Budget is about growth, not just pain

It should be the pragmatic rather than the ideological. The public are less concerned with the ownership details of Scottish Water than whether it can deliver a regular, clean supply, that future investment can be secured, and that it can be properly regulated.

Equally, it is not the absolute level of health spending that matters but whether patient care and treatment can be delivered efficiently, humanely, and by dedicated, well equipped health professionals. It is outcomes, not the size of the empire, that are important. At the same time Mr Beveridge ought not to get too hung up on whether free bus travel should be means-tested. It would be better to adopt the system now being applied in England – a gradual increase in the qualifying age to 65 by 2020.

Even then this might have the effect of encouraging people to switch back to car use with all the consequences for congestion and the environment. Reducing public expenditure always has an effect on someone.

The challenge for the budget review is not just to limit the pain. It's how to focus on the things that will help the economy to grow.

BOB TAYLOR

Shiel Court

Glenrothes

Your report (31 March) gives the impression that Mr Beveridge is some altruistic champion riding to the help of the Scottish people.

This belies the fact that privatising Scottish Water may save the SNP government 150 million per year to spend on its bloated public sector, but will cost the people of Scotland a similar sum or more on increased water rates.

It does not need the combined resources of the Scottish Future Trust (SFT) at a bill of more than 5m per year and the council of economic advisers to come up with a model for mutulisation. The Welsh have had a successful model running since last century.

This model loaded up a "not for dividend" single purpose company with huge debts, which the Welsh people have to service through their water rates. Scottish Water currently charges on average 345 per year. Compare this to a rate in Wales of more than 400, then the people of Scotland can look forward to a 17 per cent rise in their water rates. Privatisation would cost even more.

If it desperately needs this money the SNP has the powers to raise it though local income tax; see how that would go down with the voters next year.

I think that would decide the fate of Scottish Water.

JOHN R T CARSON

Kirkliston Road

South Queensferry