A Treasury paper shows only those in the bottom quintile will lose more money as a result of the spending review; all other income groups will lose less. Better Together, huh?
They also report the faux pas over phone roving charges, which appears to have emanated from the Eton Boy's office. (Do they only teach them how to reprimand the butler if he decants the port badly, and throw in a few Latin tags...like damnant quod non intellegunt?) What a pile of nonsense from BT.
In the same story some junior minister, Jo Swinson, apparently said the same sort of thing about letters... couldn't have the same price stamps for all over the Uk, despite the fact that the system holds with the republic of Ireland, Jersey, Guernsey, Man, Northern Ireland, and that both the Post office and the Federation of Post Masters has indicated it sees no reason (apart perhaps for Swinson) that that would not continue.
What next. All emails will stop at the border? Another pile of nonsense from BT.
The next story reads:
SCOTLAND's former counter-terrorism expert has attacked what he called "scurrilous scaremongering" about the efficiency of intelligence services in a post-independence Scotland by pro-union campaigners.
Allan Burnett insisted security services could be "readily created" and traditional alliances easily maintained if Scots vote Yes next year.
His remarks come as figures close to the UK security establishment warn that SNP strategists have "naïvely" underestimated how much time and money it will take to create a secret police service.
Burnett was the old Strathclyde Police's head of intelligence and Scotland's counter-terrorism co-ordinator before retiring in 2010 with the rank of assistant chief constable, and endorsing the SNP. Yep, more nonsense from BT.
The next story involves the report that in the build up to the referendum, the police department responsible for the security of parliament and government offices, previously in the hands of Lothian and Borders Police, has decided that the first minister may need extra security.
The amusing thing about this story is that the comment for the newly appointed Labour spokesman for justice is not a concern that public figures (whomsoever they may be) should be safe in the run up to the referendum, but as follows:
“This shows where the First Minister’s priorities lie. We have cuts to support staff, which means police officers are behind desks instead of out on the beat, but he’s more concerned about his own safety rather than that of communities across Scotland.”
|Graeme Pearson: Justice Spokesman for the Labour Group|
So, what he's saying is that he is more interested in making cheap political points than keeping public figures safe. Oops!
He may have to retrench if the security services decide that Darling should have protection. I wonder what he thinks about Brown having protection from now until he dies, even when he is off on work which swells the Brown coffers...
Statesman like behaviour from Graeme Pearson and Labour, and maybe not the quote for which he will wish to be remembered, in what, I suspect, may not be a long career in politics.
The Herald now appears to ration the number of pages that you can look at in a month for free, so unfortunately although I can give you a link to the last story, I don't know whether you will be able to look at it. On my screen it gives details of how I can sign in and get another 5 stories, or pay £1 for the first month and £2.99 thereafter to read their stories.
Yes... Fat chance.
I've read that Jim Murphy was less than pleased at Ken Mackintosh getting the sack (as was ken himself). Is there a schism in the Labour leadership (using the term loosely)?