ED Balls's visit to Scotland was almost reminiscent of the referendum.
A senior Westminster politician visits Scotland and tells the SNP that there will be no negotiation, and that the SNP cannot get what they want. He leaves.
Balls’s declaration that the SNP would have no influence in a coalition with the Labour Party was as much for voters in the Home Counties as it was for swinging voters in Scotland.
The General Election is still two months away. Any talk of coalition negotiations at this point is still a little premature.
Maybe it’s because it’s our first ever fixed-term General Election, or maybe it’s because we currently have a coalition in Westminster, or maybe it’s because of last September’s referendum, but the electioneering and the punditry and analysis seems to have started earlier and seems to be near omnipresent.
Every poll tells us something different and each percentage point seems to make the wildest difference.
That’s why Labour tell us that a vote for the SNP equals a vote for the Conservatives, and the Tories have told us that a vote for the SNP is a vote for Labour.
And now predictions from Electoral Calculus tell us that if we vote Labour, Scotland could end up with two or three Tory MPs.
If The National can give you one solid piece of advice, it is to vote for who you want. Vote how you want. Vote for the party you’d want to see in government or a coalition or for the candidate who you think would make the best constituency MP.
You should make up your own mind. Vote SNP, Green, socialist, Labour, or even Tory or Ukip (though if you are voting Ukip, maybe you should try another paper). You have two months to decide.
Police funding should not be dependent on value of drug seizures
IT is very worrying if, as Dr Iain McPhee from the University of West Scotland suggests, Police Scotland overestimating the value of drugs taken off the streets is why the force is facing a budget shortfall.
There are a number of issues with the Proceeds of Crime Act, but the principal of using money made from criminal activities for projects in communities affected by crime is undoubtedly a good one.
The principal of police relying on money made from assets retained is a little worrying, although we are not suggesting the system is quite as bad as it in states in America, where the notorious forfeiture laws allow police to take assets and then auction them off to the highest bidder, keeping the money for themselves.
But at the heart of the matter is that it is surely not responsible for Police Scotland to base any part of their budget planning on money that is so risky.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here