I UNDERSTAND that some time ago a snap decision was taken by the Scottish Government to freeze council tax, which I assume is still in place. Given that we hear of councils having severe financial difficulties and even going bankrupt, is this a wise decision? It might appear as simply being part of an apology for austerity.
It does not seem to me to be progressive in nature, and undermines public services that average people may tend to rely more on than the well-off.
READ MORE: Scottish council leaders warn of cuts in plea ahead of Scottish Budget
Inequality is rising exponentially and progressive taxation should arguably be used to remedy that disparity. There are deprived communities throughout the UK, rises in food bank use and an increasing need for public services.
This week legislation has been proposed which will allow only the better-off to marry and retain families in marriages with foreign nationals. As for the mantra “all in it together”, the country is becoming ever more a two-tier society and if there is to be a freeze on council tax it should be tiered.
On the matter of council tax benefit, the qualifying income level should almost certainly be raised to reflect the swinging increases in the cost of living, however as I understand it this is another devolution anomaly, with it being a retained competence.
READ MORE: No benefits sanctions after Scottish independence, ministers say
Triangulation politics around tax and other policies has been a common theme in UK politics but it would appear to get us no where, with, for example, a shortage of social housing, extortionate child care costs, lack of youth facilities and it seems endless austerity, with a clinging to a faith in trickle-down economics as the only way towards growth.
The recent further restrictions on immigration following on from Brexit will have a disproportionately negative effect on the Scottish economy, in keeping public services adequately staffed, in addition to presenting challenges for business development. It is hard to see what the Scottish Government can do other than ask for more devolved powers, something which the UK Government have been shown to not be in favour of, and should Labour get elected would they be any different?
Peter Gorrie
Edinburgh
THE article “Concerns over vacant NHS consultant positions” (Dec 6) raises some important issues.
Across the three groups of doctors, nurses and midwives, and allied health professionals (actually four groups unless you are classing nurses and midwives as the same thing), there are reportedly 6820.5 whole-time-equivalent (WTE) vacancies. It is impossible from the numbers quoted to say what that means as a percentage of the total workforce in those workforce groups, as only the total workforce numbers are given.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson defends 'let Covid rip' comments as he hits back over partygate
From the numbers quoted, the BMA are saying consultant vacancies are up 11.7% on 2022, with 210 “long-term” vacancies which appears to be a reduction on previous years. Are these vacancies in specialties where there are known international shortages? A long-term vacancy is a post unfilled for six months. Recruiting consultants can easily take that time when consultants only need to give three months’ notice. How many are retirals, how many are existing consultants moving to different posts thereby creating vacancies or moving to university posts?
Consultant vacancies are quoted at 439.1 WTE. From the data available that’s around 8% of the total number of consultants, or another way to say it is that 92% of posts are filled. Long-term vacancies are are around 3.8%. Turnover and therefore some vacancy factor is inevitable, especially when the number of consultant posts rises year on year as does the percentage of consultants employed in the NHS Scotland medical workforce.
I fully understand that the BMA, as the main doctors’ trade union, will want to show the stats in a particular light, but a more in-depth analysis rather that a regurgitation of a press release would better inform your readers.
Professor Alan Boyter
Strachur, Argyll
IS it a government diktat to the BBC newsreaders and Israeli/Gaza commentators that every time Hamas is referred to we are forever reminded that Hamas is considered a “terrorist group by the UK Government”? I would have thought the four UK nations would be well aware of that fact without the continuing reminders.
I also think it goes without saying (Grant Shapps is definitely not saying) that we are also aware now of the war crimes being committed on a daily basis by the Israeli Defence Force (IDS). For heaven’s sake, we are shown first-hand, viewing through the television newsreel cameras.
READ MORE: Protest planned for Keir Starmer's visit to Scotland over Gaza stance
It seems to me that, while Benjamin Netanyahu insists Israel is only interested in wiping out Hamas forever, it does not matter that in order to eliminate one Hamas rebel, several hundred Gazan citizens, young and old, are wired out in the process.
It’s almost as if it is a fault line that if a block of flats “might” be hiding Hamas as well as several hundred non-combatant citizens of Gaza, that to bomb that block of flats to ground-level rubble is okay and considered a success.
On the other hand, is it just an excuse and, while eliminating Hamas, Netanyahu has an ulterior motivation to rid the Gaza Strip of any sign of its existence altogether?
Have reduced the north regions to rubble, the IDS has now turned its concentration on the south of Gaza. And after telling two million Palestinians to move from the north to the safe areas of the south. “Aye right’’, as we say in Scotland.
It’s a pity our UK news readers and reporters are not allowed to say what they actually see, and not what the BBC allows them to see and report back that perhaps falls within the confines of any UK diktat.
Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife
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