Jones the steam

Back in the Good Old Days (surely you remember?), steam trains ran up and down our railways, carrying people, carrying freight, carrying two dragons (surely Ivor was real?).

They took ages to get going when being started from cold - I can't find anything to tell me how long but I remember stories of the footplate guys being there hours before the train got going to nurse it into life.

Remember the Wendible promised in her speech to Labour's Aviemore conference that Rhona Brankin would set up a literacy commission to examine why 50 years of Labour rule had left a whole lot of Scots unable to read and write.

I'm told it met for the first time yesterday to sketch out the ground. Here's the members:

CBI Scotland director Iain McMillan - isn't he on another Labour Commission? What a busy chap. His employers must be very understanding.

Judith Gillespie of the Scottish Parent Teacher Council who last week put the boot into Labour policy on schools:

Judith Gillespie: PFI is an extremely strange creature. I was involved with the first Audit Scotland report on the subject, which was a wonderful learning experience. I was staggered to learn that, at the end of the day, all the money comes out of the public purse, because the money that is raised by the consortia is repaid through borrowing and the maintenance contract is largely paid for out of council funding.
I understand that there will always be profit involved in building a school, because the builder will make the profit that a contractor usually makes, but it is extraordinarily strange that we are confronted with the myth that PFI somehow brings in private money. Given that, at the end of the day, the money comes from the public purse, I have long been puzzled about why the system could not have involved normal public procurement—either way, the Government pays.

Glasgow Labour Councillor Gordon Matheson - with a wonderful and varied experience of education, having gone to school and served on Glasgow's education committee.

Professor Tommy Mackay - actually a decent shout - an educational psychologist I believe, and a chap with experience in things educational who could actually contribute to the debate - if he isn't drowned out by Labour politicians looking for petty advantage.

Big Brother winner John Loughton - he's a busy lad, eh? This is his second commission as well, he'll be getting to know Iain McMillan awfy well. When's he going to study for his degree?
So there you have it - Labour starting to think about the process of developing policies at last. Maybe in time they'll understand how to be an opposition, but I get the feeling that they've just lit the flames under the boiler, that old puffer is going to take a while to get going.

Commissioner, commissioner, where have you been?

On the Independence Commission which doesn't yet know it's an Independence Commission (oh ye of little faith) - a couple of interesting points...

1. Journalists were told that if they wanted to cover the launch they would have to ask Parliament for permission for access for photographers and camera crews but would have to ask the Scotland Office for permission to interview Calman. Guess who's in charge of this commission? Interesting idea having to ask the Scotland Office before carrying out an interview in our Parliament, isn't it?

2. MSPs were told the names by the Scotland Office - rather interesting for a Commission supposedly set up by Parliament, isn't it?

3. On that first point again - third parties aren't allowed to carry out press operations in Parliament - the SPCB specifically ruled on that in February.

4. That's another thing - while we're on the SPCB, it still hasn't approved funding or resources for this Commission and it still has to follow through on the commission demanded by Parliament. Read the minutes here.

That couple of points has become like a trilogy with four parts ...

I'll come back to an interesting point made in comments to yesterday's post -

It's an interesting to see how far Labour and the LibDems have moved away from the Claim of Right, insisting that the Scottish people were sovereign and had a right to self-determination, and the idea of the Convention, aimed at bringing together the representatives of the nation.

And they're off ...

All the members of the commission (oh no it's not, oh yes it is) on the future of the Scottish Parliament have now been announced.

Whoo-hoo! Bring out the bunting!

So let's have a wee peek at the great and the good this weather:

Kenneth Calman, chair, now says he's going to make his commission part of the Scottish Government's National Conversation - it'll consider Independence soon as well. Calman is a medical chap and what doctor dismisses a diagnosis before beginning an examination?

Next up, Rani Dhir, a housing professional who was appointed to the board of Scottish Homes by Donald Dewar in 1998 and got an MBE in 2001. I don't know anything more about her.

Professor David Edward - an interesting choice, he was a Judge in the European Court of Justice. I don't think he's politically aligned, and his record speaks for himself. I think his appointment might actually cause a few problems when his intellect and analytical skills come up against the political drive of some of the other members. His sense of justice and a desire to get the right outcome rather than an expedient one could cause a bit of discomfort.

John Loughton Big Brother winner, wants to be a politician. Described by the Scotland Office as the President of the Scottish Youth Parliament (he's the Chair), he's also involved in a cross-party group.

A constant on the circuit next, Shonaig Macpherson, you may have seen her in such classics as SCDI, National Trust for Scotland, ITI Scotland, and so on.

And where would we be without Murdoch McLennan, heid bummer of the Telegraph Media Group? He must have a great view of Scotland from his office in Victoria, central London. That's him in the purple tie -

Iain McMillan, Director of CBI Scotland.

Mat Smith, Scottish Secretary of Unison.
Mona Siddiqui, Professor of Islamic Studies, University of Glasgow.

Then there's the party makeweights: Murray Elder, Colin Boyd, James Douglas-Hamilton, Jamie Lindsay, Audrey Findlay and Jim Wallace.

Interestingly, five of the six party places are filled by members of the House of Lords - that's a great start for a commission deciding on Scotland's democratic future, isn't it?

Salmond agrees to meet Brown

I am informed that Alex Salmond, First Minister of Scotland, has agreed to meet Gordon Brown to discuss a wee problem concerning petrol supplies when his Eckness is nearby in any case.

It made me wonder about what reception he would get as FM rolling up to the door of Downing Street (in a car). It took me back to a speech made by a Tory dude of the name of Hague on The 21st of January this year - one of the cast has changed, but the chagrin is still the same - do I want to meet him:

We can all picture the scene at a European Council sometime next year. Picture the face of our poor Prime Minister as the name “Blair” is nominated by one President and Prime Minister after another: the look of utter gloom on his face at the nauseating, glutinous praise oozing from every Head of Government, the rapid revelation of a majority view, agreed behind closed doors when he, as usual, was excluded. Never would he more regret no longer being in possession of a veto: the famous dropped jaw almost hitting the table, as he realises there is no option but to join in. And then the awful moment when the motorcade of the President of Europe sweeps into Downing street. The gritted teeth and bitten nails: the Prime Minister emerges from his door with a smile of intolerable anguish; the choking sensation as the words, “Mr President”, are forced from his mouth,

Labour - obsessed with the SNP

I was directed to Scottish Labour's website today. It's all about the SNP!

They've written the SNP Scottish Government a report card and launched it with a terrible photo-op in Glasgow - you'll see the pictures, no doubt - try not to mock them, the poor dears.

I have in my possession a piece of paper - it's the background note on the report card (thanks Simon).

Rhona Brankin writes:

If Alex Salmond brought his report card on education home to his mother, she wouldn't be amused.

Rhona, Rhona, Rhona - that comma isn't needed - extra lessons for you! I think that if Mrs Salmond were still alive she'd be quite pleased with what the SNP is doing in education:

• Class sizes are getting smaller


• 47 new schools already approved, more to come. Labour's target will be exceeded by the SNP - and we're squeezing out PFI / PPP


• Graduate Endowment abolished


• Working with councils to provide a nursery teacher in every class, free swimming in council pools, and extra PE

Pauline McNeill bauchles in to say:

The SNP are overpromising and underdelivering on Justice

"The SNP is" rather than "The SNP are", Pauline. Education must hae been awfy under Labour. Unfortunate that Labour released this document the day after the first of one thousand extra police officers passed out of Tulliallan. There has also been, of course:

• Reform of sentencing


• Ongoing reform of the courts


• Improving rape law


• Taking money from criminals and using it to provide sporting opportunities for children

The erudite Johann Lamont on SNP performance on housing:

The SNP stands charged with stupidity or cynicism

Well, which charge would you like to make madam? Bullets, of course:

• More central heating units installed in the first year of an SNP Government than in Labour's best year


• A new era of council housing launched


• Shared equity programmes being rolled out


• Additional help for first time buyers being considered after consultation

Mags Curran on health:

There will be long-term consequences in the health of our nation because of SNP decisions taken now.

Quite right Mags, you're quite right - we'll be much healthier as a result of SNP decisions like:

• Keeping hospitals open


• Reducing prescription charges en route to abolishing them


• Building a new hospital - without PFI / PPP

It goes on and on, never footnoted, never any evidence offered, purveying error as fact as deception as truth. One year on and Labour members still haven't worked out why they lost. Neither on the website nor in this paean to inadequacy can anyone find anything about Labour, some idea about where Labour should go in the future (I could offer a suggestion...), or anything that might lead an honest chap to think there was some spark lurking - a dim spark, no doubt, but surely there.

Ach well.

PFI? Pfwah! Give us the Scottish Futures Trust I say!

How much does Scotland waste on PFI/PPP every year? £500 million!


Yup, half a billion quid - the Edinburgh tramline every year (£508 million for a tramline? With their reputation?). Ridiculous! It's a waste of public money.

Don't take my word for it - ask some folks with an opinion, Unison, the public sector union, for example. I especially recommend the publication At What Cost?


Don't trust Unison? What about Thomas Blaiklock, PFI/PPP consultant who says

given the current state of the NHS as a public service organisation, PFI/PPP is a diversion of scarce and expensive resource

Still not convinced? What about Nick Minchin, Australian Minister for Finance under John Howard? Academics perhaps? Professor John Loxley of the University of Manitoba, or Hellowell and Pollock?


Then there's the Chartered Institute of Public Finance Accountants, followed swiftly by Architecture and Design Scotland, who are not all that far ahead of the Smith Institute.


I recommend the Smith Institute paper for the delightful quotes:

a broad consensus is forming that the PFI process is breaking down, and the very benefits that it was meant to deliver – greater competition and innovation – are increasingly being undermined. - Denise Chevin, editor, Building Magazine

Despite the successes of the private finance initiative so far, contracts are still too expensive, too time-consuming and insufficiently contested. The root causes are identified as public-sector resource constraints, poor time management and insufficient attention to financing. While the Treasury is experimenting with new funding approaches, and the public sector partner must become involved in financing decisions at an earlier stage, it is perhaps also time for banks to reassess the creditworthiness of PFI projects. - Adrian Bell, Chairman of Royal Bank of Canada Europe Limited

Setting aside the politics, at initial financing of a project, the taxpayer is taking the interest rate and structural risks inherent in the funding package that is negotiated between the private sector and its bankers – risks that are magnified under typical PFI contracts, given their length. - Bell

Some projects have also suffered from an inability of the public sector sufficiently to identify and prescribe its principal requirements – partly because some requirements do not lend themselves to the PFI structure of prescribing outputs, but also because of limitations of resource and expertise. - Jonathan Inman, Partner at Linklaters

Why, outside the demands of the public-sector borrowing requirement and the necessary risk transfer, are we entering into 35-year contracts for services? It simply is not something that happens in the private sector. Every routine commercial lease has an early break clause, without the requirement to go through a whole series of hoops around performance issues. - Peter Dixon, Chair of the Housing Corporation and of University College London Hospitals NHS Trust

we have to be able to change as service requirements change and the PFI contract, by its very nature, is arthritic. - Dixon

So what's the SNP's alternative? We came into Government promising to provide a range of procurement options for the public sector which would crowd out PFI and PPP.


There's a hospital in Glasgow which will be built under traditional procurement - £852 million which would have cost £4.2 billion under PFI/PPP.


47 school building projects have been approved by the SNP Government over the past year - 14 of them on an NPD (non profit distributing) model. More than 250 schools will be built over the lifetime of this Parliament.


There's £11 billion of infrastructure investment planned, and there's more to come.

• That NPD part of school building is a pivotal underpinning part of the Scottish Futures Trust. Money which under PFI / PPP is siphoned off as a return on equity will remain within the public sector and will be recycled into other projects.


• Working as a central funder and promoter, the SFT will be able to provide the support and expertise that PFI/PPP has stripped out of the system.


• Spreading the funding across many more projects means the finance will be cheaper.


• The SFT will draw money in from a range of sources - including bond issues - minimising risk for the public purse and the finance market.

Who thinks it's a good idea? Lots of people. You can read the resposnses to the consultation on the Government's website at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/04/18161301/0


Law firm Anderson Strathern:

The public sector may be more willing to seek and rely on expertise and support from a public body who was perceived to understand and represent the public sector's interests. The Lawyers think that in addition if SFT is able to borrow at a more commercially advantageous rate than the private sector this would facilitate better value for the public sector.

Architecture and Design Scotland:

As our recently published Annual Report sets out we do not consider that Scotland is getting the best value from new developments in the built environment. We therefore welcome the initiative to develop a better way of funding infrastructure investment and see the consultation on the role of a Scottish Futures Trust as a timely opportunity for the Scottish Government to bring design quality to the fore in public procurement

The BMA:

There is a perception that private sector project management adds efficiency to major capital developments. This has yet to be fully demonstrated and is often no more than an article of faith. The theory is that the management and other benefits brought by the private sector can outweigh higher financing costs. The SFT arrangements seem to have the capacity to deliver the expertise without the consequent excess financing costs.

COSLA:

The SFT, as an alternative method of capital investment, may have potential benefits such as providing a centre of expertise, prioritised investment across the whole of public sector, co-ordinated borrowing and reduced lead times for progressing projects.

The Society of Local Authority Chief Executives and Senior Managers:

An apparent advantage of the agreement with the Scottish Futures Trust would be the potential for a larger support base for public bodies.

It's clear that the SNP Scottish Government is on the right track. Let's not waste any more public money on Labour's failure.

New policy?

Given that collective cabinet responsibility means that when a Minister speaks the Government speaks, are we to understand from yesterday's Scottish Questions that the London Labour Government has a new policy on elections?

Willie Rennie (Dunfermline and West Fife) (LD): Would the organisation of elections in Scotland not be made much simpler if we adopted the same voting system for all elections in Scotland and throughout the UK? Would the best system not be the single transferable vote by proportional representation, which was agreed by the Minister’s party and mine when we were friends together in the Scottish Executive?
David Cairns: I agree with the hon. Gentleman to the extent that things would be much easier if there were one system for all elections, and if that system were first past the post.