YOU quote a Scottish Government spokeswoman as saying: “We are limited in what we can do, but that’s no reason not to use the powers we do have” (Think tank issues warning over income tax hike, The National, December 11). This remark points to the fundamental flaw of devolution.
Not having the full panoply of powers is the worst-case scenario, as politicians use sledgehammers to crack nuts, or a spray gun approach hoping to hit the target, rather than carefully aimed measures.
We saw this with minimum pricing of alcohol. The Scottish Government, seeking to tackle a problem with one group, intends to introduce a measure that unfairly impacts on low-income groups, such as pensioners, who are not part of the problem group. And this is done because the Scottish Government is using the powers it has, not the powers it needs. The Westminster government, which does have the powers, is going to the nub of the issue by targeting the problem alcohol products, like white cider. The Scottish Government does not have the power to do this, hence pensioners like me are going to be discriminated against.
Isn’t this spokeswoman fundamentally wrong? And, with taxation, she will be spectacularly wrong. Without the full range of taxation powers all the Scottish Government can achieve is more unfairness; more inequality, disincentive and dissent. And an SNP government seduced into following this course of action will carry the can for it at the ballot box.
I suspect this was well understood as a means to quell nationalist ardour when these piecemeal powers were devolved. The best way for Westminster to ensure the perceived failure of devolution amongst Scots was to give the Scottish Parliament enough rope to hang itself, which it now seems determined to do.
Jim Taylor
Edinburgh
SINCE I persuaded Mr B to switch to The National, he agrees he has greatly benefited from seeing the news from an independence standpoint. He has subsequently been battling with the paper’s Sudoku challenge, which he claims is the most challenging he has ever come across.
I can only imagine that this fact is indicative of the higher level of intelligence possessed by readers of The National.
Dr Mary Brown
Banchory
THE Scottish Unemployed Workers’ Network recently submitted a petition calling on the Scottish Government to make more money available to mitigate the impact of UK Government welfare cuts through reassessing spending priorities and bringing in more progressive taxation.
Well, we’ve got slightly more progressive taxation, but what about welfare? Why will there be so little extra help for the people who have suffered most from Tory cuts – and why is this not being protested loudly by any of the political parties or the Scottish Trade Unions Congress?
The Scottish Government will continue to mitigate the Bedroom Tax and put money into the Scottish Welfare Fund, and they will fund the small top-up to Carer’s Allowance and Best Start grants for children that are already announced – but that is all they have said they will do.
There is no extra help for people who have suffered major cuts to disability payments or lost mobility cars, or for people who can’t meet their rent due to the benefit cap, or people pushed into debt by Universal Credit. Nothing, such as a supplement to child benefit, to make up for years of cuts in the real value of benefits.
We believe the Scottish Government has both a political and a moral duty to help people whose lives are being destroyed by heartless benefit cuts. We are fully aware that the attack on welfare comes from Westminster and that people in Scotland already get help that is not available south of the Border, but if the Scottish Government and Parliament choose not to provide more help, then they will have to bear a share of responsibility for the consequences.
The human argument should be enough, but failure to act will also cost more in the long run, as government has to pick up the cost of the inevitable strains put on health and social services as individuals and families collapse under the stress of fear and poverty.
Sarah Glynn
For the Scottish Unemployed Workers’ Network,
Dundee
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel