Why the Highlands and Islands will win from Scottish independence
This is acknowledged by the Government's setting up of a compensation fund, albeit that the scheme is described by many islanders as inadequate.
Fergus Ewing rails with justification against the failure to fully dual the A9, Scotland's most dangerous road. Meanwhile here in the West Highlands voters voice their frustrations with the lamentable quality of our trunk roads, the A82, A83 and A85. Sorting the bottleneck at Pulpit Rock on the [[A82]] seems a very modest achievement for nearly 20 years of SNP government; the A83 at the Rest and be Thankful closes with monotonous regularity; and both the [[A82]] and the A85 were recently closed for almost a full day as a result of two separate road traffic incidents.
Things are no better further north as residents on Skye and along the so-called North Coast 500 testify when they complain about tourists causing gridlock on the roads.
Tourism is responsible for at least £11 billion of visitor spend and yet our investment in tourist-related infrastructure is wholly inadequate.
The difficulties of the SNP Government in defending its record multiply the longer the party is in office and yet it is pitilessly caught on the horns of a difficult dilemma. On the one hand, it has to declare what a supremely good job they are doing of governing Scotland, on the other it has to argue devolution is inadequate and only independence will sort Scotland's problems.
It seems that the SNP in recent years have done too much of the former and not enough of the latter. Doing both is difficult but not impossible.
READ MORE: Tripadvisor award names Scottish attraction one of the best in world
The real problem is of course a structural one. Scotland's system of government has been set up in a way that is almost guaranteed to prevent any possibility of good government.
Tony Blair famously and gleefully declared that the Scottish Parliament was like a 'parish council.' George Robertson delighted in his notion that devolution would 'kill nationalism stone dead'.
Whatever you might think of Tony and George, they are not stupid people. To paraphrase George Bush it is a mistake to 'misunderestimate' your opponents.
The fact is that even now, after more than 25 years of the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Government has minimal and wholly inadequate borrowing powers.
Despite the recent increase authorised by Secretary of State Ian Murray, now allowing £6 billion of accumulated capital borrowing, the Scottish Government has almost maxed out its borrowing capability.
Just as homeowners take loans for significant home improvements, governments fund infrastructure by borrowing and that is a large part of the reason why most of Scotland's old and tired infrastructure hasn't been updated over the last 25 years.
PFI has been wholly discredited and its replacement, the NPD (non-profit distributing public private partnerships) model is only marginally better. Neither come close to offering value for money.
When it is considered that building a dual carriageway can cost up to £60 million per mile and that Glasgow's Death Star hospital cost almost £1bn to build, it can readily be seen how inadequate Scotland's borrowing powers are, when measured against the long-standing nationwide need to rebuild our tired and failing infrastructure.
By comparison Westminster, like almost every other government, has huge borrowing powers, limited only by the markets and the possibility of inflation. UK Government debt currently stands at around £2.8 trillion but contrary to popular belief is lower than many comparable countries in pro rata terms.
If Scotland's government had a population-based share of this borrowing capability it would be entirely possible to upgrade our infrastructure to approach that of equivalent modern countries.
Furthermore, with only limited devolution of taxation, the Scottish Government's coffers barely benefit if growth is increased.
There is little fiscal reward for economic success and therefore only the negligible possibility of establishing a virtuous circle where success builds on success and economic growth in turn gives rise to an increase in the tax take.
The business sector knows that prudent investment can establish a virtuous cycle whereby wise investment more than pays for itself. This possibility is denied to the [[Scottish Government]] and Scotland's people are much the worse for this.
READ MORE: I heard a lot of excitement during my recent Highlands visit
Things are just as bad with local government. Our local authorities have significant borrowing powers but little incentive to invest. There is no general mechanism for prudent investment in local infrastructure to pay off financially. Indeed, as Highland Council's parking fines on [[Skye]] approach £500,000 per annum, one might argue that the opposite is the case.
We are left then with only a democratic mechanism to motivate governments to invest both locally and nationally.
In the Highlands and Islands, with relatively small populations compared to the central belt coupled with the ongoing scarcity of investment capital, proper investment in our infrastructure will always be an afterthought, as politicians seek to placate voters in areas where numbers are highest.
In addition to being an election year, 2026 is also the 250th anniversary of the publication of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations'
Perhaps as we approach the election we should recognise that devolution can never produce good government as the 'invisible hands' it has given rise to mitigate against the possibility. I am confident the great economist would agree with me on this point.
That is why we need urgently to seek independence. No matter which party we vote for, under the status quo of devolution, things, in the long term, are not going to get better.
Mike MacKenzie was an SNP MSP between 2011-16 representing the Highlands and Islands region
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Kate Forbes exit: Is it possible to be a good parent and an MSP?
"I am grateful to them for accommodating the heavy demands of being a political figure. Looking ahead to the future, I do not want to miss any more of the precious early years of family life – which can never be rewound." It's a statement that will resonate with all working parents across Scotland (most often mothers as they usually have the responsibility as chief carer), many of whom will have regretted missing a school sports day or a school show or felt the panic of a meeting over-running as the clock approached nursery closing hours. But it will particularly echo with a considerable number of MSPs. Kate Forbes pictured with her daughter Naomi aged six months, in March 2023 during the SNP leadership race (Image: Colin Mearns) When the Scottish Parliament was reconvened in 1999 there was much emphasis that Holyrood would do things differently to Westminster including that it would be more family friendly. For instance, the late night sittings, common place in the House of Commons, would be avoided in preference for more usual office hours and parliamentary sittings would align with school term times and there would be an on site creche. But while it has a creche its opening hours have been limited. Calls by some MSPs - including Ms Forbes - for longer opening hours of the Holyrood creche have not been met. It is currently open just three days a week and can only be used three hours a day - which is clearly insufficient for the child care needs of an MSP. Prior to the pandemic, the creche was open Monday to Friday. Holyrood has insisted since 2021 that it has adopted new family friendly policies, including the permanent introduction of hybrid working, allowing those who can't attend Holyrood in person to take part in, and vote, on parliamentary business. Proxy voting has also been introduced, allowing those who may be on parental leave or certain other long term absences, to have their vote counted in parliamentary business. And in 2023 the Presiding Officer commissioned a Gender Sensitive Audit of the Scottish Parliament looking at barriers to equal representation and participation at Holyrood, with the aim that being an elected representative is a realistic ambition, whatever a person's circumstances. But despite some of the moves by Holyrood - including mostly keeping to the standard working hours for its debates and committee hearings and sitting during school term times - MSPs and ministers have duties that take them well beyond the daily nine to five. For many MSPs the job is a 24 hour round the clock role - so perhaps political parties should do more to help promote a better work life balance among their parliamentarians. READ MORE: Ahead of the last [[Holyrood]] election in 2021, [[Kate Forbes]]' SNP colleague and fellow Highland MSP Gail Ross spoke about how hard it was to be an MSP, especially for a large constituency a long way from Edinburgh with the huge amount of weekly travel that involves, and being a mother who was there for her children. If there are difficulties for a backbencher, as Ms Ross was, in finding a decent balance between working and caring duties, these challenges intensify for someone in government, who in addition to all their parliamentary and constituency responsibilities as an MSP, also has the huge demands of being a minister or a cabinet minister. And of course, the pressure rises still further for anyone in the role of Deputy First Minister or First Minister. I was struck by a comment by John Swinney last week when he told Donald Trump that he likes to caddy for his son Matthew, who is 14. My immediate thought was 'that's a really nice thing to do but how does the First Minister find time to caddy for his son?' Clearly, the FM must do a lot of diary juggling to find time to spend this quality time with his teenager. Few of Scotland's First Ministers have been parents of young children while in office. Donald Dewar's two children were adults when he was First Minister, as were the children of his Labour successors Henry McLeish and Jack McConnell. When it came to the [[SNP]], neither Alex Salmond nor Nicola Sturgeon had children. The latter has spoken of her deep sadness of this situation and also revealed she suffered a miscarriage in January 2011 while Deputy First Minister. As an indication of the pressures senior politicians are under Ms Sturgeon told some years later that instead of dealing with her grief following the miscarriage at home, she attended the 40th anniversary of the Ibrox disaster, in which 66 Rangers football supporters were crushed to death. Humza Yousaf was the first First Minister to have young children while in office at Bute House. Mr Yousaf used his time at the top of government to highlight that he also had an important role as a father. The then First Minister and his wife Nadia El Nakla had one daughter Amal, three, together when he first became FM while Mr Yousaf was also stepfather to 14-year-old daughter Maya. He liked to describe himself as a "hands-on dad", was pictured reading bed time stories to Amal in Bute House and spoke of the need to set boundaries between his family and working life. Things didn't always go to plan though and Mr Yousaf has previously recounted one episode, just after he was elected SNP leader, when Amal burst into a Bute House meeting when he was deciding who would be in his Cabinet. 'I'm deciding who's going to be in my Cabinet, making last-minute tweaks to the ministerial team. It was about 9.30pm and in comes Amal, bare feet, unicorn pyjamas, saying 'Dad I have to go to bed, Mummy says'," he said. 'And both Colin [McAllister] and Shona [Robison] were like 'that has never happened at Bute House before. I say to my kids and wife Nadia, as much as this is a workspace, it's also our residence and family home too.' Given the challenges, it was perhaps not surprising that Mr Yousaf paid tribute to his wife, children and family for their support in his tearful resignation statement in April 2024. "Politics can be a brutal business. It takes its toll on your physical and mental health; your family suffer alongside you. "I am in debt to my wonderful wife, my beautiful children and wider family for putting up with me over the years, I am afraid you will be seeing a lot more of me now. You are truly everything to me," he said. Shortly after returning to the backbenches the former First Minister was keen to highlight one of the silver linings of his loss of office was being able to attend events with Amal that he wouldn't have had the time to while in Bute House. Kate Forbes's resignation announcement has been met with considerable dismay across Holyrood today. No doubt her young daughter and her wider family will be delighted to see more of her. But it is a sad state of affairs that we expect so much of a sacrifice from our politicians that some feel they cannot be both successful MSPs and senior ministers and also contented and nurturing parents.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
From rising star to Deputy FM – Kate Forbes' career in brief
The Deputy First Minister was selected to contest the Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch constituency in 2026, but now the party will have to rerun the contest and find a new candidate. Party members and politicians expressed shock at the news, while opposition politicians used it as an excuse to take shots at the SNP. Forbes was first elected to Holyrood in 2016, aged 26, having previously worked as an accountant in the banking industry and for former MSP Dave Thompson in the same constituency. READ MORE: Kate Forbes to quit Holyrood in 2026 – read her statements in full The MSP studied history at Cambridge before completing an MSc in diaspora and migration history at the University of Edinburgh. Born in Dingwall, she spent part of her childhood in India and Glasgow, and attended a Gaelic school. She quickly rose through the ranks, first as public finance minister in 2018 before becoming Scotland's first female finance secretary under Nicola Sturgeon in 2020. Forbes was praised for delivering the budget speech at short notice, taking on the role the night before after her predecessor Derek Mackay was forced to stand down when it emerged he had sent inappropriate messages to a teenager. During her time as a backbencher, she delivered the first speech in the Holyrood chamber entirely in Gaelic, later becoming the first Cabinet Secretary for the language, alongside responsibilities for the economy, when she was appointed DFM. (Image: PA) Forbes narrowly lost out on the SNP leadership contest after Sturgeon resigned to Humza Yousaf, who is also set to leave [[Holyrood]] when the parliamentary term ends. She fought the contest while on maternity leave, coming second in the first round of voting with 40.7%, to Yousaf's 48.2%. The second round saw Yousaf win with 52.1%, compared to Forbes' 47.9%. During the campaign, Forbes came under fire for her views on abortion, gay marriage and trans rights. A member of the Free Church of Scotland, she said that having children outside of marriage was 'wrong' and that she would not have supported equal marriage as a 'matter of conscience'. Forbes was on maternity leave while the Scottish Parliament voted on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which would have allowed transgender people to self-identify. In 2019, she joined 15 other SNP politicians in writing an open letter to Sturgeon calling for a delay to the reforms, and would later reiterate her concerns during the leadership campaign. READ MORE: Keith Brown: UK can't ignore independence demand with SNP majority On independence, she said during the contest that the party should use the Westminster election to win a mandate and demand powers to allow a referendum to go ahead. After the contest, she told the New Statesman she would have been 'haunted' if she had not stayed true to her religious beliefs during the campaign. Leaving the cabinet in 2023 after Yousaf offered her the rural affairs brief, seen as a major demotion by some, Forbes spent a year on the backbenches. When Yousaf resigned as first minister, following the collapse of the Bute House Agreement with the Scottish Greens, Forbes took on the deputy first minister role when John Swinney took over leadership of the party and government. She was given responsibilities for the economy and [[Gaelic]], and last week welcomed the approval of a massive offshore wind farm off the coast of East Lothian. Forbes had been considered a potential successor to Swinney, prior to her shock announcement and will continue in her MSP role for the next nine months. She added on social media that despite standing down, she is looking forward to campaigning at the election to 'lead Scotland to independence'.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Politicians fleeing the stage as old certainties collapse
The Deputy First Minister, however you view her politics, has been held in high regard by many as a hard-working minister and committed MSP. In more stable times, a career in politics would have offered a variety of long-term attractions. Today, though, the appeal of a quieter life beckons, as the retreat into private life provides respite from the manifold crises which present themselves in politics, economics, international affairs and society writ large. READ MORE: What Kate Forbes's exit means for future SNP leadership hopefuls Of course, there have always been wicked issues to consider. But in this era, it is the confluence of many fissures and dilemmas at once which generates the kind of environment in which things unravel rather more sharply. Simply put, there isn't a roadmap for how to get out of the mess, or to escape the dogmas which got us here in the first place. As a result, the rate of attrition increases. Jackie Baillie says that it is notable that the SNP's 'former rising stars are abandoning the stage'. This is true. And it is also not exactly controversial to suggest this indicates that independence is not on the horizon, or that there exists a compelling and inspiring strategy around the issue that might entice lifelong nationalists to stay the course a little longer. But this is to miss the wider point: it is a tale that can be told of the UK establishment too. Between Margaret Thatcher coming to power in 1979 and Tony Blair leaving office in 2007, only John Major came in between. That is close to three decades of relative stability as far as the leadership of the British state is concerned. Over those years, we saw the miners' strike; great showdowns between strikers and police; riots over the poll tax; mass protests against war in Iraq; Black Monday and much else. At the same time, those upheavals also entailed a level of state coherence and political infrastructure which doesn't exist in the same way now. The Conservative Party, the essential instrument of ruling class power, pursued a strategy and vision for British capitalism as a whole, coinciding with the Reagan administration in the United States. This set about dismantling the trade union movement and embarking on a process of privatisation, deregulation and financialisation known as neoliberalism. READ MORE: From rising star to Deputy First Minister – Kate Forbes' career as she stands down Yes, there were challenges. But at the same time there was a plan for how to resolve the immediate questions posed around how to secure new economic growth and to discipline the working class into the bargain. But this arrangement could only ever overcome the accumulation of problems bound up with the system for a relatively short period. As Martin Wolf of the Financial Times writes: 'Indubitably, a serious government would be devoting vast intellectual resources to the question of how to raise the growth rate. None has, including this one. A starting point, in my view, must be recognition that the Thatcher experiment failed: it did not transform the underlying performance of the economy for the better. This must now be admitted. 'Too much of the post-Thatcher performance was unsustainable. This was, in good part, because it was the fruit of a global credit bubble, in which the UK was a leading actor.' Thus, after the 2008 financial crisis, the condition of politics changes. As it bled into society through austerity and bailouts for bankers, the rotation in leadership advances at pace. By the time David Cameron leaves office in 2016 after the Brexit referendum – itself an outgrowth of the divisions over the future among a once united status quo – the rot has set in. We then have Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and Rishi Sunak in quick succession. (Image: Lucy North/PA Wire) That's four Tory prime ministers in a span of eight years. One of these, Truss, lasts only 49 days. This is abnormal and a reflection of the deep-seated problems built up in a period where living standards went into decline, as the wealth of the super-rich grew to unfathomable levels. Gone too are old certainties, like the permanence of the European Union, or indeed the Conservative Party itself. Keir Starmer has been in the job for a year and is already widely reviled. Doubtless the chatter around his replacement will increase, as a hapless Kemi Badenoch attempts to revive the fortunes of a once semi-invincible organ of the British establishment in the face of new challenges in the shape of Reform. Labour also face a test from their left too, in the form of the nascent new lefty party. The political system is cracking up under the pressures of a failed economic model and the projects of blame displacement and scapegoating attendant to it. This further shreds the social fabric, creating a polarised and angry populace, increasingly alienated from official politics. Authoritarianism, then, is an inevitable but futile resource from which those in power will increasingly draw upon. READ MORE: 'Totally gutted': SNP politicians and members react as Kate Forbes to stand down All of this is set against a global backdrop in which the norms, rules and conviviality once handed down as tablets of stone have been shattered. The post-war order is over, and finished for good, alongside many of its institutions. This is a new, multipolar age for which the vast majority of politicians are simply not trained for and do not understand. These epochal shifts combine with the fact that there is no obvious route to meaningful economic growth or an end to domestic volatility. It is little wonder, then, that many are asking themselves why on earth they should take up such a poisoned chalice at all.
