Latest news with #FergusEwing
The National
04-08-2025
- Politics
- The National
Why the Highlands and Islands will win from Scottish independence
The failure of the Scottish Government to invest in keeping our ferry fleet up to date has caused chaos and significant economic harm on our islands. 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
Scotsman
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Fergus Ewing could be celebrated as the man who gave devolution a long overdue kick up the A9
Fergus Ewing, pictured in the Scottish Parliament | PA Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Fergus Ewing's intimation that he will stand as an independent in next year's Holyrood elections is a political milestone but not a surprise. His alienation from the party with which his family name is synonymous has long been apparent. Equally, his personal status among the good burghers of Inverness and Nairn is beyond doubt. He says the tipping point was a visit to Morrison's when it took two hours to navigate the aisles due to good wishes from electors; an accolade to which few MSPs could aspire. He will be hard to beat. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The influence of his arguments should extend far beyond Inverness and Nairn since the matters which have separated Fergus Ewing from the SNP have resonance in every corner of Scotland. Basically, there is a desperate need for change if devolution is ever going to deliver its potential. In SNP terms, Fergus's offence was to be right about everything he stepped out of line on – coalition with the Greens; future of the North Sea; Deposit Return Scheme; Highly Protected Marine Areas, the Gender Reform imbroglio and so on. It is from these stances, rather than the constitution, that he has won respect. Incidentally, Fergus usefully reminded us yesterday that the Bute House Agreement with the Greens was 'negotiated by the current First Minister' who cannot now run far enough from its outcomes. That's what passes for 'steadying the ship' without a word of apology to Scotland for a vastly expensive and socially divisive waste of time. Such arrogance! The greatest of Fergus's local causes has been the flagrant breach of manifesto pledges to upgrade the A9 and A96. These are examples of the SNP being hoist on a petard which served them well for so long – making grand promises without meeting them, then relying on short memories. In 2007, the SNP squeaked into government with an unambiguous commitment to dual the A9 between Perth and Inverness by 2025, the year of grace in which we now live. In his previously marginal seat, Fergus romped home. The A9 pledge was highly influential in the Highlands and therefore in determining the overall outcome. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Once made, it had outlived its usefulness. To cut a very long story short, they now admit to being a decade away from the declared objective and probably a lot longer. Fergus last week accused his erstwhile colleagues of again rejecting expert advice by adopting a procurement strategy that makes 2085 a better bet! Some politicians become apologists for such cynicism. Once out of office, Fergus chose not to and his constituents appreciate that, across political divides. If the SNP had listened to him as an elder statesman with an old-fashioned loyalty to the people he represents, they would not now find themselves in this mess. Liking and respecting does not necessarily mean voting for him, of course. As I'm sure he would expect if I lived in Inverness and Nairn, I would vote Labour as usual since the only way of getting rid of the government which he dissects so effectively is to replace them with someone else. But the 'someone else' should also heed the arguments Fergus makes. 'Over time', he says, 'I have seen the Scottish Parliament at its best and its worst. I fear in recent years it has been at its worst. I believe the SNP has lost its way and that devolution itself is letting Scotland's people down. It doesn't need to be this way'. Holyrood, he says, 'is more fractious and tribal than ever before'. First Minister's Questions is 'a pointless slanging match' which participants regard 'as the highlight of their working week'. The Scottish Parliament 'came of age some years ago - surely now it's time for it to grow up; to act with maturity. Instead, there is the same lack of delivery, the same blame game of 'it wisnae me' and the same lack of humility'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Beyond the specific policy issues with which Fergus Ewing has been identified, this brutal - and patently accurate - critique should be even more damaging to the reputation of Holyrood's current masters who have had 18 years to reduce it to this. Fergus argues for the main parties to work together and 'replace brittle bickering with reasoned debate and the cross party co-designing of, for example, reform of public services and maximising economic growth'. He then recommends 'a grand coalition' to head off the threat from 'fringe parties'. That might be stretching it but the basic point is right. If you take the constitution out the mix, there are no great ideological chasms at Holyrood, however much they are contrived. The failings are overwhelmingly of leadership, competence and vision, the essential foundations of good and productive government, which is really what Scotland wants. Those who aspire to replacing Mr Swinney and his dismal band should rise to that challenge. They need to offer something better, not only in policies but also the whole approach to making devolution work for the people. Willingness to co- operate across party lines, and crucially, to work with the UK government rather than against it should certainly be parts of that approach. I would also put the return of powers to local levels and a purge of the quango statelet as high priorities. Who would disagree? And revising Holyrood's own stultifying procedures is long overdue. The list of options for 'a new approach' are plentiful and should be brought together as a reforming agenda.
The Herald Scotland
12-07-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Scottish Greens at the crossroads – principle or pragmatism?
Fergus Ewing, the former SNP Minister, previously dismissed them as 'wine-bar revolutionaries'. To each and every taunt, Green politicians tend to respond with a gentle, faintly supercilious smile. Read More: In truth, the most fervent advocates of Greenery can occasionally seem a mite smug. Like religious adherents, they can sometimes give the impression that their path is the way to truth, while others are self-deluded. Only very occasionally, mind. And they mean well. They genuinely believe, as they set out in their 2024 election manifesto, that 'we are hurtling towards climate hell.' Such a conclusion tends to lessen the scope for nuanced politics. But, alongside that, there is also an intriguing conundrum confronting the Scottish Greens right now as they elect their next leaders and contemplate the pending Holyrood elections. Are they content to be, principally, a party of voluble protest? Or is there pragmatism too – an opportunity to cut deals with other parties, such as the SNP or Labour, in pursuit of interim Green objectives? As The Herald has ably chronicled, there are those in the party who argue that the Greens must present a fully radical agenda, who distrust Holyrood compromise, including the Bute House pact previously struck by the retiring leadership. Equally, though, there are prominent Greens who lampoon such talk as 'heroic Bolshevik insurgency' – which achieves precisely nothing for the people of Scotland. Politics is frequently a question of balancing principle, pragmatism and power. Just ask those Labour MPs who found it impossible to back their leader's demands for welfare cuts. Again, commonly, that balance becomes trickier as a party gains more salience. It is relatively easy to be pure of thought when what you say and do is immaterial. That tends to change when there is the prospect that your contribution could alter Parliamentary arithmetic, could advance or thwart legislation, could sustain or oust a government. Then you have to choose. To compromise. You have to acknowledge that you cannot implement every line of your manifesto. Not least because the people did not vote for you in sufficient numbers. Be clear. The Greens will not abandon principle. They will still, on occasion, sport that knowing smile. But perhaps they may once more seek a mandate to enter negotiations with others. Is that feasible? Are the Greens not burned by Humza Yousaf's abrupt decision as First Minister to end the Bute House pact and kick them out of government? Seems not. One senior source dismissed the notion that they were 'nursing some raw fury at the SNP.' I was told that there is a good 'transactional' relationship with Team Swinney, as evidenced by the negotiations over the Scottish Government budget. The Greens know that John Swinney does not share their overall outlook. For example, he believes firmly in pursuing GDP economic growth while they do not, insisting that was excluded from the Bute House deal. First Minister John Swinney (Image: PA) And, yes, perhaps the relationship with Nicola Sturgeon was deeper. She is arguably closer to the Green perspective. After all, in a lecture, she previously set out the concept of assessing 'well-being', rather than simply economic wealth. But it seems the Greens could still work with John Swinney, where necessary. There is, I was told, 'sufficient mutual trust and respect.' There could also be a deal with Labour, arithmetically. But core Labour policies might be problematic – not least their eager advocacy of nuclear power. For now, the SNP seem more likely partners. After all, both parties support Scottish independence. Albeit with differing degrees of vigour. Frankly, I do not believe that Green politicians get up in the morning with the first thought that they must end the Union. Their waking focus is on the environment and climate change. Still, the Greens insist that they back independence, placing it in the context of those environmental aims. They say that an independent Scotland would be better placed to alter energy policy and tackle the climate crisis. And there is another thought lurking at the back of Green minds. They note that John Swinney has faced a degree of internal SNP criticism from those who believe he is not sufficiently fervent in pursuing independence. One source suggested to me that this might present an opportunity for the Greens to highlight their independence credentials. Frankly, to prise votes from the SNP. However, as with Mr Swinney, it seems the Greens want to get away from discourse over the independence process. To build support instead for the proclaimed advantages of the notion. Again, though, the Greens will not shed their iconoclastic image. They will continue to position themselves as challenging the wealthy establishment. An opportunity to do that presents itself with President Trump's possible Scottish visit. Many leading politicians will be torn between mounting protests and arguing Scotland's interests, if given a chance. No such dilemma confronts the Greens – who will be firmly behind the barricades. But, still, there is the lure of pragmatism. I expect the Greens to enter the next Holyrood elections with a litany of claimed achievements and a taste of what more could be feasible, if they are granted influence. Always a degree of grandiloquence on the climate. But a focus on cutting costs for working families. Rent controls, free bus travel for young people, secured by the Greens in partnership with the SNP. This leadership election will determine who is primarily making that case. Patrick Harvie is standing down as co-convener. Lorna Slater is seeking re-election. As I write, MSPs Ross Greer and Gillian Mackay are also in the frame. Others may emerge. En passant, I should note that the winners will not necessarily be one woman, one man, as in the past. That reflects revised equality guidance. But political balance will still be at the core of this contest. What direction will the Scottish Greens pursue? And could it lead them back to shared power at Holyrood? Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre – and Dundee United FC
The Herald Scotland
10-07-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Is the lack of dualling of the A9 really such a danger to life?
In other words, dual carriageway accounts for only 25% of the road, but accounts for 36% of non-fatal accidents and 32% of fatal accidents. The claim by Fergus Ewing, published in your newspaper, that "the risk of being in a road accident is three times greater on single carriageways such as the A9 compared with dual carriageways" is not supported by these figures. A little more attention to statistics – and less political point-scoring – might be a good idea. Jim Macgregor, Edinburgh. • I am now on the wrong side of 80 but nevertheless, still care passionately about Scotland, its people and their glorious diversity. All of us, to our detriment, have a mediocre political establishment, who, despite their mediocrity, expertly magnify the insignificant at the expense of the significant, thus masking society's real problems. Two articles in Wednesday's Herald very powerfully illustrates this malaise that permeates all areas of our social welfare. First, the concern over the A9, and second, Calum Steele's excellent piece on the failed concept that is Police Scotland ("This is why we should raise more than an eyebrow at the state of Police Scotland", The Herald, July 9). Over the years I have been privileged to have had numerous letters (and an Agenda column) published in The Herald echoing the sentiments contained in both articles. Indeed, so have many others. Sadly it seems that politicians are incapable of listening to or understanding the concerns of the electorate whom they are supposed to serve. Dan Edgar, Rothesay. Read more letters Let's have some prosecutions We all deplore the brutality of organised crime gangs but what has been revealed by the Post Office and infected blood scandals is as brutal and contemptuous of individual suffering as gang behaviour. But the gangs involved are executives, politicians, civil servants, professionals and what a surprise it will be if any of them end up in court; they certainly won't be in prison. They see themselves as doing their jobs, protecting their personal positions and their organisations. You don't have to stab or shoot people to make the innocent suffer, you just have to tell lies and find plausible excuses to prevent justice for decades in the hope that the issues will go away – ie, victims will die off. Those responsible are, of course, all respectable people. Like the banking scandals of 2008, who really got punished? The public, the small businesses, but not the irresponsible gamblers whose greed and arrogance caused so much damage. So let's see what the prosecution service does. Any bets? Isobel Lindsay, Biggar. King Charles or Donald Trump? AJ Clarence's suggestion (Letters, July 9) of the abandonment of the monarchy to save the possibility of £500 million per year is more than ill judgment. It demonstrates a lack of knowledge as to what the state owns vis-a-vis the royals' private income. His suggestion that cavalry regiments, Trooping of the Colour and, of all things, bearskin hats should be ditched is a case in point. Is he not aware that all cavalry units have been mechanised since 1940 and form an integral part of the Army, ceremonial duties being only a very small part? I doubt that overseas people would flock to London to see an American version of the sorry spectacle of America's finest ambling down The Mall clad in what looked like fatigues, waving their hands to the small crowd. I am not sure that he knows that the duchies (Lancaster and Cornwall) are taxed at the highest rate, ie 45%. The palaces and their contents are owned by the Crown Estates and held in perpetuity for the country. The final suggestion that "taxing the rich rather than the poor might well be a popular policy" but in the end will not produce the amount necessary to run the country, but it may cause a vast wasteland of empty houses around a well-known airport amid excellent golf courses. I much prefer the status quo to that of the US head of state, a convicted felon, who might easily have transferred the total running cost of Mar-a-Logo to be paid by the state, in keeping with state assistance for several of his private financial ventures since he was elected President. Robin Johnston, Newton Mearns. • The Prime Minister of Israel has nominated Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. May I suggest that the Rev Sue Parfitt would be a much better candidate? Iain McNicol, Port Appin, Argyll. Some of the Lewis Chessmen (Image:) Good move for Chessmen It is intriguing to note that the British Museum will loan the Lewis Chessmen to France in exchange for the Bayeux Tapestry, which is set to return to England for the first time in more than 900 years ("Bayeux Tapestry to return to England for first time in more than 900 years", heraldscotland, July 8). The Chessmen have become unlikely diplomatic pawns between Britain and France. In return for the tapestry, which depicts the 1066 Norman invasion and the Battle of Hastings, the British Museum will loan the Sutton Hoo collection, the Lewis Chessmen, and other items to France. The Chessmen – a famous hoard of 93 objects – were discovered in 1831 on the Isle of Lewis. Eleven are in the National Museums Scotland (NMS) collection, while the remaining 82 are in the British Museum's collection, six of which are on loan to Museum nan Eilean on Lewis. It is clearly fantastic to be able to showcase the Chessmen to a wider audience and allow others to check them out. Alex Orr, Edinburgh. Camp follower I was intrigued to learn that the phrase "winter of discontent" was originally coined by a William Shakespeare (Letters, July 5). I had supposed it to be a jocular corruption of a notice in the window of a Sheffield sporting goods emporium one springtime, reading "Now is the discount of our winter tents". Robin Dow, Helensburgh.
Telegraph
08-07-2025
- Automotive
- Telegraph
SNP accused of ‘betrayal' over Scotland's most dangerous road
The SNP Government is facing fresh criticism over its failure to upgrade Scotland's most dangerous road, where more than 300 crashes have occurred in four years. Since 2021, 28 people have been killed on the A9 between Perth and Inverness, with hundreds more injured. The 88-mile trunk road was supposed to have been dualled by this year, following a pledge by the SNP government in 2011. In 2023, the completion date was pushed back to 2035 after ministers admitted the target was unachievable. The Scottish Conservatives, which obtained the latest accident data, accused the SNP of a 'shameful betrayal' of those who rely on the A9, including First Minister John Swinney's constituents. Fergus Ewing, the veteran MSP and former SNP rural affairs minister, who last month announced that he will stand as an independent in next year's Scottish Parliament elections, said his former party's failure to deliver on its pledge was 'the SNP's shame'. He added: 'Never have promises been so clearly broken, and the lack of any sense of contrition or humility from the SNP leaders is in itself surely reprehensible.' Figures released under a Freedom of Information request show that 2022-23 was the worst year for fatalities, with 13 people killed on the 88-mile stretch of the A9. Between 2021 and 2025, there were 321 collisions that resulted in 134 serious, and 159 minor, injuries. The Perth to Inverness stretch of the A9 switches between dual and single lanes, which is believed to heighten the risk of accidents. In addition, there is no central barrier to separate traffic and prevent head-on collisions. 'These shocking figures reveal the appalling casualty toll on the A9,' said Sue Webber, the Conservative shadow transport secretary. 'Every day that goes by without this vital road being dualled is putting more lives at risk. Enough is enough. Dualling this road is a matter of life and death.' Mr Ewing, who has been increasingly at odds with the SNP over its slow progress in dualling the A9 and A96 roads, pointed to evidence from the Road Safety Foundation showing that the risk of being in a road accident is three times greater on single carriageways such as the A9 compared with dual carriageways, and ten times greater than on motorways. Addressing the latest accident data, he added: 'Every single one of these accidents involves a family, and those where deaths have been caused will be devastated. 'The dualling of the A9, promised by this year, won't happen by 2035 in my view, and at the heart of my campaign in Inverness and Nairn will be that the next government must complete the dualling. It is my unfinished business. It's the SNP's shame.' Last year, Nicola Sturgeon, the former SNP first minister, apologised that her party's pledge to dual the A9 between Perth and Inverness could not be met. She told a Holyrood inquiry that the £3 billion project had faced significant challenges beyond their control, including from Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic. However, opposition politicians have suggested measures to speed up progress. The Scottish Tories have proposed an emergency law that would utilise private companies and expedite environmental impact assessments to fast-track the dualling of the A9 by the end of the next parliament. Cost pressures and austerity In 2011, the SNP government also promised to upgrade the A96 between Aberdeen and Inverness by the end of this decade but abandoned the pledge last year. Fiona Hyslop, the SNP Transport Secretary, blamed cost pressures and austerity, and admitted that the 'original anticipated timeline of 2030' would not be met. She also unveiled an official review that cast major doubt on whether the project will ever be carried out, after it concluded that dualling was not the best option. Transport Scotland said 50 per cent of the A9 will be dualled by 2030 and completed by 2035. The body added that it is 'actively considering' fast-track work, including opportunities for undertaking 'advance works' ahead of main construction contracts. A spokesperson said: 'Our sympathies are with the families and friends of those who have lost loved ones and those who have been injured on Scotland's roads. One death is one too many, which is why we have increased our road safety budget to a record £48 million to address road casualties across the road network.' 'We have prioritised funding for A9 Dualling within our annual budgets and we are also actively considering whether there is any way that we can fast-track work, including opportunities for undertaking 'advance works' ahead of main construction contracts. 'In the meantime, additional investment has supported junction improvements, improved markings and targeted road safety campaigns to improve A9 safety. Private companies are already being used and advance works including Environmental Assessments for the route have already been made.'
