellor’s comments, Mr Swinney said:

“We welcome the opportunity to continue the debate with the Chancellor on the merits of our proposals on a currency union.

“However the Chancellor made clear his conclusions on currency union were based on the advice of Treasury officials. That advice is incomplete and with regard to the size of the Scottish financial sector and operation of monetary unions is backward looking and takes no account of the comprehensive evidence provided by the independent economic experts of the Fiscal Commission, including two Nobel laureates, Professor James Mirrlees and Professor Joseph Stiglitz.

“On every one of the four points the Chancellor rehearsed today, the FCWG have already published comprehensive advice and analysis and their proposed macroeconomic framework is a workable model that would ensure financial stability and allow both governments autonomy over economic and social policies, including fiscal policy. In addition the Governor of the Bank of England has confirmed the Bank will deliver a currency union if agreed by both Governments.

“On the banking union: no country should have to bail out banks again. Across the EU and UK recent regulation has been designed to break the link between taxpayers and banks. The Treasury hugely overstates the size of the banking sector in Scotland which is in line with the rest of the UK. It is the City of London which is hugely reliant on the financial services sector, accounting for 50 per cent of UK financial services GVA. A banking union with an independent Scotland is in the interests of the rest of the UK as the sector benefits from integrated trade.

“On fiscal risk sharing: Scotland’s fiscal position is stronger than that of the UK. An independent Scotland would have had the opportunity to spend more, tax less, invest in an oil fund and still borrow proportionally less than the UK. The Fiscal Commission proposition ensures a harmonised system for financial regulation and resolution of banks. Scotland would take its fair share of responsibility recognising that ‘both Scotland and the UK have a shared interest in ensuring financial stability’.

“On monetary and exchange rate policy: Scotland would have full fiscal and economic freedom to set taxes and economic policy, as has been shown by many countries in the different currency unions which have operated internationally.

“And on permanence; all Sovereign states have the ability to determine currency arrangements that are appropriate for their circumstances. That is not a barrier to successful currency unions.

“The model proposed by the Fiscal Commission Working Group has not been considered and the Chancellor’s statement today is political and completely counter to the spirit of the Edinburgh Agreement, which commits both Governments to working in the best interests of both countries whatever the result of the referendum.

“If the UK Government is to honour its commitment to the terms of the Edinburgh Agreement, the discussion that the Chancellor has entered into today must be informed by the best evidence available. The Fiscal Commission have recommended early engagement between the Scottish and UK Government to properly address these critical issues. The gaps in the Chancellor’s analysis demonstrates the force of that recommendation.”

So there you have the two sides of the currency union divide. The Unionists say it can’t and won’t happen, the Nationalists say it can and it will. Political panic over narrowing poll leads, or a pie in the sky economic gamble?

You pays your money, you takes your choice. For now at least, that money is sterling.

Carmichael welcomes latest employment figures

The latest employment figures show that Scotland is doing well as part of the UK, Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael said today.

Unemployment in Scotland fell by 7,000, to 196,000 in the period August to October 2013, according to Office for National Statistics (ONS) data released today.

The Scottish unemployment rate is 7.1 per cent, which is below the average of 7.4 per cent for the whole of the UK.

The labour market statistics also show employment in Scotland has increased by 11,000 over the three months August to October 2013. The number of those in employment in Scotland now stands at 2,546,000.

Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael said: “Every new job created in Scotland represents someone getting back into work and is to be welcomed. Today’s figures reinforce how well Scotland is doing as part of the UK and they are good news for people and families across the country. There are 83,000 more people in employment in Scotland than there were a year ago.

“Unemployment has fallen and employment increased over the three months to October. We have also seen a further significant fall of 2,900 in people claiming Jobseekers Allowance in November. As a result there are 23,300 fewer Scots claiming JSA compared to one year ago.

“This comes on the back of recent positive news and the continuing recovery of our economy. We will keep up all our efforts to create the right conditions for the private sector to create sustainable, long-term jobs.”

Independence white paper: Seconds out, round two

‘Rarely have so many words been used to answer so little’

Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael says the independence white paper is a ‘wish list not a price list’ and has called on the Scottish Government to share their figures for the cost of independence with the Scottish people.

Meanwhile First Minister Alex Salmond has said that enhanced childcare entitlement, one of the key commitments of the independence mission statement, would only be possible in an independent Scotland.

MSPs will debate the white paper at Holyrood this afternoon.

The 670 page independence white paper provides no answers on crucial questions like currency, pensions and the cost of independence, Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael said.

‘Rarely have so many words been used to answer so little’, said Mr Carmichael following the publication of the paper.

He also expressed disappointment that the Scottish Government had deliberately sought to ignore the uncertainties and difficulties of independence. He said it was astonishing that the Scottish Government had refused to put a price tag on independence even though their private cabinet paper had discussed costs.

Mr Carmichael said: “This was their chance to level with people. They have chosen a different path and people will judge them on that.

“For years we have been promised that all the answers on independence would be in the white paper. The big day has finally arrived and we have 670 pages that leaves us none the wiser on crucial questions such as currency, pensions and the cost of independence. Rarely have so many words been used to answer so little.

“People will draw their own conclusions that the Scottish Government have deliberately sought to ignore the uncertainties and difficulties of independence. We are simply expected to believe that everything will be perfect after we leave the UK. We are asked to accept that ending a 300 year United Kingdom will be straightforward. We are told it will all be alright on the night.

“We know that the terms of independence would need to be negotiated with many countries including the rest of the UK and the EU. An honest assessment of the challenges and uncertainties of leaving the UK would have seriously helped the debate between now and September. Instead we have been given a wish with no price list. Today was their chance to level with people. They have chosen a different path and people in Scotland will judge them on that.

“It is astonishing that the Scottish Government can sit in private discussing the costs of independence and then refuse to share those figure with the Scottish people. John Swinney’s leaked paper said it would cost £600m every year to run an independent tax system but today we saw nothing about that.

“It looks more and more like the Scottish Government will continue to keep these things private. If they had convincing answers then today really would have been the day to share them with everyone. From now until September 18th we will keep making the positive case for the UK. It works well for Scotland. It gives us the best of both worlds. It offers us a better future. We will fight hard to preserve it against those who have been obsessed with independence for their entire political lives but now seek to disguise it.”

‘transformational change in childcare’

Improved childcare entitlements is one of the most eye-catching sections in the white paper – and would be very popular – but some critics have suggested that the Scottish Government could act now to improve childcare and need not wait for independence.

The Scottish Government says families will save up to an estimated £4,600 per child, per year under plans to extend childcare to every child from the age of one. The proposed entitlement in an independent Scotland is for 30 hours of childcare each week – the same number of hours as a child in school.

The move would benefit around 240,000 children, 212,000 families and has the additional benefit of allowing more women to return to work by removing the barrier of childcare costs.

Implementation would be phased and the proposal will see the workforce expand in line with the hours, creating up to 35,000 jobs in the childcare sector, mainly for women.

The Holyrood government says independence offers the opportunity to bring in this proposal as tax revenues generated by more women returning to work will stay in Scotland. Under devolution, increases in tax revenues – and savings from reduced benefits claims – go to Westminster.

Speaking ahead of a debate on ‘Scotland’s Future – Your Guide to an Independent Scotland’ in the Scottish Parliament, First Minister Alex Salmond said:

“Independence would enable us to bring about a transformational change in childcare. The early years are the most crucial years in a child’s development. Our plan will provide high quality childcare that is both flexible and affordable for parents.

“Our current childcare costs are lower than the rest of the UK but every working family with children knows it is a real burden on the family finances. Improving access to quality childcare will not just benefit children – it will help many more women into work.

“At the moment, without all the powers of independence, we have managed to prioritise childcare and are increasing the number of hours from 412.5 to 600.

“Independence offers us the powers to go much further. If we matched, for example, the female labour market participation of Sweden, this would generate an extra £700 million in tax revenue. As we progressively expand childcare, the tax revenue generated would pay for further expansion. Without independence, however, that revenue would leave Scotland, go to Westminster and not be available to fund the further expansion we need.

“With independence, we would keep this revenue here in Scotland to reinvest it in childcare for all, a model we know from countries such as Netherlands works well for children’s development, female participation in the labour market and the wider economy.

“This transformational change in childcare will help give children the best start in life, allow parents to choose to work without worrying about costs and create up to 35,000 new jobs. This is just one of the many opportunities to make Scotland a fairer, more prosperous country through independence.”

Government set to act on pay day lenders

The Westminster government is to introduce legislation to cap the cost of payday loans. In a move that’s likely to be welcomed by campaigners, the Treasury says there is “growing evidence” in support of the move.

The cap will be included in the Banking Reform Bill, which is currently going through Parliament, and the level of the cap will be decided by the new regulator the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

Chancellor George Osborne told the BBC there will be controls on charges – things like arrangement and penalty fees – as well as on interest rates. “It will not just be an interest rate cap, you’ve got to cap the overall cost of credit,” he said.

Although the level of the cap is yet to be determined, the announcement will be welcomed by opposition and campaign groups who have been urging the government to take action against some pay-day lenders’ practices: eye-watering interest rates and hidden charges which hit the poorest hardest and drive desperate people deeper into debt.

Just last week, Citizens Advice Scotland claimed that many payday lenders in Scotland are breaking the promises they made last year to clean up their act. According to CAS research, lenders continued to break ‘most of the pledges in their own code.’

The main points were:

less than half of payday lenders in Scotland are telling people that loans should not be used for long-term financial problems;
only 1 in 3 are checking peoples’ financial background before giving them a loan;
only 14% of customers felt the lender was sympathetic when they got into difficulties repaying the loan; and
only a third of lenders are warning their customers about the dangers of roll-over loans.

CAS Chief Executive Margaret Lynch said: “When the payday lenders published this voluntary code last year we made clear we would be watching them like a hawk to make sure they kept to their word. Because there’s no point making promises if you don’t live up to them.

“Our survey results – together with the experience of other clients we see every day in the CAB – show very clearly that this Code of Conduct Is being ignored repeatedly.

“Across Scotland, CAB advisers are currently seeing over 100 cases every week of people who are in crisis debt to a payday lender. That’s a third higher than this time last year. Our evidence is that many lenders are operating in ways that result in people getting into debts they can’t handle.

“So the Payday Lenders have had their chance to clean up the industry, and they have failed. It’s time now for the regulators to step in and do it properly.”

Local MP backs Living Wage

This is Living Wage Week and Mark Lazarowicz MP has backed Labour’s plans to raise wages for thousands of low-paid workers in Edinburgh.

If the party wins power at the next General Election, Labour says it will introduce new tax breaks for employers that commit to paying the living wage – currently set at £7.65 in Scotland. As well as making sure work really pays, it will also help cut benefit bills through savings in lower tax credits and benefit payments.

The North and Leith MP (pictured below) said: “In-work poverty has risen sharply so that many families that are being forced to turn to food banks or take out pay-day loans actually have a wage coming in. It is simply wrong that almost 60% of children in poverty in the UK come from households where at least one person is working.

“I know there are already councils like the City Council here in Edinburgh and private employers as well who are doing the right thing by their staff and paying the living wage. I strongly support Ed Miliband’s plans to encourage more employers to do the same so that hard-working staff are treated decently and paid a fair wage.”

As well as the City of Edinburgh Council, Fife, East Lothian, Falkirk and Scottish Borders Councils have also committed to paying the living wage.

Under Labour’s plans, firms that commit to paying their employees the living wage in the first year of the next Parliament will be offered a 12 month tax rebate of up to £1,000 for each individual worker that receives a pay rise. The money would be funded directly from increased income tax and National Insurance revenues.

Scotland and the UK: safer together?

Threats to Scotland and the UK from organised crime gangs, cyber criminals and global terrorism are best confronted with Scotland inside the UK, Home Secretary Theresa May claimed today. However ‘Yes’ campaigners have been quick to challenge the Home Secretary’s analysis and say that Scotland will continue to work closely with international partners on security issues.

The Home Secretary (pictured below) was in Edinburgh to launch ‘Scotland analysis: Security’, the seventh in a series of UK government papers to inform the debate ahead of next year’s independence referendum.

The paper examines how the UK and Scotland derive mutual benefit from an integrated approach to security, cyber, justice and policing, as well as from security exports and our international alliances and relationships.

The possible consequences for both Scotland and the continuing UK of a vote for independence are subject to analysis in the paper. It stresses that while the UK does work with other countries, such as the Republic of Ireland, to improve security and fight organised crime, there is a significant difference between these relationships and Scotland’s current position as a privileged and influential part of the UK.

The analysis concludes that independence could disturb the united protection provided to Scotland by the UK’s security and intelligence architecture. The report suggests:

Scotland facing a technically complex and expensive requirement to establish its security infrastructure. In the meantime, there would be a risk to both Scotland and the continuing UK of diminished security.
Scotland no longer being covered by the UK’s National Cyber Security Programme, which strengthens the services the public rely on and makes the UK a safer place for businesses to operate.
Co-operation between Police Scotland and other UK forces may not be as straightforward as it is now. Long established UK-wide laws make it easier to pursue justice across borders despite different legal systems and police jurisdictions.
A limit to the amount of information the continuing UK would be able to share with Scotland. Under the “Control Principle”, the UK could not share the kind of information used to fight and counter terrorism with Scotland, passed to it by another country, unless the UK had that country’s consent.

Home Secretary Theresa May said:

“This report sets out in plain terms the security consequences of independence, not just for Scotland but for the UK as a whole. Undoubtedly we are stronger and safer together.

“The national security risks the UK faces are complex and changing. Terrorists and organised criminals will seek new ways to exploit any weakness in our justice and policing capabilities, and the scale of emerging threats, such as cyber crime, demands a comprehensively resourced response.

Now is the time to work more closely together for the security of all citizens of the UK.”

The UK government believes that Scotland is better off as part of the UK, and that the UK is stronger, safer and more secure with Scotland as part of it.

In the event of a vote in favour of leaving the UK, Scotland would become an entirely new state and would have to establish its own security arrangements.

However, supporters of independence have been quick to refute the Home Secretary’s claims. The Scottish government said that, in the event of independence, Scotland would work closely with the rest of the UK and international partners on security and intelligence matters.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill (pictured above) told the BBC: “These claims are wrong – not least because Scotland is already an independent jurisdiction when it comes to policing and justice issues, and current cross-border cooperation shows how well that can work to combat terrorism and other threats.

“An independent Scotland will have first-rate security arrangements to counter any threats we may face. And we will continue to work in very close collaboration with the rest of the UK and international partners on security and intelligence matters, which is in everyone’s interests.”

Westminster congratulations for Professor Peter Higgs

Mark Lazarowicz MP put down a Parliamentary motion, an ‘Early Day Motion’, last week to congratulate Edinburgh’s Professor Peter Higgs on the award of this year’s Nobel Prize for Physics. Among those supporting the North and Leith MP’s motion were fellow Edinburgh MPs Alistair Darling and Mike Crockart.

Professor Peter Higgs, who is now Emeritus Professor of Theoretical Physics at the University of Edinburgh, was awarded the prize in recognition of his theoretical discovery of the origins of mass of the fundamental particles that make up the world. His theoretical work first published in 1964 was confirmed in July 2012 – almost half a century later – by the Hadron Collider based in Switzerland showing just how groundbreaking his work was.

A shy and modest man, Professor Higgs shares the prize with a Belgian physicist,François Englert, who also published on the same subject in the summer of 1964.

Mark Lazarowicz said: “Professor Higgs’ achievement has at last received the long awaited recognition of the award of the Nobel Prize, and as the MP for the constituency where Professor Higgs lives I wanted to make sure that achievement and award was marked by Parliament also.”

Professor Higgs has announced that he will formally retire next year, when he is 85.