Show Me the Money

Facing the contradictions and deep structural flaws of their Local Income Tax plan, and now the growing public scrutiny of this proposal, the SNP have decided on a new media management tactic. The Scottish Government is now attempting to generate headlines that evoke a sense of economic competence, while ensuring these stories don’t touch on LIT itself – the bedrock of SNP economic policy.

So first we have:

“Swinney calls for oil revenue talks” – May 19

Here, Swinney writes a letter to Alistair Darling with the boilerplate SNP demand that “Scotland’s” oil profits be given to Scotland. This misses the reality that as the oil sits in British waters, it belongs to Britain as a political entity. However, even while based upon this premise, the first parts of the letter seem reasonable enough:

“...it is vital Scotland has access to and benefits from our own resources. It cannot be right that we have fuel poverty and soaring road fuel prices amid this energy plenty.

That is why I have written seeking talks on greater financial independence for Scotland, including a transfer of oil and gas resources to the Scottish Parliament, so that we can invest in Scotland's long-term economic interests.”

But then he gives the game away. If he is serious about securing these talks, why conclude the letter with this snippy and frankly inappropriate comment?

“Such a change would mean that we could invest these revenues in the future success of Scotland after decades of unfortunate decisions by the UK Government that have seen oil revenues directed towards filling the black hole in Britain's finances rather than being invested in the sensible manner adopted elsewhere.”

Because he needs a headline to divert media attention from LIT, which he calculates the media will begin to scrutinise if he doesn’t supply them with simple fodder like this. It worked for that day in both the Herald and Scotsman.

Next, we have:

"Salmond accused of stoking fuel row"

Salmond elaborates on Swinney’s argument here, linking the growing cost of UK domestic fuel to the financial windfall that Scotland could have if it acquired sole access to British oil revenues. The status quo is a “massive national outrage”, with this escalation of rhetoric seemingly indicating the pressures entailed in identifying new economic problems in order to disguise the ones Swinney is creating.

No mention here of the possibility of LIT alleviating some financial problems facing Scots due to the rising fuel prices – why not?

And now, yesterday, Darling responds to this nonsense.

“Holyrood and Westminster at war over oil and taxes”

Darling refocuses media attention on LIT, which, judging by the behaviour of the SNP, they would really rather not talk about. He tells us that, oddly, Swinney hasn’t approached the Treasury to discuss the Scottish Government’s hope that HMRC will conduct tax collection for LIT.

"To be blunt about it, the Nationalists are refusing to talk to us about it. If they thought this (policy] was a goer, you would have thought they would open up with us and say, 'Can we use the HMRC computer systems' but they have not done it."

Swinney seems to prefer asking Darling for oil revenues to be added to the Scottish Governments’ budget while insulting him in the same letter, to making progress on the economic policy that will make or break his name in politics. What’s going on?

Ultimately, the SNP are trying to prevent headlines emerging like this one on their proposed Scottish Futures Trust:

“Swinney admits SNP funding reform relies on PFI financing”

A few more headlines like this, but regarding LIT, will do much to encourage a public debate on its merits and shortcomings. To stop this happening, the SNP generate alternative economic talking points for the media, as shown above. If they have confidence in LIT themselves (or the Scottish Futures Trust for that matter), why do they feel the need to do this?