Letter: Budget is no foundation for prosperity

AS THE dust settles following the last-minute horse-trading that ensured the passage of the Scottish Budget, it is clear the biggest losers will be the 160,000 households stuck on housing waiting lists in Scotland.

MSPs voted to cut the overall money available for housing by a whopping 34 per cent - a bigger cut than any other area of government spending.

To add insult to injury, John Swinney was able to find an extra 16 million down the back of the sofa for shared equity and "mid-market" rent properties, reportedly to secure the backing of the Conservatives.

As mid-market rents are on average more than 60 per cent higher than social rent, these properties won't help those in most acute housing need.

It has become clear that housing simply doesn't feature as a political issue in the way it should.

The biggest consultation on the future of Scottish housing was published on the day of the UK Budget. It was debated in parliament on the day the Pope was in Scotland while many MSPs enjoyed a glass on the lawns of Holyrood Palace. It has resulted in a 34 per cent cut to funds.

These are not firm foundations on which to build a better future.

Graeme Brown

Director, Shelter Scotland

Edinburgh

FOR the fourth year in a row SNP Finance Secretary John Swinney MSP has got the Budget settlement through parliament, no small achievement in today's economic climate.

Mr Swinney went a long way to win the support of opposition parties, debating, juggling and granting concessions. Included in the approved Budget was an increase in modern apprenticeships to a record 25,000 in the next financial year, a massive 11.5 million spend.

This concession was secured by the Labour opposition and the Scottish Government gave its backing.

Opposition parties getting their concessions met, duly voted for the Budget - with one exception, that of the Labour Party.

The voters have a right to know why the Labour Party voted against the very concession it had argued for, more apprenticeships, not to mention the abolition of prescription charges and extending the living wage of 7.15 to all agencies the government is responsible for and within Scotland's health service.

It beggars belief that the Labour Party voted against the creation of apprenticeships, free medical care and a living wage.

Catriona C Clark

Banknock, FalkirkWHAT would it have taken, I wonder, to get the Labour Party to support John Swinney's latest Budget (your report, 10 February)? For that matter, what would it take to get the Labour Party to back any SNP initiative?

What if the Budget conceded most of the spending plans which the Labour Party had insisted on (without proposing any cuts which would pay for these)? Wouldn't cut it with Labour, I think.

What if the initiative was something (for example, local income tax) which the Labour Party itself had proposed but not got around to implementing during its own time as the Scottish administration?

No, Labour still couldn't hack it.

What about something approved by a consensus of relevant professionals, and which the Labour Party was introducing for England (minimum pricing for alcohol, or an end to short jail sentences)?

No, no, no, that would never do.

What if it was something (releasing Megrahi) which the UK Labour Party was secretly trying to facilitate?

Yah-boo, sucks, Scottish Labour would say.

There's only one way for Alex Salmond to get Labour support for his plans; for John Swinney to get Labour to support his Budget. They would have to tear up their SNP membership cards and join the Labour Party.

The Labour Party in Scotland still doesn't "get" the concept of being in Opposition.

Its leaders still hanker for the old order, the natural order, with Labour, unchallenged, running Scotland as its own fiefdom. Running Glasgow City Council as a one party State. Filling jobs with their own, back to the days when the only serious election was the one among different groups of Labour cronies to decide whose turn it was to take the seat.

Fortunately, after that fateful election of 2007, these days are gone and the body politic is healthier for it.

Mary McCabe

Circus Drive

Glasgow

THE Scottish Budget deal agreed by MSPs this week is not the budget for recovery that the building industry has been crying out for. An additional 16 million for housing is welcome. But overall, capital investment still bears the brunt of public funding cuts.

MSPs had an opportunity to grasp the nettle on restructuring Scottish Water, which could have generated significant savings for re-investment in capital projects.

Elsewhere, we are faced with having to fund the 2 billion second Forth Crossing entirely through traditional capital investment. This will inevitably place an extra strain on other headings of capital expenditure at a time when they have already been significantly cut back.

Bold pledges were also made on the delivery of more modern apprenticeships.However, such pledges ring somewhat hollow if we fail to invest in those industries offering apprentices the greatest number of long-term employment opportunities, that is construction.

A budget to build sustainable economic recovery in Scotland would have released more funding for capital investment. This week's deal is a real opportunity lost.

Michael Levack

Chief executive, Scottish Building Federation

Edinburgh