Margo MacDonald, Independent candidate for the Lothians (and Independent MSP for the last 8 years) gives us a guest post today, setting out her views on some of the key policies being debated in this election campaign and her priorities should she be re-elected in May.
At a Hustings meeting in Edinburgh, candidates were asked what they considered to be the most important feature of the Election. My answer was probably not what most members of the audience expected, but after a couple of explanatory sentences, quite a few heads were nodding in agreement.
I said what I most wanted to see was the back of this futile, phoney parade of misleading spin disguised as party manifestos. I accused the “big four†of issuing near fraudulent prospectuses of their programmes for government. None of the supposed leaders of public opinion had the courage to level with voters and admit the Scottish Parliament’s impotence in effecting fundamental change. Therefore, when the piper has to be paid, or paid-off, after the election, by whoever wins, the electors will lose any lingering respect and trust in the forked-tongued politicians who sold them a pup.
In the week or so since that hustings, I’ve detected a growing cynicism on the part of voters that the promises of Council Tax being frozen for up to five years, while the money sent from Westminster for Holyrood to dole out to local councils, the NHS etc will be cut by  £1.3 billion from the current year’s block grant, leading to a total cut of  £4.8 billion in 2015. In response so far, the â€big four†have continued to promise programmes and projects without even trying to re-prioritise the need for  big ticket projects like the proposed Forth Bridge.
Labour and Tory spokespersons continue to insist that one all-Scotland police service will be cheaper than the present 8 forces. Even if the most important criterion of all, whether such a plan would continue the “policing by consentâ€Â  ethos on which our civil order rests, it’s more than doubtful that the promised savings in cost can be realised. Is it too much to hope that both parties, plus the SNP, will say in advance of May 5th whether their second preference would be for a reduction to two, or three, forces? To their credit, the Lib Dems will have nothing to do with the idea of a single force, even if it did appear to be the cheapest option. They value our civil liberties more.
The values we attach to our public services should play a large part in the parliamentary and public debates that will follow the election. The debate on how much we value the purity of no tuition fees from P1 to First Class Honours has so far been confined to the amount an individual student might pay for tuition, and when. We haven’t even begun to look at the delivery mechanism for degrees. Are there changes that could be made to the number of institutions offering by and large the same degrees?
As an Independent, if Lothian voters re-elect me, I’ll support policies and initiatives most likely to keep people in work, to keep them healthy and to provide the means or the guidance for them to access the highest standards possible in life-long learning.
I’ve got a few ideas of my own I’ll pitch in too. Since the very concept of retirement is changing due to the flexible end point to a working life, I’d like to see Parliament host a Pensioners’ Day  along the lines of Business in Parliament. Also, I’ll be looking for support across the parties for an investigation into scandalously high PPP profits. I’ll still be banging the drum for every primary school pupil to have a time for some physical activity every day…the two hours PE a week would be great if it were feasible, but for several reasons is the wrong way to go about producing a fitter, more active nation. And I’ll have another shot at an Assisted Dying Bill.
#1 by AliMiller on April 21, 2011 - 11:39 am
Hello Margo, great to see that Better Nation has given you this opportunity to put forward to your views.
Although an strong SNP supporter, I share your cynicism regarding the acheivability of the various commitments. To win will be a poisoned chalice given that so much has been promised.
I am very glad that you are going to be campaigning hard on PPP if re-elected. It has to be one of the biggest scams in history, yet governments have ploughed on with this waste of money, although the SNP has made progress towards getting away from it with NPD. Finincing the New Southern General with direct capital is an excellent move. Hopefully the existing contracts could be re-negotiated as you once alluded to.
Good luck in the election, I suspect most people – regardless of their political party – hope that you are returned to Holyrood, to continue your fine work of holding the Governemnt to account and contributing some very thoughtful and honest opinions.
#2 by Indy on April 21, 2011 - 12:50 pm
All of the SNP’s policies in this election are costed and are budgeted for. I have to say I get really annoyed about this “we can’t afford free education, free prescriptions, free bus transport for pensioners, free personal care” mantra that so many people seem to buy into.
It is lazy. It’s a kind of “last in-first out” mentality. Because these measures were brought in as a consequence of devolution people seem to assume that they are expendable luxuries and, as soon as money gets tight, we should just ditch them. That outlook is totally wrong. These policies were brought in for a reason and those reasons are as valid today as they were before.
Take free prescriptions for example. The SNP did not always support free prescriptions. As I recall we initially wanted a review of the prescription charging regime to ensure that people who needed medicines for long term conditions were able to get them for free. As it turned out when you take that group out of the equation you are left with a smaller group of people who get prescriptions from time to time – and the cost of administering prescription charges for that group would be only slightly less than the amount you would recoup by charging them. So it is a perfectly rational policy.
To maintain the system as it was would leave some people in the position of having to choose between paying for their medication or buying groceries or paying household bills. That is unacceptable, end of story. Irrespective of economic conditions it is unacceptable and that is why the policy on precription charging is not only affordable but right.
The same goes for free access to university education. If you believe as a fundamental principle that access to education should be based on the ability to learn not the ability to pay then that is the basis of your policy. If people oppose that principle fair enough – make your case. But the argument that we can’t afford free education any more because of the cuts is nonsense. You might as well say we can’t afford to have the NHS any more.
Yes – cuts will have to be made but you have to look at spending in the round. You have to look at the whole Scottish budget and say where can savings be made and where can we be more efficient. There are many areas in which this can be done and it may well be that there are things which will stop being funded altogether.
So when Margo – and others – say that parties have failed to re-prioritise they are missing the point quite spectacularly. The commitments set out in the manifestos are the priorities. If we say we will fund a council tax freeze for 5 years we will fund a council tax freeze for 5 years. The corollary is that if no spending commitment is made in a particular area then there is no commitment to fund it.
#3 by Jeff on April 21, 2011 - 1:10 pm
Indy, just to pick up on your point about ‘free elderly care, free prescriptions, free etc etc’. It is not lazy at all. I do understand your point but let me say why I disagree.
Scotland receives a block grant from London, a grant that is calculated as a slice of the spending that Westminster spends (less reserved areas). So whatever England spends is the benchmark. We could do exactly as Westminster does; move towards privatising NHS by backdoor, increase costs for prescriptions, introduce ‘free schools’, bring in £9k/year fees and we should be able to balance the books just about right. It is only fair for Scots to use that Westminster approach as a benchmark for Holyrood and consider ‘overs and unders’ from there. We keep tuition free, we have to ask what we’re doing different to Westminster to pay for it. We keep free care for the elderly? What is the downside that England ‘gets’ that we don’t.
You may have a different approach to how Scotland spends its money but, until fiscal autonomy or independence is brought in, that Westminster vs Holyrood comparison is unavoidable for many (myself included), and perfectly valid.
And, as Margo points out, there seems to be a low of upside compared to Westminster but not much mention of the downside. I don’t see how that can work and I really, really don’t want this to be a rerun of last year’s Westminster election when parties would say anything just to get into power, at which point promises would be broken.
One other point, you say that with their manifesto the SNP is showing what its spending priorities are and, yes, there will be cuts and some things will have to stop being funded entirely. Why is there no priority list for what will be front of the queue to be cut if there is a priority list for what will be saved/brought in?
#4 by Indy on April 21, 2011 - 1:54 pm
Yes I take your point Jeff but it’s still the wrong way to look at it.
Let’s take free personal care. What happens if we abolish it? Has anybody even thought about that? We go back to the situation we were in before it was introduced, with all of the same problems that led to its introduction in the first place. How much would that cost us – and would that cost outweigh the savings from scrapping free personal care? And how would its abolition affect the move towards a greater integration – however it is done – between health and social care? Every party supports that so it is going to happen no matter what. You can’ty just unpick these things, it’s all connected.
Regarding why there is no priority list for things to be cut in the manifesto – because that is not something that the Government can do. The SNP Govt said to the NHS, local authorities, police boards etc ages ago you need to prioritise frontline services, everything else can be looked at. But its not a centralised process and will vary from area to area.
#5 by Claire on April 21, 2011 - 3:43 pm
Glad to see Margo standing for re-election we need her ‘independent mind’ and her independent BIG LOUD VOICE in the Scottish Parliament holding all the big parties to account and raising the bar for debate.
I’m voting for you!
Anyone not sure what to do with their Lothians second vote – go watch the video blogs on Margo’s site!
Pingback: OCD, what is it, and is this a case of it? | New ways to organize a room
Pingback: We need an evidence based approach to crime « Better Nation