
Budget gaps, Chancellor? Why not save £500m a year on the royals?
Palaces and properties, duchies (Lancaster and Cornwall), and the seabed to 12 miles from the shore are all income generators. Is it too much to suggest that they belong to us, not the Windsors?
Taxing the rich rather than the poor might well be a popular policy.
AJ Clarence, Prestwick.
Wealth should not matter
I wonder if Kevin McKenna writes for The Herald on a Tuesday ('How Scotland's satnav socialists abandoned working-class people', The Herald, July 7) without first reading the Monday paper?
This is the second time that he has attacked Roz Foyer's position as STUC General Secretary purely on the grounds of her purported financial status and, by extension, her social class. If he read her articles purely on their merit, he would surely see that she bats on the side of outsiders of all descriptions in the UK and beyond, and does not appear to have bought into establishment thinking on homelessness, wealth distribution or anything else.
How much property you own or how much money you have in the bank should have no bearing on whether someone can or does stand up for compassion, freedom, justice, and equality. I suggest that so to do is, adapting one of Mr McKenna's phrases, 'to be authentically Christian in public life'. Jesus did not require cynicism from his followers; he said: 'go and do likewise'.
David Rogerson, Bridge of Allan.
Read more letters
A small price to pay
There has been grumbling about pensioners being "dragged" into paying income tax for the first time with the Government freeze on the tax threshold.
The current threshold for income tax is £12,570 in one year. The current maximum state pension is £11, 973.
The triple lock could mean that the pension will rise by 5.2% (£622) next year to £12,595.60. This is £25 over the threshold, meaning pensioners on the maximum state pension would pay 20% tax on that £25 (£5) – an extra 10p a week. Those receiving smaller pensions would still not pay tax.
While I appreciate this creates a precedent surely it's a microscopic price to pay for our share of improved NHS and defence of the country.
I can't understand why Keir Starmer doesn't explain this. It's simple, reassuring, arithmetic.
Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven.
Make enterprise No 1 priority
Scotland receives around £10,000 more per family of four in public spending than England, thanks to the Barnett Formula. On top of that, middle earners face significantly higher income tax than their UK counterparts. So where does all this extra money go? Not into productivity or investment, but into politically motivated consumption: free prescriptions, free tuition, baby boxes, and much more. Now, the SNP is considering an eye-watering £8 billion-a-year Minimum Income Guarantee – as if the money tree (those with the 'broadest shoulders') can be shaken indefinitely.
This isn't a path to prosperity; it's a blueprint for dependency. Tellingly, there's little serious discussion of how to grow Scotland's economy, because meaningful reform is complex, politically demanding, and doesn't deliver instant results.
The true drivers of growth – entrepreneurs, investors, job creators – are ignored or penalised. These are the people who risk their capital, work long hours without guarantees, and expect fair reward if successful. Crucially, they are mobile – as demonstrated by the growing exodus of wealth creators to other European countries that welcome them with open arms.
Scotland's increasingly punitive tax regime and populist handouts only accelerate this drain. With fewer wealth producers, the tax base shrinks, leading to more borrowing or heavier taxes on an already stretched population.
And here lies the central irony: a debt-fuelled, welfare-heavy Scotland, reliant on Westminster subsidies, is hardly the mark of a nation preparing for independence. You cannot credibly claim sovereignty while running an economy on excessive borrowing, oppressive taxation and unsustainable welfare.
Until the SNP prioritises enterprise over entitlement and growth over giveaways, it demonstrates only one thing: it is not serious about independence.
Ian Lakin, Aberdeen.
Biggest sinner is Westminster
John Gilligan (Letters, July 8) declares 'it's the economy, first, last and always, stupid' and then proceeds to berate road signs and ferries.
The big picture appears to have eluded him.
We remain part of a UK economy which is currently in such a parlous state that cuts to winter fuel allowance and disabled benefits have been attempted and there are now plans to scrap support for special educational needs in England.
The Children's Commissioner has declared that young people in England are living in 'almost Dickensian levels of poverty' where deprivation has been normalised.
If Mr Gilligan really wishes to add up the billions wasted, I would suggest he directs his calculator to the oil revenues squandered, HS2, which may or may not reach Birmingham saving commuters 20 minutes, tanks which can't be driven and one aircraft carrier being laid up so as to be used to supply spare parts to keep the other afloat.
Should he prefer to focus on minutiae, perhaps he could consider the ink that, although barely dry, is wasted when this Labour Government performs yet another U-turn?
Whatever the Scottish Government's faults, and I agree they are legion, Westminster is in a league of its own.
Alan Carmichael, Glasgow.
Definitions of separatism
While I agree with Mark Smith ("Independence declaration has the same old problems", The Herald, July 7) that 'commissions' are a way of kicking embarrassing issues into the long grass, the rest of his rambling article is, to put it politely, mince.
It is noticeable that as usual, British nationalism is not nationalism at all, and must not be mentioned. Unfair? Why were the terms 'nationalism' and 'separatism' absent from the EU referendum, and how can politicians who opposed and still oppose membership of the European Union be 'unionists'?
Mr Smith thinks that 'working closely together' in the case of the SNP joining the EU would undermine that concept. Sorry, that does not compute, nor does Scotland joining other independent nations of the world constitute separatism. The UK is not a fair and equal union: England with its huge population dominates the other countries, exploits their assets for its own benefit and uses that population density to slew investment to its country.
Devolution has proved to be power retained with fiscal control remaining in London, and Westminster politicians desperate to interfere and overrule the elected legislatures of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. An example this week is the English Health Secretary putting down his marker for Labour's next leadership campaign through an ad hominem attack on the elected First Minister of Scotland ("Streeting calls Swinney an 'analogue politician in a digital age' over NHS app", The Herald, July 8).
There is a democratic deficit; an elective mandate in Scotland is treated differently from an Anglo-British mandate, is it not? The right of self-determination, supposedly the first principle of international law, by-passes Scotland, though not Ireland. Westminster refuses to compromise its alleged sovereignty over the rest of us, and virtually never consults or seeks common ground on any issue with other UK nations.
GR Weir, Ochiltree.
Does Holyrood adequately cater for the needs of rural areas? (Image: Gordon Terris)
Rural Scots are being ignored
Andy Anderson ( Letters, July 7), writing about the right to call a referendum on public policy, says that "there is a petition on the Holyrood website calling for this particular UN Human Rights covenant to be put into Scots law". I contend that the SNP, which centralises all power in Scotland into Edinburgh, will never implement such a demand.
Prior to the May 2021 election, the then SNP Communities Secretary, Aileen Campbell, pledged that her party would implement a bill, drafted by Andy Wightman of the Scottish Greens, to give councils European-style safeguards over a raft of new powers and financial controls. Note that, once again, the SNP shows that it cannot be trusted to implement pledges given to the people of Scotland.
Phillip Norris (Letters, July 4) should also recognise that his request for "the SNP to take note" (over the desecration of rural Scotland
by wind turbines) will simply be ignored. After all, there was not a single response from any SNP politician to my letter of June 30 pointing out that there's a parliament for the Central Belt but not for the rest of us.
Rural Scots are ignored by the SNP.
Ian Moir, Castle Douglas.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Herald Scotland
5 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
University investigating student complaint over Palestinian fundraiser
Katie Wood, president of the society and organiser of the bake sale, said staff approached their stall and told them the items breached university policy and had prompted 'numerous complaints,' including one suggesting 'there will be trouble' if the students were not removed. Emails obtained by The Herald and Liberty Investigates reveal that the university also attempted to prevent the flag from being present at another bake sale fundraiser for a Palestinian charity, scheduled to be held by the University and College Union (UCU) 10 days later, in an 'attempt to avoid a similar issue.' HWU eventually allowed the flag to be flown after a UCU member questioned whether prohibiting the Palestinian flag was discriminatory. A HWU spokesperson said it would be investigating the 31 January bake sale event to 'establish a full set of circumstances' and that it would be 'inappropriate to comment' while this is ongoing. Students lodged a formal complaint against university staff for the handling of controversy surrounding a fundraising event. (Image: Garrett Baylor Stell) Ms Wood told The Herald she and her fellow students were left feeling 'targeted and uncomfortable' after staff allegedly threatened to use force to remove them if they did not comply with requests to remove their Palestinian flag and leaflets. She provided documents showing that she had given the university nine days' notice when submitting a request to book a stall for a 'bake sale to raise donations for a Palestinian charity,' which was approved. Yet on the day of the event, Ms Wood said two members of the university's Safeguarding team told them to remove the flag, allegedly saying it was 'university policy that no political messaging was allowed.' Read more: Ms Wood told the Herald: 'The Palestinian flag is not inherently political, any more than any other flag at any event would be. Attempting to remove the flag is discriminatory towards Palestinian students, as it implies their existence is inherently political and they are not welcome or safe on campus.' "The members running the stall at the time asked why they were being told to remove the flag and leaflets, they were told that it was university policy that no political messaging was allowed, citing that the word "Genocide" on the leaflets was political, and so was the flag. "The members were also informed that the safeguarding members had received 'numerous' complaints, including one asking for us to be removed, saying 'or there will be trouble.' Ms Wood added: 'This was extremely concerning that we would receive a threat such as this, and that the safeguarding member took this to us instead of dealing with the student threatening our safety. "This seems to show a great flaw in their approach to solving conflicts and harassment.' Ms Wood said the students eventually decided to comply with the requests to remove the items in question so they could continue with their fundraiser. 'After continued attempts to reason, the safeguarding members threatened that if we did not comply, we would be 'removed by force.' 'We have been part of and have ran this same event before several times and have never faced this reaction. This is disappointing, and has made us feel targeted and uncomfortable within our university.' They put away the flag, and handed out leaflets only to students who asked. Heriot-Watt University is investigating whether Safeguarding staff ordered students to take down a Palestinian flag because it violated university policy. (Image: Garrett Baylor Stell) Ms Wood said that she and her fellow students asked for the names of the Safeguarding staff in order to file a complaint, but staff allegedly refused to identify themselves. A HWU spokesperson said: 'On Wednesday 16 July, we received a formal complaint relating to a bake sale event that took place at our Edinburgh campus on 31 January 2025. "An investigation will now be carried out in line with our Complaints Handling Procedure (CHP) to establish the full set of circumstances. While the investigation is ongoing, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time." Emails disclosed under freedom of information laws reveal that university staff discussed the SPS bake sale 'incident' as they debated how to handle a similar event being held by the local branch of the UCU. A staff member wrote, on 5 February 2025, that 'in an attempt to avoid a similar issue," they had contacted the UCU organisers to request that they 'didn't provide a flag and that any literature provided reflects University policies.' According to the email, this 'inadvertently caused an issue.' The email quotes a response from someone connected to the UCU fundraiser, who questioned the justification for banning the flag. 'I have never seen any literature stating that national flags are not permitted … If you could point me in the direction of any relevant literature, I would be grateful. 'I will also check with UCU as it is important not to have discriminatory situation where the Palestinian flag is the ONLY [sic] one that is not allowed on campus.' People close to the event told The Herald the Palestinian flag was allowed at the UCU fundraiser. The revelations come days after it was revealed that HWU agreed to a request from defence company Raytheon UK to monitor students for signs of potential protest activity targeting a career fair held last February. Raytheon UK's requests – which HWU staff agreed to in an email – included monitoring students' online chats before the event, actively monitoring CCTV and carrying out 'enhanced patrols' during the fair in order to spot signs of students gathering and 'act as a deterrent' to help safeguard the Raytheon UK employees. The university denied involvement in improper monitoring. 'Heriot-Watt University categorically denies any suggestion of improper monitoring of our community. These allegations completely misrepresent the way the University operates. 'For absolute clarity, our Safeguarding team does not have access to student chat rooms or online discussion forums, nor would they ever be expected or requested by the University to monitor them.


The Herald Scotland
14 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
So you want progressive taxes, SNP? Fine: start with a land tax
Stories about wealthy people fleeing to avoid taxes are scarcely a novelty. Some of Scotland's most feted thespians and entrepreneurs have been following that route for decades. The others seem to have survived and feel no envy for the departed brethren, boring each other in sun-kissed places. The 'scare story' keeps running, however, as a deterrent to any government initiatives which might inconvenience the greediest. Never mind that it was Brexit which prompted more such departures than anything else. According to the Tax Justice Network, an average of 30 press articles a day appeared about 'the non-existent millionaire exodus in 2024', fed by lobbyists hired to promote the fiction. Read more by Brian Wilson In fact, many wealthy people want to do the right thing, particularly if they have acquired that status by creating businesses and employment to match. A fractional increase in taxation is not going to send them scurrying for their passports. As entrepreneurs, they are likely to be more concerned about the impact of business taxes than personal ones. The old statistic which gave rise to a theatre company, when seven per cent of the people owned 84 per cent of the wealth, is seriously in need of updating. Now, the richest one per cent own more wealth than the bottom 70 per cent while, according to Oxfam, billionaires pay 'effective tax rates close to 0.3 per cent of their wealth'. It's a pretty compelling case for starting to redress that gross imbalance while also contributing a few billion to the public finances, but it won't happen overnight or by grand announcement. Putting in place new structures which would be fair and effective, without unintended consequences, will be extremely complicated and take time, in the teeth of fierce resistance. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be embarked upon. Where better to start than in Scotland, which should be looking creatively at its own revenue options, beyond ritual moans about not being sent enough money or by raising income tax rates for people who are not at all wealthy. The number caught in Scotland-only higher tax rates has almost doubled in three years to over 700,000 and that particular well is running dry. People don't need private jets to escape a 48 per cent rate of income tax. The Scottish Affairs Select Committee at Westminster delivered a report this week which said the Barnett Formula is working well for Scotland and also that the Scottish Government should have more borrowing powers. I endorse both conclusions, but we can surely be more progressive than that? As one would expect, the SNP's contribution to the committee's work was based on their constitutional objective under the guise of Full Fiscal Economy, which nobody – including themselves – takes seriously. They just feel obliged to keep making that noise while, in real life, taking the money Barnett delivers, even more generously since the election of a Labour government. The area in which a radical Scottish Government could do immediate work is by replacing the council tax which is a regressive system introduced by the Tories in 1991 and causes no inconvenience whatsoever to the wealthiest in the land, particularly if their wealth is related to that very commodity – land. Eight years ago, SNP ministers asked for a report from their own Land Commission on the option of a Land Value Tax. In theory, this should be attractive to them because it plays into other stated objectives on which, otherwise, nothing is happening – land reform through greater diversity of ownership, land being freed up for housing, derelict land being brought into use, and so on. The Land Commission spelt out potential benefits of a Land Value Tax. 'Aside from raising revenue, one of the main theoretical benefits of land value taxation is that it should encourage land to be used more productively. This is because it is based on the value of land in its optimum use as opposed to its actual use. 'Taxing land value should also be an efficient approach to taxation because the supply of land is relatively fixed so taxing it should not affect supply. Whereas income taxes reduce incentives to work and corporation taxes reduce incentives to invest, taxing the value of land should not affect the amount of land available'. Funding arrangements for the Scottish Parliament are again under review (Image: Newsquest) For good measure: 'Taxing land is also attractive for administrative reasons because land cannot be moved so land value taxes should be difficult to avoid or evade.' At the end of all that, one wondered: 'What is there not to like?'. To be fair, the Commission added the caveat: 'The research did not find unequivocal evidence that proves they definitely deliver the various benefits often claimed of them. Any further steps toward implementation must therefore be taken with caution.' That was the get-out clause which the Scottish Government gratefully accepted. Whereas there is 'unequivocal evidence' that the existing system is deeply regressive, leaves large areas of Scotland untaxed and local government near bankrupt, there is no 'unequivocal evidence' that trying something else might produce better results. So after 18 years of SNP government, the Tory solution of 1991 – based on not offending the wealthy – remains undisturbed. Under the devolution settlement, the Scottish Government could only apply radical reform to funding councils rather than to national taxation. But it would be a start which would signal a genuine commitment to redistribution. And maybe if they tried it, working closely with the UK Government, it could become not just the most radical and interesting outcome Holyrood has ever delivered, but also a stepping-stone towards delivering a fairer tax system for the whole country. Or is it easier just to shout 'wealth tax' while avoiding even the smallest advance towards that objective? Brian Wilson is a former Labour Party politician. He was MP for Cunninghame North from 1987 until 2005 and served as a Minister of State from 1997 to 2003.


The Herald Scotland
16 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Brodies chief declares firm embracing AI with 'open arms'
He told The Herald: 'The rise of generative AI is an opportunity for the legal sector, and having tech that will help free up our colleagues to focus even more on our clients is something that we welcome with open arms. 'The firm has already assessed and adopted new ways of working that involve the latest technology, including use cases established through immersive AI labs that our innovation and technology team, together with teams of lawyers, worked on last year. 'When appropriate, AI tools can be used in tandem with lawyers to review and summarise information. Our evaluation will continue as new and improved products come to market but we also see people as being key to unlocking more use cases. The challenge lies in identifying and using AI in a way that creates efficiencies, freeing up lawyers to do the parts where clients require and benefit from human judgement, insight and interaction.' 'Confusion and uncertainty': Scotch whisky rocked by global upheaval Energy chief's price pledge as £300m Glasgow district heating scheme takes shape Edinburgh firm outguns forecasts after snubbing £1bn takeover approach 'Deeply concerning': More Scots firms plan to shut than expand Mr Goldie's comments came as Brodies booked a 15th consecutive year of growth. Brodies reported this week that its turnover had increased by 11% to £126.7 million in the year ended April 30, lifting operating profits above £50m, against a backdrop of domestic and global headwinds. The firm said it had seen growth across all of its core practice areas over the period, and highlighted its work on a number of major corporate deals. These included acting for Parkmead Group, the energy firm built by North Sea veteran Tom Cross, on the sale of its UK oil assets to Serica Energy, and for Three60 Energy on its acquisition of the entire issued share capital of Samphire Subsea Limited. Mr Goldie told The Herald the firm had seen an increase in appetite for corporate deal-making in Scotland, despite the volatile backdrop. He said: 'There have been fluctuations in the flow of UK and international deals, with some volatility in the investment and M&A (mergers and acquisitions) markets generally, largely attributable to macroeconomic and geopolitical issues. 'However, with interest rates and inflation in the UK having largely stabilised, that degree of increased certainty in the market is feeding an appetite for deals in many key sectors across the Scottish market. From our clients we're seeing those movements particularly evident in, for example, the energy, technology and business services sectors.'