Letter: Narrow pursuit of unproven ideology?

Ben Thomson of the Campaign for Fiscal Responsibility accuses me in my New Year message of being hypocritical to complain about the expense of the Scottish Government's National Conversation when I sat on the panel of the UK government's equivalent review, the Calman Commission (Letters, 30 December). He is wrong to do so.

The Calman Commission was established jointly by the Scottish Parliament and UK government. In 2008, the Scottish Parliament passed a resolution authorising the establishment of the commission and the resourcing of its work. A counter motion in the parliament in favour of the National Conversation was defeated by majority vote.

In 2009, after extensive public consultation, the Calman Commission published its report and the Scottish Parliament passed a motion in support.

Earlier this month, a majority of MSPs voted in principle in favour of Westminster's Scotland Bill which will enact most of Calman's recommendations that require legislation.

The Scottish Government, as a minority administration, proceeded with the National Conversation in defiance of the will of the Scottish Parliament. To argue, as Mr Thomson does, that the National Conversation has equivalence to Calman, and that there has been no public consultation or debate, is plain ridiculous.

Mr Thomson is a successful and talented businessman, but he appears to be obsessed with fiscal autonomy.

There is no proven positive correlation between the extent of a country's or sub-state's fiscal powers and its degree of economic success. Mr Thomson believes there is, but has produced no credible evidence in support of his claims.

In my New Year message, I praised the Scottish Government in respect of a number of its successful policies and presented eight examples.

I also cited eight examples of policy areas that deserved criticism and yet Mr Thomson latched on to my appraisal of the National Conversation like a limpet.

Has he nothing to say about the use to which the Scottish Parliament's already extensive powers can be used to build a successful economy, or is his only interest the narrow pursuit of an unproven ideology?

Iain M McMillan

CBI Scotland

Robertson Street

Glasgow

Every time I read a statement from Iain McMillan on behalf of CBI "Scotland" (your report, 29 December), I find myself saying to myself "Ian who?" and "who or what does he represent?"

I have been running a small business in Glasgow for the past 40 years. It currently employs about 20 people.I have never heard of any activity from the CBI Scotland which has been of the slightest help to me as a businessman.

I struggle to think of any new industry that CBI Scotland has introduced into Scotland in the past ten years, or any Scottish business headquarters which it has stopped from being siphoned out of Scotland.

I do not recollect CBI Scotland campaigning for a Scottish oil fund to ensure that some of the government's oil revenues would be used to boost Scotland's economy.

I can't remember it attacking the profligacy of Scotland's banks in the run-up to 2008, or attacking the UK speculators who fiddled while London burned and led to the UK's current insolvency.

When Ireland's business community backed the campaign to force Diageo to keep the Guinness brewery open in Dublin, CBI Scotland sneered at the idea of campaigning to keep Johnnie Walker in Kilmarnock.

It backs the Glasgow Airport Rail Link (Garl) but we haven't seen a rush of Scottish businessmen willing to invest money in Garl without government hand-outs.

It backs nuclear power, which is the most expensive form of energy production and which private business won't invest in without government hand-outs.

In fact, maybe someone could tell us what CBI Scotland and Iain McMillan do. See if you can squeeze it on to a small postcard or perhaps the back of a postage stamp.

George Leslie

North Glassock

Fenwick

Iain McMillan's ex cathedra message attacks the SNP for its failure to make use of public private partnerships. Some years of experience of the related private finance initiatives (PFI) provide good grounds for treating such schemes with deep suspicion.

Any organisation which supports PFI or any similar scheme has either failed to understand the ramifications of this colossal swindle or stands to gain by it. Neither option gives confidence in the CBI's pronouncements.

(Dr) PM Dryburgh

Newbattle Terrace

Edinburgh

Had CBI Scotland director Iain McMillan taken his own advice and shown "leadership" by taking "tough decisions" during the boom years then the economic prospects for the UK would now be far brighter.

When the opportunity arose for a windfall tax on the Scottish banks, Mr McMillan was chief cheerleader for their right to unfettered profit, growth and greed. Of course, CBI Scotland neglected to tell the taxpayer who was really bankrolling all this economic "enterprise".

Calum Miller

Polwarth Terrace

Edinburgh

I must confess I get slightly frustrated when I read about "business leaders".

I of course make reference to your recent article on the CBI. How many members does it have that are Scottish-based and Scottish-headquartered businesses?

I suspect the answer is not many.I would question on what basis they can be deemed "business leaders".

Far too many of our business organisations are led by people who are more interested in making cheap political remarks than really speaking up for business.

John McGlynn

Airlink Group of Companies

Clark Street

Paisley