Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 22nd November 2008

Claim a Free Glayva Miniature

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Housing sector set for £100m boost to bolster the economy



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 20 August 2008
ALEX Salmond announced a multi-million boost for Scotland's beleaguered housebuilding industry last night in an attempt to help the Scottish economy ride through the current downturn.
Housebuilders have been among the hardest hit by the economic slowdown, with economists predicting Scotland will lose up to 4,500 housebuilding jobs by the end of the year – or one-fifth of the total workforce.

This is almost entirely due to the lack of demand for new homes and the stagnation in the housing market. However, the slump in housebuilding has had a knock-on effect on other related trades and services.

Last night, the First Minister said he would accelerate the Scottish Government's social housing programme, bringing forward £60 million of work earmarked for 2010-11 and starting it as soon as possible.

Another £40 million of work will also be brought forward if Mr Salmond can get the agreement of Scotland's councils.

The First Minister made the announcement in a speech at the Edinburgh Book Festival, which he used to explain how he intended to help Scotland cope with the economic slowdown.

He said he wanted to speed up the investment of £180 million in European funding which, he claimed could help the Scottish economy weather at least some effects of the current slowdown.

Mr Salmond also said that he expected the country to benefit financially from the Homecoming events planned for next year, which are designed to bring Scots from around the world back to Scotland.

He said: "The global economic downturn is affecting economies across the world, and clearly Scotland cannot be fully insulated from its effects.

"But there are two reasons why the economic outlook for Scotland is positive.

"First, the Scottish economy continues to show encouraging signs of resilience. Second, Scotland has a government that, despite its limited economic powers, will take decisive action to strengthen our performance and prospects.

"We will not simply sit back and wait for conditions to get better."

Mr Salmond said housing was a top priority, adding: "That is why we have published the next steps for our housing policy, and why up to £100 million capital spending will be brought forward to support these efforts and help us meet demand for affordable housing.

"As part of the full programme we are announcing to meet the immediate economic challenges, promote growth and support business confidence, this investment will help us maintain Scotland's reputation as Europe's place of the future."

However, Labour last night said Mr Salmond had merely reversed a cut his government had made in affordable housing provision in its budget last year.

Labour claimed that in the budget, the SNP-led government reduced the 2008-9 spending on housing by £85 million, and that yesterday Mr Salmond increased the 2008-9 budget by up to £100 million, just by bringing it forward from 2010-11.

Elaine Murray, the party's enterprise spokeswoman, said: "The SNP's credit is low after disappointing first-time buyers by failing to deliver on its promise to provide £2,000 grants and now deliberately setting out to mislead the public that they are providing new money."

Meanwhile, Jacqui Watt, the chief executive of the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, said: "While the SFHA believes there should be more funding overall for housing, we welcome the Scottish Government's decision to bring forward the allocated funding and give a key role to housing associations.

"This gives local authorities greater flexibility and recognises that housing associations are best placed to meet the needs of the affordable housing sector," she added.

And Alan Ferguson, director of the Chartered Institute of Housing in Scotland, welcomed the move, describing it as "very welcome".

He said: "This is important at a time when demand for affordable housing options is likely to increase as the credit crunch increasingly hits consumers and mortgage lending."

The full article contains 649 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 August 2008 9:42 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scotland's economy
 
1

Jimmy Le Pie,

20/08/2008 00:07:19
Well done Alex, yet again.

Onwards and upwards.

Vote SNP, the ONLY party for ALL of Scotland
2

Coileach an taobh Tuath,

20/08/2008 00:07:36

Economic Action form the Scottish Govenrment

£100M Accelerated funds to bolster the Social Housing Sector and provide support to the general house building industry.

£250M going into LiFT (Low-cost Initiative for First Time Buyers)

£25M going into NEW Council House Building

£25M to help vulnerable households facing repossession.

Saving >£500 for First Time Buyers, indeed ALL buyers the cost of multiple surveys, when PiPs are introduced this autumn

The SNP have already announced a Planned investment of £1.5 Billion to create at least 21,500 new approved affordable homes by 2011 .

19% higher than planned by the previous administration for the last three years.

The acceleration of the £100M is part of that spend, simply brought forward to bolster the house building industry and get projects moving faster in a time of economic downturn.

Clever SNP

3

Senga Jean,

20/08/2008 00:09:55
Now if we had full Independence it would be even better!
4

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/08/2008 00:17:12
#3 Senga, living in mud huts is not better.
5

The Answer,

Glasgow 20/08/2008 00:19:20
Head south to Y+H

4,179,000 aged 16+ Yorkshire and The Humber
4,181,000 aged 16+ Scotland

Economically active males

1,441,000 Yorkshire and the Humber
1,396,000 scotland


Males in employment

1,345,000 Yorkshire and the Humber
1,335,000 scotland

tinyurl.com/5byw8t

Public sector workers (paid from taxs)

493,000 Yorkshire and The Humber
578,000 Scotland

tinyurl.com/6ftpjk

Scotland has 85,000 extra public sector workers when compaired to Yorkshire and the Humber, yet still manages to have 10,000 less males in employment!!

And the say Yorkshire and the Humber is a basket case!
6

a proud doonhamer,

Dumfries 20/08/2008 00:27:40
5 Nae answers

Aye, Lad, we do not deserve to be in the union.
7

SlyFifer,

Somewhere west of Scotland 20/08/2008 00:39:24
You have to hand it to the SNP. Here is a party that in such a relatively short time, working for Scotland and the Scottish people with their welfare and future in mind raises the political environment way above the heads of the vile and corrupt Nu-Liebour lot. How little they have achieved in all the years they had to so called ' work for the interests of the Scottish people. Never happened. Here is Scotland in the early years of the 21st century as backward as ever, appalling levels of investment in the country, 19th century infrastructure, grossly and up till now, overgoverned and overtaxed. Oil rich and economically poor. Yes, Leibour, a wonderful legacy you have left the Scottish people. Now, disappear and let the SNP drive the country forward. You miserable shower.
8

Arnold Codger,

Arnold Codger 20/08/2008 00:41:34
See The Herald for the real comments:-

http://tinyurl.com/5ur49b

and after the headline was changed )too popular a story you understand - relegated the middle pages don't you think (best ol' boy):-

http://tinyurl.com/6evf2z
9

,

20/08/2008 00:44:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

Senga Jean,

20/08/2008 00:52:54
#4 Another self loating Scot? No ; even they would know that Scotland's greatest wealth is its people. "Mud Huts" How patronising. Must be an alien from Planet Zog!
11

Brian Hill,

20/08/2008 01:19:49
What the article didn't tell you is that Alex was the 2nd fastest sell out 'performance' of the festival, 2nd only to our own Sean Connery.

Neither did they tell you there was around 600 people in the audience. Which of the current opposition MSPs could do that I wonder, including Jack McConnell and Wendy?
12

somerferg,

perth 20/08/2008 01:24:19
#11 - well said - as usual the SNP government are moving forward but there will always be the odd 'mud hut' clown. As it happens I would rather live in a mud hut in a free country than a palace in an occupied one.
13

Allan(handofgod137),

20/08/2008 01:32:19
So wee eck can find the money for this, but not to pay public sector workers a fair wage.
14

democracy,

Scottish Borders 20/08/2008 01:49:48
#15 Allan(handofgod137), reserved matter, clown!!
15

democracy,

Scottish Borders 20/08/2008 02:00:46
Elaine Murray, the party's enterprise spokeswoman, said: "The SNP's credit is low after disappointing first-time buyers by failing to deliver on its promise to provide £2,000 grants and now deliberately setting out to mislead the public that they are providing new money."

Oh dear Elaine, so New Labour would never have done a thing like that and is why everybody wants you back in power, eh!!

A minority government has to do what is necessary to alleviate a problem even with limited resources from a Unionist Westminster Funding mechanism, unlike Scottish New Labour who would have done their usual, NOTHING!!!
16

democracy,

Scottish Borders 20/08/2008 02:24:46
#17 Isore says, "I doubt that you have the ability to predict the future, so your statement indicates that you seem to be prepared to base your future circumstances on a gamble".

No, Senga Jean is an optimist and NOT a spineless pessimist like you. When a people wishes independence then you fight for your aims. Of course there are no guarantees, if you want one of those, then buy a toaster.

Guarantees are only for Unionist wimps who want their mummies to compensate them if they lose a few pounds but want to keep it all to themselves if they gain.

The perfect description of a gutless Unionist!!!!!
17

Castaway,

20/08/2008 02:49:26
It is apparent that with each passing day the Westminster Government and especially our Scottish constituency MP's are becoming more remote from the Scottish people.
18

Col. Blimp­IV*,

20/08/2008 03:12:05
#17 Isore

When Jesus told the story about the rich man, the camel and the eye of a neeedle...the must have had you in mind.
19

Longdirk Maceth,

NZ 20/08/2008 03:12:59
#4 Rufus T. Firefly, Care to explain that baseless rant?
Well done Mr Salmond,leading from the front.


20

Col. Blimp­IV*,

20/08/2008 04:37:29
#24 Isore

Analogy - Kingdom of God = Independent Scotland(king optional)

'The Camel and the Eye of the Needle'

People's New Testament

Matthew 19:24 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man (i.e. as already explained, one who trusts in riches) to enter into the kingdom of God. In other words, one whose trust is in wealth cannot enter at all.

The original Greek tells not of a camel, but a rope (kamilos ). When it was translated into Latin, kamilos was confused with kamelos ( camel).

This translation error has been perpetuated into almost every language in which the Scriptures has been printed.

The Scriptural statements are almost identical to each other in English. There is some variation in Greek. The needle in MattithYAH [Matthew] and YAHchanan Mark [Mark] is a rafic. In Luke it is a belone. Both refer to needles used in sewing.

There are a few variations of the following. The usual explanation of the meaning of the text, is as follows:


There was in a Jerusalem city wall, a narrow gate known as the "eye of the needle". It was very difficult for a camel to pass through this gate. Either the camel would have to be unloaded or pass through on its knees.

There is a slight problem with this explanation, in that there is no evidence there ever was such a gate.

In the fifteenth century, some theologians presented the notion that the "eye of the needle" was to mean a small gate entrance to a city. Apparently the architect designing the gates, forgot about all the camels that needed to get inside the city!

Luke clears this up, by carfully useing the Greek word for a surgeon's needle, nullifing this interpretation.
YAHshua selected the eye of the needle because it was the smallest opening. The rope because it was an impossible situation.

"... Again I tell you, it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man t
21

Col. Blimp­IV*,

20/08/2008 04:39:37
#28 cont...

"... Again I tell you, it is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Yahweh." When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, "Who then can be redeemed?" YAHshua looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with Yahweh all things are possible."

Suggested readings:

MattithYAH [Matthew] 19:16-24 and also cf. 6:24

YAHchanan Mark [Mark] 10:23-27 and also cf. 9:19

Luke 18:15-25 & 1 Timothy 6:10

The koran tells a similar tale with "impious" substituted for "rich man"

conclusion : you're fecked!
22

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 20/08/2008 05:14:51
local councils, scottish office, holyrood, westminster & the european union? can any union supporters on here tell me why a country of 5 million people (yorkshire 6 million) needs so many public sector workers and why we should pay them more?
23

Soup kitchen,

20/08/2008 07:03:26
Wow! This man has £100 million to play with and he can't afford his top priority?

This political party has £100 million slack and they have dumped manifesto commitments because they can't afford them?

If you are a responsible borrower, where are your police officers and safety? If you are a propertyless student where is your right to an education debt-free? If you are chronically ill, where is your right ot medicens without tax?

The SNP are the same as Labour. THey have all the £Millions in the world for stupid irresponsible businessmen and their clients of the state. If you are decent and responsible, their is no promise they made to you tey can;t break.
24

Champion Haggis Slayer of Fife,

20/08/2008 07:27:10
Wishart wrote the following post in the Herald today regarding this story.
Its a great post and I attach it below, its so true and I agree with every word!

So here we go again. Another day, another kite being flown by ‘Scottish’ Labour. How are we to understand the strange death of ‘Scottish’ Labour? Could this collective catharsis be attributable to the prognosis of the psychiatrist who’s been working with them? “You can’t hold anything back” he must have told them, “You need to let it all out. You’ll feel better for it, trust me”. Or can it be attributed to the disaster that is Maggie Broon or perhaps to the legacy that was bequeathed to him (and them) by that spiv in a suit, Anthony Blair?
Perhaps it’s the SNP. How can the SNP, with such limited resources, with all the constraints of being a minority government, with all the limitations of its powers delivered by the devolution stepping-stone, not to mention the entire printing and broadcasting media in Scotland dutifully lined up against them, how can the SNP still be so f-ing popular? And what is starting to preoccupy the minds of the dullards at Smith House is the question that they hoped they would never live to ask. If this is what the SNP can achieve with such limited resources and limited powers, how long before enough people in Scotland start to ask: What could the SNP achieve with all the powers and resources that independence would provide?
And all the while, for ‘Scottish’ Labour, the clock ticks inexorably towards 2010 – tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock...
But the roots of ‘Scottish’ Labour’s dilemma are to be found further back in time and outside of Scotland. Not in 1979 or 1983. These were the days, after all, when ‘Scottish’ Labour could still credibly adopt, in Scotland, its lofty but impotent opposition to the Tories. 1987 was the real turning-point. That was when Labour in England suffered its third consecutive general election defeat. The ensuing soul-searching in the party induced the
25

Champion Haggis Slayer of Fife,

20/08/2008 07:27:32
But the roots of ‘Scottish’ Labour’s dilemma are to be found further back in time and outside of Scotland. Not in 1979 or 1983. These were the days, after all, when ‘Scottish’ Labour could still credibly adopt, in Scotland, its lofty but impotent opposition to the Tories. 1987 was the real turning-point. That was when Labour in England suffered its third consecutive general election defeat. The ensuing soul-searching in the party induced the notorious ‘Policy Review’ which lasted until Labour’s fourth consecutive general election defeat in 1992. The Policy Review (remember ‘Labour Listens’, now where have we heard that since?) ditched all the old policies and with that went all the old rhetoric.
Meanwhile in Scotland, circa 1987-92, Labour were winning landslide victories. In the 1987 general election in Scotland, Labour won 50 seats, the highest number of seats Labour had won in Scotland in its entire history. And in the 1992 general election, Labour almost matched this, winning 49 seats.
And there was the rub. In England, the Policy Review created the conditions for the ‘official’ launch of ‘New’ Labour at the party’s 1994 conference. ‘Scottish’ Labour now had to sell this dog’s dinner to Scottish voters who were still stubbornly, overwhelmingly, supporting ‘Old’ Labour. And in the fallout from Labour’s 1992 election defeat in England, one English Labour MP, Giles Radice, was honest enough to explain the compelling rationale for the Policy Review and the imminent launch of New Labour: “Either we win middle England or we remain in permanent opposition”.
Labour won over the Tory voters in middle England, with a little help from ‘Black Wednesday’ and some red-eyed Tory Eurosceptics in the 1990s. But what wasn’t in the script of the original architects of the New Labour Project was what to do when the Tory voters of middle England returned home? For if middle England voted Tory again what was the purpose of New Labour? For ‘Scottish’ Labour, devolution might

26

Champion Haggis Slayer of Fife,

20/08/2008 07:27:54
Labour won over the Tory voters in middle England, with a little help from ‘Black Wednesday’ and some red-eyed Tory Eurosceptics in the 1990s. But what wasn’t in the script of the original architects of the New Labour Project was what to do when the Tory voters of middle England returned home? For if middle England voted Tory again what was the purpose of New Labour? For ‘Scottish’ Labour, devolution might provide a safety net, maybe even buy it some precious time. For, circa 1999, with the SNP safely marginalised, ‘Scottish’ Labour could always play the ‘Scottish’ card should the Tory voters of middle England return home early – “We’ll protect you from the Westminster Tories - until Labour gets back in down south”, this last part was always implicit of course, north of the border.
But what wasn’t in ‘Scottish’ Labour’s script was the collective awakening of the Scottish people from their dogmatic slumbers. They (we) realised and more of us are realising something that is so sweet, so deliciously sweet that no ‘cybernat’ in her or his wildest dreams could ever have envisaged it. For over 30 years, ‘Scottish’ Labour has traded on the political capital it has accumulated from creating fear in Scottish voters about the consequences of independence. But what many more people in Scotland realise, now more than ever as 2010 approaches, is that, all along, it was the consequences of remaining in the Union that should have frightened us most.
It was Marx who wrote that “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce”. If the lost decades of Thatcherism were Scotland’s tragedy then the lost decade of New Labour’s Thatcherite revisionism must surely be Scotland’s farce. Marx didn’t have much to say about the third round of history so, in 2010, we’re going to have to improvise and oh, how we shall improvise in 2010!
There is no point to ‘Scottish’ Labour anymore. Like the Union it had a purpose once but like the Union it has served its purpose.
27

Champion Haggis Slayer of Fife,

20/08/2008 07:28:12
The best epitaph for both ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Labour that I have ever seen was written in 1993 (you must admire the prescience of the man) by Gregory Elliot in his book, ‘Labourism and the English Genius: The Strange Death of Labour England?’ just after the completion of Labour’s Policy Review. It wasn’t written as an epitaph but it can and maybe should be adopted as one:

“It is otiose to commend or condemn Labour for abandoning something – socialism – it never espoused, and for embracing in its stead, something – social democracy – it had already jettisoned”.

Tick-tock, tick-tock, tick-tock...
28

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/08/2008 07:31:47
#33 Soup...... Give the SNP some credit. They have to prioritise the limited funds available to them.

Thats why £400k has been set aside for an "Islamfest".
29

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 20/08/2008 07:33:53
Can the Alex Salmond sycophants look at the detail of the announcement more closely. This is not £100m that has been magically introduced - it is expenditure already earmarked for another year which is to be "brought forward" thus leaving a shortfall in a future year. It is therefore the reannouncement of an existing budget commitment.

Alex Salmond has learned this trick from Gordon Brown who has frequently adopted the same tactic to give the impression of more funding when all that is happening is the repackaging of existing funding.
30

,

20/08/2008 07:36:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

,

20/08/2008 07:51:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
32

Saoghal Beag,

20/08/2008 08:13:49
41 Jimmy and is Isore, AM's manifestation without his medication. The Leibour supporters and unionistas are getting more desperate by the minute, quite entertaining. Anyone for a cushie leibour nomination in a safe seat?
33

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 20/08/2008 08:27:42
Wow. You can really feel the Unionists' pain as they desperately try to find some way to attack yet another popular, sensible SNP action in government, can't you?
34

Rose Bhoy,

20/08/2008 08:29:31

The great SNP Political swindle continues.

Where are the new council houses that where committed to in the longest lie in history, 2007 SNP manifesto.

Fife has seen a cut in the money going to the housing associations from £21m to £13m. This is a measure of importance that the SNP place on socially rented accommodation.
35

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 20/08/2008 08:33:19
The striking council workers don't appear to appreciate SNP management.

If SNP really wants to make a difference it should invest the £2bn planned for a cable to Norway, instead on R&D on a sub-marine turbine factory is Scotland. That gives us jobs, exports, sustainable green energy and independence from an alien nation for supplies.
36

Peekay,

20/08/2008 08:36:36
#40. Very interesting. Can you give me the source of the information that you quote?
37

Fifi la Bonbon,

20/08/2008 08:40:23
# 47 - his sources is made up by the pixies' voices on his own head.
38

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 20/08/2008 08:57:44
44 Rev S Campbell
Please read post 39

Look at the detail rather than the rhetoric. "bringing forward £60m of work scheduled for 2010/11 and starting it as soon as possible" How soon is that once planning, contracts, designs etc. are organised? Realistically, how much earlier than 2010 is this work going to start? All that has been done is the representation of an existing commitment.

So when the SNP repackage and represent existing funding to give the impression of new funding this amounts to "sensible SNP action" When Gordon Brown has repackaged and represented existing funding frequently over the years he has been accused of spin and deceit. Which is the apt description?
39

JG,

Fife 20/08/2008 08:59:47
Question
Is this money (presumably taken from the public purse) being given to private companies to build houses for sale, in order to secure a profit for the company building them?
40

The McKellarator,

20/08/2008 09:04:03
#40 I agree that there are people in Local Authority management that have neither the talent, ability or even qualifications to be there. Their fallback is the rise of the consultant. Our local authority has spent something bizarre like £12m on consultant fees over the past few years.

Where I disagree with you is the assertion that you've "never met any local government employee who earns their wage", this is more about the people you know than the average experience. I know people who literally do themselves in with commitment to their local authority jobs across a wide range services, be it bin men, social workers or even librarians.
41

donald,

glasgow 20/08/2008 09:05:51
Liebour is baffled.
42

,

20/08/2008 09:06:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
43

Publius,

London 20/08/2008 09:06:26
Can't see why we need to build more social housing. Most towns have boarded up or abandoned council houses, so we shouldn't need more.
Better to spend the money on something else - or reduce taxes.
44

thinking,

Scotland 20/08/2008 09:17:40
£1.5 Billion to create at least 21,500 new approved affordable homes...
Has anyone worked out how much that is for each house?
45

Soup kitchen,

20/08/2008 09:18:48
54 Publius

You will NEVER get your money back or have meaningful services to all so long as Labour/the SNP are in power.

"The money is there, so let's waste it." This is the mantra of the hybrid beast.

Just look what Alex Salmond has done today. Announced £100 Million for who? For Jack the Lad who borrowed too much and withdrew equity for a sportscar he couldn't afford? For greasy Ken the property developer building "luxury 2 bed flats" that sell for 5 times their inherent value in terms of brick, mortar and labour costs?

If you are responsible, decent, if you contribute to society you will never see any money back. NEVER.

If you earn less than £20k quite your job, benefits pays more once you factor in no taxes and discounts on everything you buy on the hight street.

That is the future of Scotland. A race to the bottom, spobnsored by Labour/the SNP. When all the middleclasses that are robbed, ahem, taxed to pay for all of this leave the country to settle abroad, Scotland will fin itself worse than the great depression/post-WW2.
46

Soup kitchen,

20/08/2008 09:19:31
55 thinking.

People who are lazy and can't be bothered working deserve luxury homes. You should know that.
47

brownlie,

20/08/2008 09:22:30
40 Fons

Whilst no doubt some public service employees do get promoted beyond their capabilities it is completely wrong to denigrate all public service workers on that basis.

The one I have contact with have enormous case-loads involving vulnerable individuals and, without fail, all of them are dedicated to their role in this area.
48

Highland Property Bubble,

Inverness 20/08/2008 09:30:54
This is an absolute disgrace.
Why should taxpayers' money be wasted in order to bail out the housebuilding sector in Scotland near to the top of the market? These projects should be held off until the property crash gains further momentum and building costs become significantly lower.
If the SNP wanted to truly revolutionise the housing sector they should outlaw buy to let investment. Buy to let is the most parasitical form of social cancer in our society today. These people contribute nothing to the communities in which they purchase property.
49

,

20/08/2008 09:41:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
50

Miss H,

20/08/2008 09:47:52
27 But the Scots are 'special'. We don't govern ourselves. Agree with you that is because people buried their heads in the sand for generations. That is coming to an end.
51

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 20/08/2008 09:48:45
#49 Wriggle, wriggle, wriggle. The SNP have NOT presented or "repackaged" this as "new funding". The quotes from Alex Salmond make it absolutely crystal clear that this is existing expenditure being brought forward in response to a particular economic situation. That's the difference between the Holyrood and Westminster governments - one of them tells the electorate the truth.
52

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 20/08/2008 09:52:28
#61 Indeed. But #27's comment is bizarre anyway:

"Yours is a typical Scottish rant. 'Everybody's fault but ours.'"

At no point whatsoever does the post he quotes blame any non-Scots. Labour's MSPs are as Scottish as the SNP's. The state of Scotland is a political issue, not a genetic or racial one.
53

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 09:53:52
Rufus: How can yo possibly put a negative spin on this?

The Answer: Possibly, but that wasn't the question. Begone.
54

,

20/08/2008 09:56:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
55

Margaret L,

Edinburgh 20/08/2008 10:00:07
Why have we all been shut off from commenting on readers' letters???????????
56

Alan B,

20/08/2008 10:02:29
#54 Publius

Agree with you.

Although if the government is going to spend money in this way it makes sense to bring that spending forward during a downturn.
57

JG,

Fife 20/08/2008 10:04:12
Actually, when I think about it, what's the point of sinking money into building houses that no-one can afford to buy because they can't get a mortgage anyway? There are hundreds of houses for sale at the moment and few of them are shifting.
58

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 20/08/2008 10:06:00
Does Publius want ANTI-social unaffordable housing built?
59

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:11:12
Local Authority houses (number of buildings started).

2003: none (Labour / Libdem in Holyrood)
2004: none (Labour / Libdem in Holyrood)
2005: 6....(Labour / Libdem in Holyrood)
2006: 28...(Labour / Libdem in Holyrood)
2007:none (1st quarter - Labour / Libdem in Holyrood)
2007: 432 (last 3 quarters SNP in Holyrood)
60

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:13:15
Isore is a troll with a changed moniker. Ignore.
61

AM2,

Scotland,UK 20/08/2008 10:13:23
This Green-aligned blog raises an interesting side-issue:
http://www.twodoctors.org/2008/08/triple-gold.html

Presumably 25% of the homes to be built on the 9 acres due to be sold off after the SNP/LibDem-approved demolition of the Meadowbank Stadium will be of the "affordable, social" variety. That puts an interesting slant on the open-topped bus parade, Salmond's photo-ops and the like.
62

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:15:08
Soup kitchen - another ersehole.
63

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:16:47
Ugly George: See 73.
64

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:17:31
sm753: Another cringe. What's up with you people?
65

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:18:55
Rose bhoy

Another "newbie". Where do they come from? Same pi­sh.
66

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:20:53
Offski. Mentalism abounds.
67

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:28:01
Get some perspective, nats.

£100m will build about 1,200 houses once land purchase, utilities and construction itself is sorted.

This is just another grandiose SNP claim backed up with minimal funding. Note £40m is coming from councils and NOT the SG.
68

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 20/08/2008 10:29:30
62 Rev S
I see what you mean - if Alex Salmond says it is so then it must be so. It must be touching and reassuring to have such absolute faith.

As I said study the detail rather than the rhetoric. Is there anything actually substantially different in this new arrangement? What does "bring forward mean"? Is it going to be physically possible to bring forward this building programme by any significant amount of time? - we are already past half-way in 2008.

69

Scottish 'N British,

20/08/2008 10:30:11
Intersting.

When I requested SNP Executive intervene on this yesterday/the other day (Tavish Scott item), SNP activists here lined up to a man to claim salmond couldn't intervene because this was a "reserved" matter.

Salmond appears to have pulled the rug from under their feet on this one, somewhat...

Good idea, BTW - as Tavish Scott (and I) suggested.

70

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:30:43
70. Councils didn't build houses themselves during those years but instead private companies did with funding from councils. This way, the private sector carried more of the risk.

Try to gather, comprehand and then quote all the facts for once, nat.
71

Miss H,

20/08/2008 10:35:35
81 Rubbish.
72

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:36:16
82. An excellent and informed response from the SNP staffer.

Well done.
73

Soup kitchen,

20/08/2008 10:37:14
73 Hoots

Thanks for you preceptive and considered response.

£100,000,000. Not a small amount of money. I would have thought that the SNP, if they are genuinely more competant than Labour, might have spent this on a "top priority". Such as 1,000 extra police officers, an affordable higher education policy for our youngsters, or the abolishment of the tax on chronic illnesses.

Do you have any comment on why the SNP aren't doing this with £100,000,000? If they were sincere, you'd have thunked it, wouldn't you have of?
74

danbob,

20/08/2008 10:39:54
34,35,36 Champion haggis slayer of fife hits the nail on the head for me. The stark truth is that Scotland and England are politicaly now poles apart. Scots realise this but it,s not yet registered in the english shires. As for the story well I hope Alex Salmond delivers because it,s obvious that a lot of people are hanging on to his every word. I doubt £100 million will do anything in a housing slump, but it,s better than what is coming out of London who are behaving like King Canute.
75

Miss H,

20/08/2008 10:39:59
80 Rubbish as well. The Scottish Government is simply bringing forward money already allocated to social housing to this year, which is a sensible thing to do. The other measures which are within the competence of devolution - such as scrapping right to buy on new social housing - have already been taken.
76

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:40:30
The previous Labour/Liberal Democrat government had presided over the building of just six council houses in four years.
77

"Hoots" Fandango,

20/08/2008 10:41:25
81

You just don't get it do you?
78

Miss H,

20/08/2008 10:41:40
83 Provide proof of councils investing money in housing during Labour's term in office or admit you are just talking rubbish.
79

Soup kitchen,

20/08/2008 10:43:53
OH! What's that I've found down the back of the sofa? Is that £100,000,000? It looks like it! Is that £40 for every tax paying Scotsman? Why yes sirree!

Hmmm... what a decision. Shall it be a Islam festival this time? Or maybe I could get our tiddlywink pieces back from the Ungurlish to sit next to our chessmen? Or should I change some signs at my palace and buy some fancy letterhead? Maybe a Junket to New York again? Get my photot taken with a sausage? Cycle around outisde parliament? Nah!... boring ... done that been there.

I know! ALL of Scotland complains it can't afford housing so I'll take £40 of each and every one of them making them poorer, and give it to the property companies making them richer so that the prices stay high!

Man o man even Labour aren't this clever. The SNP/Labour hybrid machine is out of control.
80

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:45:51
89. And one quick search on the net produces this example of Labour provision of low-cost housing:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/5019704.stm

Now, you were saying?
81

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:46:34
89. Here's more:

http://www.south-ayrshire.gov.uk/housing/lowcost_ownership.htm
82

Miss H,

20/08/2008 10:48:28
68 The money is for affordable housing. That's the whole point of it.
83

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:48:40
89. [contd] And some more:

http://politicsforpeople.org/business/research/pdf_subj_maps/smda-12.pdf

Any response from the young SNP staffer?
84

Miss H,

20/08/2008 10:49:23
Hughland Mighty that is all government money you numpty.
85

Publius,

London 20/08/2008 10:51:24
#69 Yok Finney

Don't see the point of your question. My points are:
(1)Existing social housing should be occupied before more social housing is built. Refurbishment will cost far less than new build.
(2) It is not the business of government to bail out speculative developers who have overreached themselves. They profit handsomely some years, so they must take a loss in others.

#89 Miss H
You cannot know that new social housing will be an 'investment'. It might turn out to be a disaster.
86

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:53:56
89 [contd] and more yet:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2005/03/08100555

Miss H, are you SNP types really so ignorant of the truth that you did not know this?
87

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:55:02
95. LOL. Where do you think councils get the vast majority of their money from?!

Do you know ANYTHING about government??
88

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 10:57:58
95. You SNP types claimed Labour never spent anything on social housing and I provided proof that they did.

The fact stands:

If a nat said, it's not true.
89

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 20/08/2008 11:03:00
#68 JG

You are quite correct in what you say. For family reasons we have our house on the market. It is a nice house, in the country, lovely views. The price is low compared to just about all others on sale in this region. There are no buyers out there! If more 'affordable houses' come on the market, there will be even less chance of selling the ones already available! I have always wondered if, one day, someone will give a definition of 'Affordable'? How about some political leader having a shot at it? I await with glee seeing some Minister, prospective or actual, squirming their slippery way around that particular task!
90

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 11:08:01
95. Miss H? Where has she gone?

Honestly, these SNP types blitz the net with endless ridiculous claims, get proven wrong every time, then they get abusive and then they disappear!

What a weird bunch!
91

Miss H,

20/08/2008 11:10:41
98 I do - you don't. I'll try and explain it simply. Central subsidies to registered social landlords has gone to housing associations - that's why it's called the Housing Association Grant (HAG). It does not go to councils. Indeed Labour has gone out of its way to encourage councils to divest themselves of their housing stock through housing stock transfer - the incentive being the writing off of historic housing debt. (We can perhaps see the magnificent success of this policy best in the much loved GHA). The failure of this policy became apparent even to Labour in recent years and councils were allowed prudential borrowing powers. They did not use them however because of RTB legislation because where is the incentive for them to build social housing when they will lose that investment? By scrapping RTB for new build the SNP has dealt with that issue and is actively encouraging councils who can to build new housing. Of course many councils can't because of historic debt which still cannot be written off by the Treasury unless the stock is transferred. So what the Government will probably do is focus central resources on areas where councils (or HAs) cannot borrow.

It's all a bit more complex than that but hope you have the ghist now.
92

Miss H,

20/08/2008 11:15:52
100 Affordable housing is for people who cannot afford to buy i.e. those who cannot get a mortgage.
93

Highland Mighty©,

20/08/2008 11:15:58
102. Who wrote that for you? Your team leader?

So are you (or your team leader) now admitting that Labour DID provide funding for social and low-cost housing, contrary to previous claims?
94

brownlie,

20/08/2008 11:21:57
101 British Pride

Quite right, Highland/BP. All SNP supporters on this site are always wrong and we unionists, especially those of superior intelligence such as your humble self, are always right.

You are a fine asset to our glorious unionist cause - just a pity it did not gain us a glorious victory in Glasgow East.
95

The Master,

20/08/2008 11:35:35
#59 Highland Property Bubble: in your reference to "the most parasitical form of social cancer in our society today" I fear you are confusing "buy to let" investors with "buy to leave", in which a property is left empty in order to benefit from a rising market (although the recent slowdown may have put paid to this).

Buy to let investors (of whom I am proud to count myself among their number) provide an alternative to housing associations and large property companies, thus bringing much needed competition and choice to the sector. I therefore doubt if even the SNP would ever be foolhardy enough to outlaw buy to let investment.
96

Miss H,

20/08/2008 11:44:09
104 of course the previous Exec provided money for social housing - but not for council housing. You really don't get this. You claimed that the Exec had subsidised council housing – no they didn’t. Clearly you equate all social housing with council housing which is your mistake.

The point of new council housing is that it is not going to be subsidised by central government. It’s not supported by the housing grant. The councils build the houses, they own the houses – it’s all independent of central government, paid for out of rents not grant money.

The reason we need this is that we can’t go on looking at government grants as the only source of funding for affordable housing because that is never going to meet the need and the Scottish Government does not have borrowing powers whereas councils do.
97

JG,

Fife 20/08/2008 11:46:10
#103 Miss H
If people "cannot afford to buy" a house they must be renting it, therefore we are subsidising buy to let landlords who will be making a profit from our (the public's) money.
98

Publius,

London 20/08/2008 11:48:26
#101 Highland Mighty©

SNP posters don't often run away. They usually keep it up until sensible people have got bored or gone back to their jobs.
SNP posts are easy to write because they contain the same catchlines and slogans over and over again. Examples are:
"SNP's civic nationalism" meaning abuse and misrepresentation of opponents.
'New Scots' meaning anyone except the English.
"National conversation" meaning monologue by Alex Salmond.
"Isn't the Scottish government doing well/wonderful/the best thing since sliced bread?" adapted from Labour mantra of 'Isn't G