Opposition parties unite to expose capital budget secrets
January 26, 2010 by Hamish Macdonell · 50 Comments
IT is the political equivalent of the total eclipse of the moon: the opposition parties at Holyrood have today managed to ignore their differences and unite around a common goal.
Labour, the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens have agreed on a joint strategy for the budget, or at least one part of it.
On the surface, the point they are making seems dull and unimportant but it is anything but. What the parties want is for the Scottish Government to release full details of its capital budget.
It is at this point that most observers – except public finance anoraks – switch off but they shouldn’t because the opposition parties might actually be on to something here.
The Scottish Government’s capital budget is huge, amounting to several billion pounds, and it is used to fund the really big projects like the Southern General Hospital in Glasgow or the new Forth Road Bridge.
Because it is so big, there is room for manoeuvre for ministers, particularly when projects fall behind their timetable. This is happening with the Southern General Hospital. It is supposed to cost £840 million but is already two years behind schedule.
What this means for ministers is that money that has been set aside for the hospital for this financial year is available to be spent on other projects. This could amount to tens of millions of pounds, but no-one outside the Scottish Government knows how much there is or where it is.
Opposition politicians suspect that this little financial loophole gives ministers a slush fund to use to prop up their favoured areas and projects.
Why is this important? Simply because money is so tight this year and other, not so popular, schemes have been axed by the government which has claimed there is money to go around.
Labour have a determination to reinstate the Glasgow Airport Rail Link which the SNP government axed last year, that is why Labour have joined this joint campaign to get ministers to publish the details of the capital budget.
If they can prove there is money in the budget which is not being spent, it will add ammunition to their campaign to get the rail link back.
For the other parties, the reasons vary from curiosity to a desire to get one of their own pet projects reinstated.
So what’s going to happen? It seems likely that the Scottish Government will be forced to agree to the opposition demands. If it doesn’t, it risks getting its budget defeated. If it does, it will have got the opposition on board without having to commit a single penny to new spending.
Indeed, a spokesman for John Swinney said today ministers would “consider the request made” and if any further information could be given “to aid the budget process” they would consider it.
But the longer term effects could be significant. The current flexibility on the capital budgets gives ministers the chance to pull rabbits out of the hat at budget time, to make last-minute concessions to win over wavering opponents.
Without that flexibility, all future finance ministers will find it much harder to get their budgets through, especially those running minority governments.
The opposition parties may well cheer when the Scottish Government gives in on this issue but they may curse their own move when they get into government. They are likely to find then that the new spirit of transparency and openness they championed in opposition is actually a real in the backside when in government.
Related posts:
On the whole, anything which reduces the power of politicians to manipulate things is OK by me.
Shouildn’t be a problem in future, as all a minority government has to do is to build in a bigger contingency fund.
Report This Comment
Who do you think should be able to manipulate things, then?
Report This Comment
Engineers manipulate things. But seriously, when politicians dabble in technical matters like energy supply, and consistently ignore the advice of eexperienced engineers, that is when things start to go wrong.
Report This Comment
So, the Labour party has opened a debate about the government capital spending plans. Is this the same Labour party that oversaw the overspend for the building of the Scottish Parliament building? Is this the same Labour party that is currently overseeing the overspend on the Edinburgh Tram project?
On the other side of the debate, should the budgets for capital projects be a) in the public domain and b) ring-fenced for the projects for which they were allocated?
Report This Comment
Am I the only one who sees the irony of the unions campaigning against Glasgow’s Labour city fathers reining in of capital works when those same councillors and MSPs are attacking the SNP for axing their airport rail link?
Report This Comment
This is a cynical ploy to spin the SNP Govt as inept. I’m sure the capital budget will be open to interpretation with that interpretation being coloured very much by the bias of the party involved. It would be the same for any Scottish govt of any hue but the current Unionist opposition will try to spin it as a uniquely SNP problem … again. It wont be a long term problem for them as they will simply close ranks and deny access to an SNP opposition should we be unlucky enough to get another Labour “executive” after the next election. I may be thought cynical myself but that has come from experience
Report This Comment
“IT is the political equivalent of the total eclipse of the moon: the opposition parties at Holyrood have today managed to ignore their differences and unite around a common goal.”
Eh? I know the paper was only born yesterday but we weren’t.
The Unionists have united at every conceivable opportunity against the Scottish government. Where were you when the Megrahi release was being (ab)used, Edinburgh trams voted through, the Trump(ed) up allegations, referendum bill, minimum pricing, LIT.
And please, less of the pejorative terms in the headline ‘expose’ and ’secrets’ indeed.
Report This Comment
Are you seriously calling Patrick Harvie a Unionist?
Report This Comment
Its not clear from the report how this is a deal-breaker for the budget as claimed.
Does this mean that the same complete transparency will now be requested of the Treasury by Unionists for all Scottish finances?
Report This Comment
I wonder if Labour would take the same stand at Westminster?
Ya get me?
Report This Comment
Desperate times demand desperate measures- and the Unionists are desperate!
Report This Comment
Will Hamish be followed by Maddox, Peterkin and Barnes of the Hootsmon to repeat non stories to attack the SNP?
The Unionist Alliance against the SNP and Independence has always been in place. This is not news.
Report This Comment
“So what’s going to happen? It seems likely that the Scottish Government will be forced to agree to the opposition demands. If it doesn’t, it risks getting its budget defeated.”
Would the opposition really be prepared to defeat the budget and bring down the Government on this rather technical measure which neither Labour nor Liberals thought appropriate when they formed the administration?
If so, bring it on and force an early election.
Report This Comment
Sorry if I may sound cynical,unite? they have always united when it comes to anything against the SNP,we have for years suffered maladministration from unionist parties,SNP get into power and suddenly these same parties are baying about what has not been done!have they forgotten that for years they have made promise after promise and never delivered?
As for the second Forth Road bridge,yes it is needed it was needed 25 years ago when we still had to queue for ages to get to our office in Edinburgh,the east for long has been ignored is about time money was spent on the access to and from Fife.
Oh yes may I remind your good selves that life does extend beyond Fort William and Inverness, Sutherland does exist arguabley to me the most wonderful county in Scotland and I was born a lowlander.
Report This Comment
Nothing unusual in the Holyrood opposition parties getting together, only this time it might be formal rather than the informal unholy alliance.
Just gave a look at the actions on last years budget, LIT and now minimum alcohol pricing.
Report This Comment
It’s a basic truth that there is always flexibility in capital plans: projects get delayed or portponed for many reasons and the money allocated for those projects sits unused.
A sensible capital plan will have projects waiting to take up the slack, i.e will plan to spend a bit more than is actually available, so that when a project slips some other project or projects can be brought forward to take the money for that year….otherwise you get an inefficient use of capital, with large amounts “locked in” to projects that are temporarily inactive.
Report This Comment
Whilst I welcome the notion that the allocation of taxpayers’ money be open for scrutiny, I most certainly would not welcome it as an excuse for political points scoring. The funds not yet spent on the likes of The Southern General Hospital are not available for other projects unless the original projects are not proceeding further. Looking for alternative uses for our money is not the activity of a responsible parliament, especially not in the current economic climate.
Report This Comment
The thrust of this action is to spend money in the Capital budget that has been allocated but not spent because of delays.
on the face of it ,it seems reasonable , till you actually take a step back and think.
it is like visa being late sending out yuor bill , you know it is coming ,and that you have to pay it ,instead you take the money and buy something else.
What do you do when the bill finally arrives?
it has to be paid so when it finally arrives something has to give!!
It is this kind of head in the sand financial management that has put the UK into the worst recession ever.
That said the spiteful opposition in holyrood will leave no stone unturned to try and slur the SNP government.
In 2007 the Scottish electorate showed that lies ,slurs ,and scaremongering no longer affected their desire to Vote SNP.
just as the Unionists show no sign of ever being anything otehr than negative let us hope the Scots keep voting for hope and vision .
Report This Comment
It appears reasonable because it is reasonable. Project slip all the time and for a variety of reasons.
Most local authorities will “pack” their capital plan and use the flexibility caused by delays to promote projects when the planned project cannot proceed for whatever reason. It leads to more efficient use of capital, which is a good thing.
It seems sensible to ask the Scottish Executive to do the same. Does it not?
Report This Comment
It is probably reasonable during times of plenty and you can be sure your budget will be sufficient in the future to ensure a project will be completed despite any delays. However, in times of famine, taking money from one project could lead to it being compromised in the future as capital budgets shrink. In such times it is better to ensure one project is carried through to completion than see two being put at risk.
Report This Comment
MBP,
The exact opposite: when money is easy you can always find the cash for a pet project, it’s when money is tight that it makes more sense to manage your budgets better, including capital budgets.
In fact, good capital management is desirable at all times, so there should be no problem in the SNP administration letting us see how efficiently they manage our budget.
Report This Comment
Sounds horribly dodgy to me. Robbing Peter to pay Paul then discovering there is not enough money to give Paul what he needs and pay back Peter what he’s owed appears a recipe for disaster to me
Report This Comment
no I don’t agree , I g back to my earlier point ,we have made too many mistakes by spending money that we do not have.
the Scottish Government has a finite amount ,and is subject to whim of Westminster as to the amount.
If we spend capital on other projects ,who is to say we will have sufficient money when the time comes to pay up?
we should all have learned a lesson from the banking crisis.
you cannot spend the same £ more than once!
Report This Comment
Why don’t we just follow the Prime Minister and former Chancellor’s lead and do the ’student thing’ of running up credit cards to their limits then when they get too hot, open another card and transfer the debt to that one instead?
I think the Westminster Executive calls it ‘Quantative Easing’ or ‘Private Finance Initiative’.
Report This Comment
Interesting article. It will be intriguing to see if this is reported in the Horrid/Hootsmon and, as importantly, how it is reported. As mentioned above at first glance this looks like a reasonable idea but as poitined out above, it would be rather like your Visa bill arriving late when you’ve decided to spend the money on something else.
Report This Comment
There is no credibility in a supporter of a party led by Alex Salmond complaining about the lies and slurs of others.
Report This Comment
You mean you disapprove of politicians telling lies and slurring?
So what party leader do you choose to believe has credibility, by those terms?
Report This Comment
well well Hamish, 4 days in to this new venture and you couldn’t help yourself could you.
agree with braveheart you should always have a plan “B” “C” and indeed “D”.
It’s called being organised ,I know this is a new concept for Scottish Politicians but some have worked it out quicker than the usual suspects.
I suppose if you are actually looking around you instead of having your head in the trough or being to busy organising PFI OR PPP deals you might just get there quicker and save the tax payers millions.
Sid
Report This Comment
Darn! and here was me feeling so optimistic yesterday……………it looked like we were going to get what was promised; honest reporting!
Journalists have a right to their personal opinions, but not to report them as NEWS!
Report This Comment
I don’t see anything “dishonest” in this report. It highlights the downside for the opposition as well as the SNP govt. It appears to be written in a less formal manner than we would expect from the Herald or Scotsman but that is refreshing in my view. It’s too early to make claims about bias where this “publication” is concerned. Why reflexly alienate it when there is little, if any, evidence of an anti-SNP agenda?
Report This Comment
One thing that does concern me (though it is out of the CalMerc’s control) is the prospect of the trollish Unionist denizens of the Scotsman site suddenly flooding what has so far been a pretty civilised “voxpop” on these threads. It can only be a matter of time … unfortunately
Report This Comment
I agree with that, but at the same time we don’t want blogs being turned into elitest cliques like some I could mention.
Report This Comment
But isn’t the difference that the blogg is being read and moderated by the editors, so that floods of banal trolling or attempts at flaming can be quickly spotted for what they are and nipped in the bud?
Report This Comment
Is there any particular reason why my comment of 10am is still awaiting moderation after 3 hours? It’s hardly controversial.
Report This Comment
Me Bungo Pony January 27, 2010 at 3:06 pm
“Sounds horribly dodgy to me. Robbing Peter to pay Paul then discovering there is not enough money to give Paul what he needs and pay back Peter what he’s owed appears a recipe for disaster to me”
Don’t be a nervour Norrie MBP! Managing capital budgets in thiswa is standard practice among local authorities.
Indeed anyone who has a long-term view of capital investment will know that it’s wise to keep projects in reserve in case other projects slip or fail to come to fruition. Otherwise you are tying up capital in projects that are not moving….which is wasteful. And projects that could be moving are stymied for lack of that same capital, which is even more wasteful.
It’s the closest thing to common sense….
Report This Comment
Braveheart wrote;
“Don’t be a nervour Norrie MBP!”
That’s the kind of thinking that brought the world to the edge of financial oblivion. If this is standard practice in local authorities then perhaps it time to call a halt to it. It’s not as if LAs have a great track record over finance.
Report This Comment
MBP, may I hazard a guess that what’s making you nervous is that the capital plan shows that there actually is enough money to finance GARL, with the result that the last fig-leaf of cover for the SNP administration’s financial competence and honesty is blown away in the subsequent gales of laughter and howls of derision?
Indeed I may hazard it. In fact I just did.
Report This Comment
GARL? Is there bus service not good enough for Glaswegians now There is indeed already a train service to both Glasgow and Glasgow Prestwick airports. I have to question the motives of those wanting to spend Glasgow’s/Scotland’s future on a direct and specific railroad when the railways were invented before airports! It would surely be less churlish to build Glasgow airport beside the railway?
I despair at the lack of invention of putting a teeny spur on Yoker through a wee Gowf course or from closeby Paisley Sick unionist nonsense or what?
Report This Comment
Nothing is making me nervous Cllr Braveheart (Lab). I have as much knowledge of the govt’s capital budget as you do. As I said at the top of this thread;
[ "I’m sure the capital budget will be open to interpretation with that interpretation being coloured very much by the bias of the party involved. It would be the same for any Scottish govt of any hue but the current Unionist opposition will try to spin it as a uniquely SNP problem … again." /]
And that is all it will be … spin. Another baseless attack based on rhetoric, specious reasoning and downright dishonesty. Labour are past masters at such things. your post is only the start of said spin.
As for GARL, if the govt had the money for it do you not think they would have gone through with it? Or do you actually believe all the Labour Party claptrap about the SNP being anti-Glasgow? GARL did not get the go-ahead because the money for it does not exist and the business case was weak. It is just another white elephant like the Docklands Light Railway and the Edinburgh Trams.
Report This Comment
If nothing’s making you nervous then you should support the full disclosure of the capital plan… it will show how well the SNP is managing our money..
..and if the money for GARL isn’t there, then it’s Andy Kerr who will look foolish, not John Swinney.
I presume that’s what you want?
Report This Comment
I feel no compulsion to back yet another groundless Labour attempt to paint the SNP govt in a negative hue. Labour never published their capital budget when in power and they wont should they be lucky enough to get re-elected. So hypocrisy reigns at Labour Party central yet again.
But let’s look at your basic argument here over what is an efficient use of money. I think it is foolish to take money already allocated to one project and start another one in a time of shrinking budgets (thanks Labour) when you cannot guarantee the money will be available in subsequent budgets to continue either project. You disagree. Indeed, you say…
["A sensible capital plan will ... plan to spend a bit more than is actually available"]
… claiming …
["It’s the closest thing to common sense… "]
What you call an “efficient use of capital” I call a recipe for disaster. You say of your plan …
["it’s when money is tight that it makes more sense"]
Sorry, but that is “nonsense” (sic). How would you know? You have only been a councillor during a time of expanding budgets. This is the first time you’ve faced a time of shrinkage. You should remember Micawber’s sensible advice …
["Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery."]
Such sensible advice appears anathema to you and your Party. Hence the horrible mess the UK (and subsequently Scotland) finds itself in
.
Report This Comment
Somedy is feart Scotland gets a good deal! If there is an election bonus to be had this year, we be sure Jim Murphy is going to insist that he gets any applause. I think it is time for Scotland to insist on London opening up the books too. Last week Mr Murphy spent millions on producing a bleak scenario of Scotland’s tax take (Excluding everything) without producing any facts or proof of Scotland’s actual income. these remain forever, a closely guarded secret at thoan London.
If the British National Front party want to save cash, they really should begin with Jim Murphy and his very expensive under-employed office.
Report This Comment
Dear all,
Apologies for the slowness of comment moderation here today. We’ve had teething problems, which have now been extracted without anaesthetic.
We do read every comment to make sure that it meets the high standards that our readers have set. This can slow things down- but not by hours.
I’ve seen a few comments having a pop at us for political bias. Can I reassure you this is not the case? We’ll get stuck into any party if there’s a story in it. As Hamish points out in his (I think) excellent piece this move could well backfire on its architects should they be in government again.
Stewart Kirkpatrick
Editor, The Caledonian Mercury
Report This Comment
I think you’ll find that almost all the claims of political bias have come from one person (off the top of my head). The overwhelming majority of posts have complimented the CalMerc on it’s balanced view. You will never please everybody though. Like the Labour activist who wanted you to stop being nasty to the Labour Party on the East Lothian/Moffat story. Unionists are not used to a press that doesn’t reflexly back them and spin against the SNP. Indies have come to expect it and some tend to see it where it doesn’t exist.
What can you do
?
Report This Comment
Its nice to to be reassured that their will be no political bias as that is something that many of us have been asking for for a very long time ,if this is kept up the C/M will go from strenth to strength.
Report This Comment
Hamish needs a doing.
Report This Comment
I also hope that there will be no political bias as we Scots really do require some form of ‘Newspaper’ to give the facts and let us decide on the rest. I used to have the Scotsman delivered every day but no longer as I got fed up with the bias reporting in favour of the unionists especially the Labour Party.
As for the budget….hard times and we all have to pull the belt tight. The Glasgow Rail link is nothing more than Labour clutching at straws for sympathy votes.
Report This Comment
MBP “…What you call an “efficient use of capital” I call a recipe for disaster….”
The difference is that I give reasons (efficient use of capital) and arguments (as one project slips, another can take the cash freed up) and examples (it’s a technique widely used in local government)…
….whereas you give emotions and opinions(horribly dodgy, disaster, recipe for disaster,foolish,spin, baseless attack, hypocrisy, specious reasoning), etc and etc, but no logic or reasoning or argument. Just assertion.
Either of us might be right or wrong, but any undecided person reading our exchange, and trying to come to a decision on who is right based on facts, evidence, logic and argument, would dismiss your stuff out of hand as having no basis in any of these.
Report This Comment
Oh Braveheart, you really should have left well alone. Neither one of us has given “facts”, both of us have given “arguments” and your “example” is no justification for taking risks with public money in the austere times ahead. Its a landscape you have no experience of and failing to adapt, as you appear to be, could see many projects put at risk as the money dries up.
If you feel the need to tell people they will agree with you, and dismiss my points “out of hand”, it actually points to some considerable doubt in your own mind as to the veracity of your claim. As when Labour politicians say “the people of Scotland will be outraged by …” or “voters will not understand if …” . What they are really saying is “we’re scared people wont be/will so we’d better tell them they are/wont in the hope they wont be insulted by our implication they are thick”. If people are convinced of your argument they don’t need you to tell them they are. I’m happy to let people come to their own conclusions. I appear to have more confidence in my “arguments” than you have in yours
.
Report This Comment
I have decided to become a card carrying member of the S.N.P.
Thank you Hamish.
Report This Comment