71. Introduce the City Region concept for Inverness and Highland
It is widely recognised that our cities are the beating heart of the Scottish economy. Numerous stats abound: 40% of jobs and 47% of GVA reside in Scotland’s four main cities - Aberdeen Dundee, Edinburgh & Glasgow.
And yet the previous Scottish Government had no clear strategy for maximising the potential of our cities. The parties’ manifestos make some good suggestions, but much more needs to be done. As Ivan Turok said in 2008
“If the city-region systems don’t function well the consequences for prosperity may not be felt immediately, but the bottlenecks, capacity constraints, unreliability and distortions accumulate over time, adding to business and personal costs, reducing productivity, undermining investment and location decisions and damaging long-term prospects”
We believe that supporting the cities should be a priority for Scottish Government economic policy and call on the new Scottish Government to institute a new Cities Review with a view to putting in place a Cities Strategy. The following should also be considered:
• A Minister with clear responsibility for cities policy.
• A Cabinet sub-committee with responsibility for the cities.
• A Scottish Parliamentary Committee for the Cities.
• A Cross Party Group for the Cities
72. All local newspapers to support local businesses, funded by public support
73. Establish a national investment fund to integrate public sector buildings
74. Transfer responsibility for road/footpath networks to housing associations
75. GPs to be incentivised to reduce big pharmaceutical bills
76. Link Neighbourhood Watch to their local constable
77. Develop a graduate placement programme (reciprocal) with national embassies/consulates
We already run the hugely successful “Adopt an Intern” programme that focuses domestically on graduate unemployment. To date, we have secured almost 100 placements.
Let’s take it on tour and truly enrich the interns learning experience.
78. End numerical parity for council wards and concentrate on community cohesion
79. Tie capital funding to active Asset Management Plans
80. Annual regional sports tournaments to be created as commonwealth games legacy
The Lib Dems stole this from us!
Wednesday, 27 April 2011
Wednesday, 20 April 2011
CSPP in the News - Council Tax Freeze
CSPP Board Member Professor Richard Kerley was interviewed on GMS.
Click here to listen(fast forward to 2:09:56).
Click here to listen(fast forward to 2:09:56).
2011 Scottish Greens Manifesto
The Greens were the last major party to publish their manifesto for the Holyrood elections.
Click here to read it and here to watch a feature on Newsnight Scotland (fast forward to 24 mins in).
Click here to read it and here to watch a feature on Newsnight Scotland (fast forward to 24 mins in).
Tuesday, 19 April 2011
Key points from the Big Economy Debate
Q1 Where will the jobs of the future come from?
All emphasised the supporting role Govt plays in creating the right conditions and the importance of renewables. Some individual differences were apparent, particularly in Harvie’s stance against the “Tory-Liberal cuts” which surprisingly Labour didn’t echo.
Also, Purvis focused more on skills investment, Swinney on reindustrialising the economy and Kerr on the internationalisation of our economy.
Q2. How many public sector jobs will be lost by 2015?
Labour & SNP answered this question in a very similar fashion: namely, “you can’t put a number on it” (Swinney). They both stated that there will be no compulsory redundancies too.
Purvis agreed that you couldn’t put a number on it but rejected (as did Brownlee & Harvie) the belief that there will be no compulsory redundancies.
Q3 Should Scotland’s tax raising powers be used to reduce taxes to bring companies & employment into the country?
The panel agreed unanimously that they would not use existing (or new) tax raising powers to reduce tax levels. For Kerr it would “lead to a race to the bottom” Irish style; for Harvie we need to be “talking about progressively increasing tax from the wealthy”; and Purvis focused on the Coalition’s success in raising the threshold for personal income tax.
Meanwhile, Brownlee asked those who were offering tax breaks to “explain how they will deliver it” and Swinney believed it would “impede economic recovery” - Scotland needs full fiscal independence.
Q4 How long can the council tax freeze continue for?
Broadly speaking, all parties support the council tax freeze. The debate centres on the duration of the freeze and its long term replacement.
Labour will freeze it for 2 years but give themselves (and councils) the flexibility to increase it if they provide sufficient justification and it’s below the rate of inflation.
The SNP will freeze it for the whole term of the next parliament but explore the introduction of a local income tax.
The Lib Dems will share Labour’s position but like the SNP want to replace council tax with a local income tax.
The Tories will freeze it until 2012-13 and thereafter look at it year on year while the Greens want to replace council tax with a land value tax.
5. What would you do to encourage banks to lend to small/medium enterprises?
Given this is a reserved issue Brownlee summed it up well when he said “we can’t do much (other than) put pressure on the banks behind the scenes”.
Nevertheless, there were some different answers. Swinney said he would roll out the Scottish Loan Fund, while Kerr emphasised the importance of underpinning risks and increasing the role of co-investment.
Purvis said he would replace the current economic development infrastructure with a regional development bank, an idea supported by Harvie. The latter also stressed the importance of microfinance.
6. Was the £500m spent on the Edinburgh Tram project a good use of public money?
The responses offered were exactly what you would expect from this topical question. All lamented the way the project had been managed but committed to completing it. Moreover, 4 out of the 5 parties (not the Greens) stated categorically that there would be no more central government funding.
All emphasised the supporting role Govt plays in creating the right conditions and the importance of renewables. Some individual differences were apparent, particularly in Harvie’s stance against the “Tory-Liberal cuts” which surprisingly Labour didn’t echo.
Also, Purvis focused more on skills investment, Swinney on reindustrialising the economy and Kerr on the internationalisation of our economy.
Q2. How many public sector jobs will be lost by 2015?
Labour & SNP answered this question in a very similar fashion: namely, “you can’t put a number on it” (Swinney). They both stated that there will be no compulsory redundancies too.
Purvis agreed that you couldn’t put a number on it but rejected (as did Brownlee & Harvie) the belief that there will be no compulsory redundancies.
Q3 Should Scotland’s tax raising powers be used to reduce taxes to bring companies & employment into the country?
The panel agreed unanimously that they would not use existing (or new) tax raising powers to reduce tax levels. For Kerr it would “lead to a race to the bottom” Irish style; for Harvie we need to be “talking about progressively increasing tax from the wealthy”; and Purvis focused on the Coalition’s success in raising the threshold for personal income tax.
Meanwhile, Brownlee asked those who were offering tax breaks to “explain how they will deliver it” and Swinney believed it would “impede economic recovery” - Scotland needs full fiscal independence.
Q4 How long can the council tax freeze continue for?
Broadly speaking, all parties support the council tax freeze. The debate centres on the duration of the freeze and its long term replacement.
Labour will freeze it for 2 years but give themselves (and councils) the flexibility to increase it if they provide sufficient justification and it’s below the rate of inflation.
The SNP will freeze it for the whole term of the next parliament but explore the introduction of a local income tax.
The Lib Dems will share Labour’s position but like the SNP want to replace council tax with a local income tax.
The Tories will freeze it until 2012-13 and thereafter look at it year on year while the Greens want to replace council tax with a land value tax.
5. What would you do to encourage banks to lend to small/medium enterprises?
Given this is a reserved issue Brownlee summed it up well when he said “we can’t do much (other than) put pressure on the banks behind the scenes”.
Nevertheless, there were some different answers. Swinney said he would roll out the Scottish Loan Fund, while Kerr emphasised the importance of underpinning risks and increasing the role of co-investment.
Purvis said he would replace the current economic development infrastructure with a regional development bank, an idea supported by Harvie. The latter also stressed the importance of microfinance.
6. Was the £500m spent on the Edinburgh Tram project a good use of public money?
The responses offered were exactly what you would expect from this topical question. All lamented the way the project had been managed but committed to completing it. Moreover, 4 out of the 5 parties (not the Greens) stated categorically that there would be no more central government funding.
Monday, 18 April 2011
The Big Economy Debate - the Scorecard in action
For the second week running the BBC punctured the sanctuary of our Sunday with an election debate. Out went the informal, laid back setting (and the illogical exclusion of Patrick Harvie) and in came the invited audience and their barrage of tough questions on the economy. Well, that was the idea.
The debate was structured around the following six questions:
1. Where will the jobs of the future come from?
2. How many public sector jobs will be lost by 2015?
3. Should Scotland’s tax raising powers be used to reduce taxes to bring companies & employment into the country?
4. How long can the council tax freeze continue for?
5. What would you do to encourage banks to lend to small/medium enterprises?
6. Was the £500m spent on the Edinburgh Tram project a good use of public money?
In the previous blog I explained how I would use my subjective scorecard/voting predictor to make the election debates more interesting and more helpful. It is specifically targeting floating voters (of which I am one) who will be disproportionately swayed by the TV debates.
So here it goes in alphabetical order:
Scores
Derek Brownlee (Conservative). Popular vote (read populism) = 1. Total Score = 5.
Patrick Harvie (Greens). Popular vote = 3. Total Score = 5
Andy Kerr (Labour). Popular vote = 1. Total Score = 5
Jeremy Purvis (Lib Dems). Popular vote = 1. Total Score = 4
John Swinney (SNP). Popular vote = 3. Total Score = 4.
If you end up with a number of candidates drawing, like I have, simply subtract the popular vote and you should have a clearer idea on who to vote for. According to my scorecard I should vote Conservative or Labour, a result I'll verfiy in the next leader's debate.
Tags
These are words I wrote during the debate when I didn’t give score a candidate.
Derek Brownlee = Concise yet distant (he doesn’t always connect as well as the others)
Patrick Harvie = Passionate yet stumbled (during the trams question)
Andy Kerr (Labour) = Prepared yet impatient(a little too eager at times to engage in ‘tit for tat’ politics)
Jeremy Purvis (Lib Dems) = Accessible yet abstract (during the question on future jobs).
John Swinney (SNP) = Authoritative yet nervous (during the question on future jobs)
A few points are worthy of elaboration. The results clearly show that the Greens and the SNP are outlining a populist agenda, but in different ways. The latter’s manifesto is an ideological successor to the successful 2007 manifesto; it is rooted in popular policies (e.g. freeze council taxes, maintain universalism etc).
The former is adopting an interesting strategy that combines their ever present strong focus on sustainability with a left wing economic populism that will resonate with many voters.
The other important point, which will be clearly illustrated in the next blog, is the consensus shared between the parties at Holyood. On job creation, income tax, small businesses, renewables and council tax there is a great deal of agreement.
Barry McCulloch
CSPP Policy Manager (but my idea alone)
The debate was structured around the following six questions:
1. Where will the jobs of the future come from?
2. How many public sector jobs will be lost by 2015?
3. Should Scotland’s tax raising powers be used to reduce taxes to bring companies & employment into the country?
4. How long can the council tax freeze continue for?
5. What would you do to encourage banks to lend to small/medium enterprises?
6. Was the £500m spent on the Edinburgh Tram project a good use of public money?
In the previous blog I explained how I would use my subjective scorecard/voting predictor to make the election debates more interesting and more helpful. It is specifically targeting floating voters (of which I am one) who will be disproportionately swayed by the TV debates.
So here it goes in alphabetical order:
Scores
Derek Brownlee (Conservative). Popular vote (read populism) = 1. Total Score = 5.
Patrick Harvie (Greens). Popular vote = 3. Total Score = 5
Andy Kerr (Labour). Popular vote = 1. Total Score = 5
Jeremy Purvis (Lib Dems). Popular vote = 1. Total Score = 4
John Swinney (SNP). Popular vote = 3. Total Score = 4.
If you end up with a number of candidates drawing, like I have, simply subtract the popular vote and you should have a clearer idea on who to vote for. According to my scorecard I should vote Conservative or Labour, a result I'll verfiy in the next leader's debate.
Tags
These are words I wrote during the debate when I didn’t give score a candidate.
Derek Brownlee = Concise yet distant (he doesn’t always connect as well as the others)
Patrick Harvie = Passionate yet stumbled (during the trams question)
Andy Kerr (Labour) = Prepared yet impatient(a little too eager at times to engage in ‘tit for tat’ politics)
Jeremy Purvis (Lib Dems) = Accessible yet abstract (during the question on future jobs).
John Swinney (SNP) = Authoritative yet nervous (during the question on future jobs)
A few points are worthy of elaboration. The results clearly show that the Greens and the SNP are outlining a populist agenda, but in different ways. The latter’s manifesto is an ideological successor to the successful 2007 manifesto; it is rooted in popular policies (e.g. freeze council taxes, maintain universalism etc).
The former is adopting an interesting strategy that combines their ever present strong focus on sustainability with a left wing economic populism that will resonate with many voters.
The other important point, which will be clearly illustrated in the next blog, is the consensus shared between the parties at Holyood. On job creation, income tax, small businesses, renewables and council tax there is a great deal of agreement.
Barry McCulloch
CSPP Policy Manager (but my idea alone)
Making the debates helpful & watchable
Warning this article contains unscientific methods. The sample size used is one.
Cometh the election, cometh the poll - wave after wave after wave after wave. If not drowning, my patience with these polls is clinging on to a dingy.
So I thought I would do something completely different and create a wholly subjective debate scorecard and voting predictor for floating voters when they watch the remaining debates.
At the very least it will make them more watchable, or maybe not.
Step 1. On an A4 sheet of paper create a table with the candidates’ names horizontally at the top and draw 5 (or whoever many are included) lines vertically to separate the candidates.
Step 2. Create your own symbols. I wanted to weigh my own views (represented by a tick) against what I thought the public would like to hear (represented by a circle). Baically, I wanted to offset my own prejudices! With the latter, I tried to think about what the public want to hear, for example, no cuts, protecting public services etc.
Step 3. Split the rounds to correspond with the questions. On scoring, you can give half marks and you are not compelled to give a candidate a score every round. Nor are you restricted by the number of ticks/circles you can give per round.
Step 4. If you do not give a candidate a score write a word to describe their performance in that round.
Step 4. Away you go, but only watch live if you can pause the action.
Step 5. Tally up the scores at the end, separating out who appeared to be the most populist, and there you have it. Your vote is decided or perhaps not if you scored the candidates the same.
I’ve tested this on last night’s “Big” Economy debate. Scores will follow very soon!
Barry McCulloch, CSPP Policy Manager
P.s. this is my own geeky idea.
Cometh the election, cometh the poll - wave after wave after wave after wave. If not drowning, my patience with these polls is clinging on to a dingy.
So I thought I would do something completely different and create a wholly subjective debate scorecard and voting predictor for floating voters when they watch the remaining debates.
At the very least it will make them more watchable, or maybe not.
Step 1. On an A4 sheet of paper create a table with the candidates’ names horizontally at the top and draw 5 (or whoever many are included) lines vertically to separate the candidates.
Step 2. Create your own symbols. I wanted to weigh my own views (represented by a tick) against what I thought the public would like to hear (represented by a circle). Baically, I wanted to offset my own prejudices! With the latter, I tried to think about what the public want to hear, for example, no cuts, protecting public services etc.
Step 3. Split the rounds to correspond with the questions. On scoring, you can give half marks and you are not compelled to give a candidate a score every round. Nor are you restricted by the number of ticks/circles you can give per round.
Step 4. If you do not give a candidate a score write a word to describe their performance in that round.
Step 4. Away you go, but only watch live if you can pause the action.
Step 5. Tally up the scores at the end, separating out who appeared to be the most populist, and there you have it. Your vote is decided or perhaps not if you scored the candidates the same.
I’ve tested this on last night’s “Big” Economy debate. Scores will follow very soon!
Barry McCulloch, CSPP Policy Manager
P.s. this is my own geeky idea.
Thursday, 14 April 2011
CSPP in the News - Education Reform
Yesterday our policy director Ross Martin appeared on Call Kaye.
To listen to the programme (13/4/11) click here.
Fast forward to 16:10.
P.s. You have 6 days left to listen to the programme.
To listen to the programme (13/4/11) click here.
Fast forward to 16:10.
P.s. You have 6 days left to listen to the programme.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)