Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Savings deal looms for Forth crossing

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Scotland On Sunday site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 01 March 2009
THE Treasury is to offer the Scottish Government "saving powers" so that it can build up a pot to pay for a new Forth Road Bridge crossing.

UK ministers will propose this week that Alex Salmond's Government keep any savings it makes over the next three years so that it has a cash pot built up before it has to meet the £2bn cost of the new crossing.

The move would reverse the curre
nt practice under which all so-called underspends are returned to the UK Exchequer.

The offer will be made at long-delayed talks between Treasury Minister Yvette Cooper and Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney this week, and follows a bitter falling-out between the two administrations over the bridge. Last night, the row looked set to continue as the SNP described the new offer as entirely "unrealistic".

Plans for a new bridge were announced by the Scottish Government late last year after surveys of the existing road crossing showed it may have to be closed down.

The SNP said it would pay for the bridge from the annual £30bn grant, but asked the UK Government to advance them cash so that the cost of the bridge could be spread out.

But the UK Government refused, saying it was impossible to advance cash which had not yet been allocated.

The Treasury proposal this week will see Cooper pledging to water down the normal rules under which all annual underspends, accrued at the end of the financial year, return to the Treasury. Instead, the Scottish Government will be able to build up savings ahead of the start of construction in 2012.

But the offer is set to be knocked back this week, with SNP ministers warning that they cannot afford to put money aside.

The SNP is furious over what it claims are huge cuts, which will hit its budget next year, of up to £500m a year.

A source close to John Swinney said: "This is a totally unrealistic suggestion. Far from being in a position of having an underspend, the UK Government is proposing to chop £500m a year from Scotland's budget."

He added: "What this whole issue proves is the urgent and compelling need for Scotland to be given borrowing powers, to allow us to invest effectively in the future infrastructure of the country. Northern Ireland is already allowed to borrow to a level which would cover the costs of the new Forth crossing."

Swinney will discuss plans to save cash in the public sector tomorrow when he speaks at a conference on public sector reform.





The full article contains 436 words and appears in Scotland On Sunday newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 28 February 2009 6:55 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Forth Bridges
 
1

RufusT-Firefly,

28/02/2009 20:38:57
Superb move by Westminster.

The SNP can start saving money now to hand over to Labour in 2 years time.
2

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 28/02/2009 21:20:31
Why not just give Scotland full borrowing powers.

RufusT-Firefly, if you think Iain Gray and Labour will beat Salmond and the SNP you are even more deluded than I thought, they will lose more than they did in 2007.
3

RufusT-Firefly,

28/02/2009 22:14:44
#2

After all those broken promises with more broken promises to come?

No chance.

Yes we can, Glenrothes anyone?
4

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 28/02/2009 22:37:27
Yes we can, Iain Gray, Lord Foulkes, Wendy Alexander, Andy Kerr anyone? All yesterdays men and women.

Next RufusT-Firefly will tell us Labour will win the UK general election , after all they are only about 20 points behind the Tories.

As for 2011 voting intentions, have Labour topped any poll since 2007 - NO.
5

RufusT-Firefly,

28/02/2009 22:45:51
Yes Thomas, however, voting intentions now and voting intentions in 2011 will be quite different things.
6

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 28/02/2009 23:30:15
OK RufusT-Firefly you win.

Gordon Brown will win the next UK general election, easily, and will be around to at least 2014.

And Gray, he will be the next FM, to at least 2015 when Wendy will take over.

Labour will dominate politics for the next decade at least. I hope this makes you feel better RufusT-Firefly. But be honest for one second, just with yourself, is this going to happen?

7

RufusT-Firefly,

01/03/2009 00:21:38
Thomas79, I never mentioned anything about General Elections.

All I am saying is that with the SNP continuing to break manifesto pledges then come 2011, the general public will be sick to the back teeth of them.
8

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 01/03/2009 00:48:55
Rufus

What colour is the sky in your world?

Is it blue like the sky in the world that the rest of us inhabit?
9

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 01/03/2009 00:52:09
Yvette Cooper offers the Government "saving powers".

Is that the same special saving powers that allowed Comrade Broon to save the world?
10

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 01/03/2009 01:16:55
You don't "save" from a budget, you underspend, just like Hurricane Jeck was doing. Does this savings pot also include the amount he underspent, which I think was about £1.5bn??
11

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 01/03/2009 01:19:42
Labour cut the Scottish pocket money, and they say "save more", and will no doubt want to show the public how "little" the SNP managed to save.
12

CRAGman,

01/03/2009 01:25:41
We don't need a new bridge - fix the existing one (it's probably being fixed sufficiently right now anyway) and invest in more worthwhile projects right across Scotland. Howsabout some new schools and hospitals instead? - they'll provide just as many jobs as any new bridge will. Is an unnecessary additional bridge at Queensferry really worth sacrificing education and health for? I don't think so.
13

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 01/03/2009 08:20:19
14 "We don't need a new bridge " - spot on.
The only 'evidence' that we need a new bridge is a few creaks and twinges in the cables of this vast structure.
Given that it weighs tens of thousands of tons - its not surprising that the cables creak!

This whole thing has been an example of kite-flying by the big business interests and their political friends to try and get their hands on a new bottomless pit of cash. The £450 million they stole while building the ugliest parliament in the world just whetted their appetite - not they want 5 or 6 times as much.
14

For Scotlands Future,

Vote for the SNP 01/03/2009 08:29:09
#15
The Bridge is the least expensive to BUILD, but the most expensive to maintain. And that is why this generation is cursing those in the early sixties who built the current road bridge, and why the next generation will curse us in 40-50 years time for short-sightedness.

I disagree about the causeway. I would disrupt the tidal flow in the Forth and probably turn in into a sinking cesspool.

Part causeway, part bridge is an option, as are twin tunnels.

Tunnels are the most expensive to build, least expensive to maintain. That's why they was rejected. It costs too much money up front. And no-one has ever accused any politician, of ANY party, of being far-sighted
15

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 01/03/2009 09:25:50
#15

The effects on tidal flows of the causeways built in the Uists are still far from being fully understood.

There is a body of opinion which contends that they contributed to the disaster which befell the MacPherson family in South Uist a few years ago.

Much of the eastern seaboard of the Uists is very low lying, as indeed is a lot of the land bounding the Forth estuary. (Next time you are in Ocean Terminal in Leith, have a look out over the estuary and see just how low lying all the reclaimed ground actually is).

Causeways may appear to be superficially attractive to the casual observer, however a great deal of research, hydrologist and otherwise, needs to be carried out before any more of these projects are carried out.
16

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 01/03/2009 11:31:59
#18 Smee
“Northern Ireland can borrow (a bit) because it does so “aagainst" a planned and committed programme of increasing Council Tax levels.”

What drivel is this?

There is no council tax in Northern Ireland; did you not run than comment pass your mentor Herr AM2, prior to submitting that post?
17

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 01/03/2009 13:09:45
If £500M is such a huge factor, why did SNP not stick by their guns and turn down trams, regardless of the vote? No good whinging at Westminster when victim of own inability to take a stance on a great sum of money being wasted.
18

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 01/03/2009 15:15:01
Labour is trying to extract the urine imho. They had better be because if they are serious then they are demented.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.