THE fact that PFI contracts in Scotland are now at £1 billion is a national scandal. Back in 2002, then Labour First Minister Jack McConnell forced councils who were opposed to PFI to use them. If they did not then McConnell would hold back Scottish Government cash for those councils.

PFI was the brainchild of Tory David Willetts. As with the poll tax, Scotland was used as its testing ground with the Skye Bridge being the first. Gordon Brown then saw its “benefits” so he could keep down UK public-sector borrowing requirement and show the illusion of economic competence.

Free-market ideologues provided cover for corrupt politicians to divert taxpayers’ hard-earned money to favoured political insiders with the false claim that public services run by private owners are more cost effective.

Scottish Labour used “free market” ideology in order to feather their own nests. PFI is the Labour/Tory way of turning public functions into million-pound businesses for themselves and their friends. Whenever you hear “privatisation,” you are hearing the formation of a scam that will create riches for insiders while taking the public to the cleaners.

Alan Hinnrichs, Dundee

HAVING read Angus Robertson MP’s column on Friday, I must say that it has, in fact, pushed me towards Tommy Sheppard MP (It is time for the SNP to evolve and empower all of its growing membership, The National, August 26).

Now, don’t get me wrong: Angus has been an amazing asset to the party over the years, in many capacities, and he would make a fine depute under normal circumstances. However, these aren’t normal circumstances. Angus doesn’t seem to have his eyes on the challenge of internal party reform, key to this party’s continued success.

While it reads very well, his article fails to pinpoint a single concrete policy proposal, in contrast to the prospects raised by other candidates. Let’s be honest: “engaging” and “empowering” the grassroots doesn’t actually mean anything. In fact, the terms can feel quite patronising when compared to the well-explained plans of, amongst others, Tommy Sheppard’s democratically-accountable Regional Organisers.

We have a choice in this election. Our first option is to embark upon a badly needed program of internal reform. We can do this before we are faced with our biggest challenge; we can do this with an opposition which is nowhere to be seen; we can do this with the combined efforts of over 100,000 members and all the funding they bring. Our second option is to choose Angus Robertson, a “safe” pair of hands, and risk making all the same mistakes as last time.

Concerned Convener, Address supplied

JAMES Mill’s letter referring to Premier May’s one-party State, highlights what I’ve tried to impart for years. The mention of “singularity” in the governance of our country was adequately provided when the President of the United States appeared before both the House of Representatives and Congress, where he had to receive permission to go to war in Iraq. On a phone call to Mr Blair, the Prime Minister duly got in his limousine, motored round the corner to Buck House, presented the Queen with the paperwork, which she signed – and that was that!

Despite strong opposition in the House of Commons (and the resignation of a Cabinet Minister) our PM took us to war, and in the absence of a Written Constitution and Bill of Rights, our PM is – undoubtedly – the unchallenged ruler of the UK.

Brian McNally, Address supplied

IN turn, I’m grateful to Allan Sutherland (Letters, August 29) for accepting my point that the government has indeed spent a record amount on the NHS.

I also agree with Mr Sutherland that it would helpful to have a documentary on GERS. I think the delight of what James Mills (Letters, August 26) refers to as our “supposed fellow Scots” over Scotland’s alleged deficit would become somewhat muted if the flimsy and politicised nature of the guesstimate data on Scotland’s finances supplied by HMRC, the ONS and the Treasury was exposed to public scrutiny. That and the range of expenditure charged to Scotland but not spent in it (as listed by James Mills) which an independent Scotland would not incur.

And finally, in the continued spirit of mutual understanding, I do take Mr Sutherland’s point about the pressure put on the NHS by lifestyle-induced illnesses. A good number of my friends do what they can to stay healthy through exercise and next week a squad of us are off to France to play for Scotland in defence of the Great Grand Masters Celtic hockey cup. GGM is code for players who perhaps should be old enough to know better, but continue to play on anyway.

If I survive that, I’d be happy to meet up with Mr Sutherland to put the world to rights over a glass of something.

Douglas Turner, Edinburgh

THE Tory rainbow alliance (blue, red, and yellow) versus the SNP and Greens will soon be upon us, for the local elections next May 2017. It is likely that there will be many things intended to misdirect our attention away from the importance of delivering long-awaited SNP-dominated local authorities, replacing anti-SNP council alliances.

We need to look forward, not back, and ensure that local authorities embed cores of technical excellence in-house, enabling competent, cost-effective and technical innovation to be instigated across Scotland. Such innovation is absolutely essential within any rapidly changing economic state, existing or new. In contrast, the Red Tories still plan to outsource yet more local authority work in Glasgow and elsewhere.

The concerned British press meanwhile undertakes an unseemly daily assault on Scotland’s First Minister, highlighting that she has failed, been kicked in the teeth, warned, and slapped down, etc etc. In tandem, the official opposition in Scotland (Blue Tory), constantly highlight indyref2 as unnecessary, as Scotland in trying to “take control”, adds great uncertainty, to their most sensible process of “taking control”, from the EU.

Scotland therefore appears to be fighting on three fronts at the moment, ie as a nation to protect/enhance its national economy within the EU arrangement, as a country to have sufficient self-determination within the British Isles, and locally, to enhance the capability of its local authorities to serve its citizens effectively. Scotland needs vibrant, innovative and coherent local authorities, without which any future Yes vote will be hamstrung, which is why it’s so important we do not let others misdirect us from May 2017.

Stephen Tingle, Greater Glasgow


Letters II: A closer look at the North Sea tax regime tells a different story