Leaving aside the playground politics (Johann Lamont as "Scotland's Mrs Thatcher" etc), it might be legitimately asked of the Scottish Government why it spends time and money persuading serious people like Crawford Beveridge and the late Campbell Christie to waste their time and that of others conducting root-and-branch reviews of Scotland's financial straits, if they intend to ignore their advice to conduct an honest debate.
Leaving aside the playground politics (Johann Lamont as \"Scotland's Mrs Thatcher\" etc), it might be legitimately asked of the Scottish Government why it spends time and money persuading serious people like Crawford Beveridge and the late Campbell Christie to waste their time and that of others conducting root-and-branch reviews of Scotland's financial straits, if they intend to ignore their advice to conduct an honest debate.
Custom byline text:
Scottish ministers did not seem to think a discussion on universal benefits was beyond the pale when they responded to the reports by the aforementioned wise men in 2010 and 2011, but for the sake of an easy hit against their opponents, they now pretend that it is. Agenda suspects this will play badly for the Cause in the long term, whatever the political sugar-rush it is delivering now. In the meantime, for a sober appraisal of the question, readers are advised to Google Beveridge's Independent Budget Review (July 2010) and read the 28-page chapter on universality that John Swinney commissioned but now affects to despise.
We moderate all comments on HeraldScotland on either a pre-moderated or post-moderated basis. If you're a relatively new user then your comments will be reviewed before publication and if we know you well then your comments will be subject to moderation only if other users or the moderators believe you've broken the rules, which are available here.
Moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours. Please be patient if your posts are not approved instantly.
