Readers' Letters: SNP government to blame for cuts, not Westminster

The issue of cuts to public services and local councils affects everyone from children to pensioners. It is crucial we understand that the blame for these savage cuts lies squarely with the SNP Scottish Government. They can’t point the finger of blame at “Westminster” as the real terms cuts to councils are three times the reduction in the Scottish block grant.

Mairi McAllan is pointing the finger of blame in the wrong direction, says reader (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

Analysis by the politically neutral Institute for Fiscal Studies shows that, in real terms, the planned increase in council budgets was only 1.6 per cent, which is massively eroded by unavoidable increased costs and wage rises. This lack of funding from the SNP government is what is causing council spending cuts.

SNP minister Mairi McAllan naively blames previous Labour governments for using PFI schemes to build schools and hospitals for the pressure on council budgets but fails to acknowledge that the SNP government still finances many projects using PFI under the, sneakily changed, names of Scottish Futures Trust and HubCo.

When the library, community hall, playgroup and golf course are closed, remember that the SNP government is to blame.

James Quinn, Lanark, South Lanarkshire

Fair offers

To assert that international overseas students are funding Scotland’s ancient universities at the expense of young Scots is inaccurate (“Free university tuition may no longer be viable”, 5 February). The number of places for international students has no bearing on the places available to Scottish students, which are funded by the Scottish Government.

Yes, we do have a higher rate of offers to international students for some subjects, and we have a higher rate of offer to Scots than overseas applicants for others. Overall, in 2023, our offer rate for undergraduate study was the same for overseas and Scottish applicants. We make more offers per place to overseas applicants for some courses for the simple reason that international students are less likely to take up their place, choosing instead to study at one of the world’s other top universities. This has no impact on the chances of a student from Scotland obtaining an offer from us.

Far from denying opportunities to young Scots, our international students enrich the learning experience for everyone, bringing fresh perspectives and contributing to the cultural diversity of our community. We welcome the debate about funding of higher education in Scotland, but this should be based on true circumstances and not a divisive misrepresentation of data which risks misinforming the public and creating an artificial wedge between our student groups. Above all, we should be clear on the positive contribution of international students to our university communities.

(Dr) Shane Collins, Director of Student, Recruitment and Admissions, The University of Edinburgh

Degree of surprise

If it is true that around 50 per cent of the university age cohort go to university (Jill Stephenson, Letters, 7 February), then that means people of only average intelligence are going to university. University is not the place for people of only average intelligence. Some of these people should be learning a trade such as being a plumber or electrician. They would also earn more money that way.

Colin McAllister, St Andrews, Fife

Baffling donation

The UK donates £10 billion-plus annually to good and humanitarian causes worldwide. Scotland, as an integral part of the UK, contributes to these good causes through its fair share of taxes raised, which rightly goes as a pan-UK contribution. It is baffling, therefore, to see Scotland – a country that is struggling to provide decent accommodation to its own people and where funding for preventable drug deaths is being cut, where food banks proliferate, and giant soup kitchens on the streets are required to feed the poor of our biggest city – hand out half a million pounds on top of the generous UK contribution to the Zambian cholera epidemic.

There is no doubt whatsoever that the Zambian crisis is dreadful, and that help is certainly required. But the UK has always been at the forefront in these cases and inevitably does more than its share.

Scotland's gesture, I am afraid, will be seen by many as another nationalist, politically motivated, stunt.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh

Tough balance

Paul de Leeuw makes makes an important point about the need to increase infrastructure investment in the energy sector (Perspective, 7 February). He is certainly correct to say that we require to strike the difficult balance between affordability, sustainability and doability and that the UK will require carefully managed and coordinated transition plans. It would be much better if an independent energy body was established to make decisions on what generation sources will best meet the criteria of affordability etc.

In my opinion infrastructure investment in energy should be by government, which would make the cost plus borrowing repayments much less, almost 50 per cent less in some cases, which would help meet the affordability requirement.

Offshore wind is put forward as a way to reach net zero in the energy sector but the evidence is not convincing. For example, the current Contract for Difference (CfD) Strike price for the SSE’s Beatrice Field offshore wind farm is £186.32 per MWh. By comparison the CfD Strike price for Hinkley Point C Nuclear plant is £128.09 per MWh.

What is needed is the whole system cost for each renewable scheme which takes into account the intermittent supply of these plants and what back-up is needed to balance the grid. Without transparency in respect of all these issues it will be difficult to make sound decisions.

Charles Scott, Edinburgh

Sunny outlook

Dr Richard Dixon (Scotsman, 7 February) says fossil fuels are the main contributor to climate change. Has he considered the possibility that our planet’s shifting axis around the Sun could be a contributor? After all, that produces a big difference between summer and winter, so any minor variation would also surely change our climate? Just a wild guess, of course… probably not even worth considering.

Malcolm Parkin, Kinnesswood, Perth and Kinross

Royally overdone

While naturally sympathetic to the worried family, do we really need four pages about the King's diagnosis (7 February), following even more pages the previous day? We know almost nothing about the diagnosis, so nearly everything is speculative. Are we really such a deferential readership that we need all this coverage about an elderly man? Really?

Brian Bannatyne-Scott, Edinburgh

Save cycle path

Aidan Smith recently made the case against turning the Roseburn to Granton path into a tramway (“Edinburgh tram extension must not see the loss of beloved cycle paths”, Perspective, 30 January). This path is one of the only green, traffic-free routes we have. It is lined with thick woodland, thriving with wildlife, and the gentle sounds of people making their way from A to B on foot or by bike. It is a vital, life-giving link across the city. It is part of National Cycle Route 1, EuroVelo 12 and Edinburgh core paths. Under these plans it will disappear forever.

So many casualties have been caused by trams in Edinburgh that the Council has had to create a special website to keep track of them. Now, one of the only places families and children can travel by bike without the risk of being involved in a collision with a tram or a car is going to be taken away.

These plans have been talked about for years, but now it seems they are going ahead. There will be a public consultation shortly. We must act now. I urge concerned readers to speak to their representatives. Let’s work together to protect this extraordinary urban breathing space.

Joseph Coulson, Edinburgh

Exploitation

The UK Government has recently responded to the online petition anent extortionate increases in motor insurance premiums by saying that it does not intend to intervene in these commercial decisions “as this could change competition in the market”.

This entirely misses the point. There is no competition in the market. All the insurance companies have increased these premiums by much the same margins – and don’t tell me this is a coincidence. They are operating as a cartel. If you doubt this let me tell you that these same companies are refusing to quote for the legally required but lesser cover for Third Party only insurance – except in two cases where they quite cynically quoted a premium in excess of that for Comprehensive cover! ​​​​​​There can be no clearer demonstration of their shameless exploitation of the public in this area.

The Government is right to say that no Commission is required to review these matters. They are wrong, however, to place any reliance on the Financial Conduct Authority and the Competition and Markets Authority which have so far done absolutely nothing.

Michael SR Bruce, Edinburgh

Hole horror

I don't think that Alexander McKay need worry about his licence driving to Newcastle in “an hour or so” (Alastair Carmichael, Letters, 7 February). Given the state of our roads at the moment, he should be more worried about writing off his car due to potholes.

John Cutland, Kirkcaldy, Fife

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – no letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.