From news.gov.scot yesterday:

‘Plans to reform the Scottish Crown Estate, and give local communities more control of its assets, has been introduced to the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Crown Estate Bill will establish a framework for changes in the management of Scottish Crown Estate assets and give communities a stronger voice in how these assets are managed. This will include opportunities for councils and communities to directly manage Scottish Crown Estate assets.  The total capital value of the Scottish Crown Estate assets is £275.7m and the approximate gross annual revenue is £15m.’

https://news.gov.scot/news/scottish-crown-estate

As I understand it, the Scotland Act of 2016 led to the transfer of the management of Crown Estate assets and their revenues to Crown Estate Scotland in April 2017.

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/marine/seamanagement/TCE

I take this to mean the revenue is part of the Scottish Government’s tax revenue as King Wiliam IV (above) ‘revoked the income from the Crown estates in Scotland in 1830.’

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Estate_Scotland

I’m out of my comfort zone here so I’d welcome comment from more-informed readers.

You might remember this from the World Economic Forum strongly praising the management of the Queensferry Crossing project:

‘The UK’s new Queensferry Crossing bridge, connecting Edinburgh to Fife in Scotland, offers an example on how to do it. Three good practices contributed to the high-quality process and outcomes: the UK planners diagnosed the problem early; took their time with careful design upfront; and built and sustained an inclusive coalition of stakeholders. The evidence speaks for itself. The Queensferry Crossing – a three-tower cable-stayed bridge with a length of 1.7 miles – opened in early September, well within budget and with a manageable 8-month time delay. This is a rare occurrence among bridges. According to research at the University of Oxford’s Saïd Business School, nine out of 10 fixed links (bridges and tunnels) suffer an average cost overrun of 34% and a time delay of roughly 2 years.’

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/11/what-america-can-learn-from-a-bridge-in-scotland/?utm_content=bufferbeb72&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Major capital projects nearly always overrun the initial cost and time estimates. You’d never know that of course from the hypocritical protests from the opposition parties as they seek to make political capital (😊) out of the smallest delay. Needless to say, the local Tory is indignant on behalf of his constituents, as the complete Aberdeen bypass looks likely to be delayed by the collapse of Carrillion. He, of course, makes no mention of Carillion. Maybe he still believes in privatisation and outsourcing.

To the credit of Energy Voice, they headlined the main story which is that sections of the route could actually open ahead of schedule and make a big impact on travel times around the city. I have relatives north of Aberdeen and passing through the city can add another hour to my journey, so I welcome this enthusiastically.

From the Energy Voice report:

‘Transport Scotland chief admitted it would be “naïve” to think the collapse of construction giant Carillion, one of the project’s three key contractors, would not have an “impact” on the £745million road. Giving evidence at Holyrood’s connectivity committee, Mr Brown [the Minsiter] revealed that about half of the 76 Carillion directly-employed AWPR workers had been transferred to the other two contractors, Balfour Beatty and Galliford Try, and that there was a “strong expectation that far more will be taken on”.’

https://www.energyvoice.com/other-news/161839/sections-aberdeen-bypass-open-early-despite-carillion-collapse/

So, unless you are the Tory MSP for the area, taking into account the Carillion collapse which was not the responsibility of the Scottish government, this looks like another good news story.

(c) pets4homes.co.uk*

First on banning smoking in public places, first on minimum alcohol pricing, first on free-care for the disabled, first to have statutory targets for tackling poverty and homelessness, first to ban the use of wild animals in travelling circuses, first on baby boxes and free sanitary products, first to propose giving refugees the right to vote and now first to ban the use of electric collars on dogs.

Electric collars have been used for some time and, in particular, for dogs with ‘behaviour problems.’ However, accepting the argument that they are cruel, regardless of any effect, the Scottish government plans to ban them altogether.

This seems to be another example of research-based policy formulation. Here’s what the British Veterinary Association has to say:

‘Electric pulse devices are sometimes used in dog training as a form of punishment to prevent a dog from repeating bad behaviour. However, although training a dog is important for their wellbeing, research shows that electric pulse collars are no more effective than positive reinforcement methods.

BVA and BSAVA consulted with experts and examined evidence which found the collars raise a number of welfare issues, such as the difficulty in accurately judging the level of electric pulse to apply to a dog without causing unnecessary suffering.’

https://www.bva.co.uk/News-campaigns-and-policy/Policy/Ethics-and-welfare/Electronic-aids/

Several other studies seem to be saying the same thing. See:

‘A new study has found that the use of shock collars (also known as electronic collars or e-collars) can cause symptoms of distress in dogs, and the effects only worsen as the level of shock is increased. The study, entitled “The Welfare Consequences and Efficacy of Training Pet Dogs with Remote Electronic Training Collars in Comparison to Reward-Based Training” was published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Plos One and was conducted by researchers at the University of Lincoln in the UK.’

https://positively.com/articles/every-dog-owner-should-know-about-this-new-shock-collar-study/

Speaking as life-long ‘dog-lover’, I didn’t need the research to know it was just wrong.

 

* the photograph above is from a site advising on purchase of the collars (!)

(c) instantoffices.com

From Insider online business magazine:

‘Investment into Scottish commercial property surged in 2017 as money spread throughout the country and across the office, industrial, retail and leisure sectors. According to figures compiled by Savills, investment reached £2.3bn, 37 per cent ahead of the 10-year annual average of £1.7bn. The figure was boosted by 36 deals worth £20m or more, more than double the number of deals of that size recorded in 2016. And unlike 2016 – when the £1.9bn invested was dominated by forward funding of the Edinburgh St James – last year’s investment was spread across all the major sectors. Savills also noted a “healthy mix” of activity across Scotland.’

Now, I have no reason to suspect Insider of pro-independence sympathies but it’s a fairly regular source of positive indicators for the Scottish economy in amongst a large number of reports which don’t serve that purpose for me, yet I rarely see them reported in the mainstream. I’d have thought Insider and the Scottish Business News Network would regular reads for Douglas Fraser of Revolting Scotland. Is he skipping these reports for some reason? The Insider report also goes on to discuss ‘prime yields’ which seem to suggest that the returns on these property investments are higher in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK:

‘Prime yields in Aberdeen ended 2017 at 6.25 per cent, 100 basis points below the start of the year. Prime yields in Edinburgh and Glasgow both moved in by 25 basis points during the course of 2017 to finish at 5.25 and 5.5 per cent respectively. However, Scottish prime office yields remain attractive compared to the UK regional prime office yield, which currently stands at 4.75 per cent.’

https://www.insider.co.uk/news/investment-scottish-commercial-property-hits-11908307

I did of course have to find out a bit more about ‘yields’. Here’s a definition:

‘Yield calculations are worked out by dividing the annual rental income on a property by how much it cost to buy. For example:

Gross yield = annual rental income (weekly rental x 52) / property value x 100.

So, if you buy a retail property for $750,000 and rent it out for $1,500 a week ($78,000 annually) the annual return on your investment, or your yield, will be 10.4%. This is an example of gross yield, where the running expenses of owning a retail business have not been taken into account.’

https://www.realcommercial.com.au/news/yield-definition-drives-commercial-real-estate-market

As for ‘prime yields’, are these a selected subset of a particular kind of property investment such as city-centre offices? I guarantee at least one reader will know.

According the above graph from the ONS, Scotland’s unemployment rate continues to be lower than that of the UK, of England, of all the English regions other the affluent and highly subsidised south and of Northern Ireland. This has been the pattern (other than the sudden fall in NI) for at least a year now, as the Scottish economy shows multiple signs of health to contradict the unreliable estimates of GDP and GERS used by the Unionist media to weaken the case for independence. The Northern Ireland figure is puzzling when you see that it also has the very lowest employment rate. Perhaps a reader can explain this.

Scotland also has one of the highest employment rates in the UK with only the super-heated economy of the south having a higher rate.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/regionallabourmarket/january2018

Another interesting and at first puzzling graph from the same source reveals that Scotland has had the second-highest increase in ‘workforce jobs’ in the last year. I admit having to find out just what this means. Here’s a definition:

‘Workforce jobs measures the number of filled jobs in the economy. The estimates are mainly sourced from employer surveys such as the Short-Term Employment Surveys (STES) and the Quarterly Public-Sector Employment Survey (QPSES). Workforce jobs is a different concept from employment, which is sourced from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), as employment is an estimate of people and some people have more than one job.’

https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/reconciliationofestimatesofjobs/latest

So, is this good news? Does it suggest more economic activity than the simple employment figures?

(c) inkcinct.com.au

According to the Herrod, yesterday:

‘Fears are mounting that only those accused of the most serious crimes will be held in police custody after being charged, under a radical overhaul of the justice system. Currently, officers have the option to bail suspects to appear in court at a later date, but it is often only used for first offenders charged with minor crimes such as traffic offences. Now the Scottish Government has extended this as part of the 2016 Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act – which comes into force on Thursday – to allow the police to “take every precaution to ensure a person is not unreasonably or unnecessarily held in police custody”.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15889691.Only_the_most_dangerous_suspects_to_be_locked_up_under_new_custody_guidelines/

Now, just where are those mounting fears being expressed and by just whom? The Herrod is unable to tell us despite its headline. I’m guessing they’ve been made up by the Herrod or its feeders from the opposition parties. So, there are no mounting fears really.

Further, even if the Herrod could tell us where they are, would they be justifiable? In Scandinavia they’ve been imprisoning only the most violent criminals for decades now. They report no increased threat to the general public as a result and have lower re-offending rates:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/oct/18/prisonsandprobation-norway

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/26/prison-sweden-not-punishment-nils-oberg

Scotland has experienced a dramatic fall in violent crime in the last decade. See:

Of 35 children and teenagers killed with knives in Britain in 2017, not one was in Scotland, yet in 2005, the UN called Scotland the most violent country in the developed world.

Scotland’s homicide rate falls by 47%, is lower than the rate for England and Wales and has fallen faster than many other countries in the ten years of SNP government

So, it’s maybe time to try the Scandinavian approach. It’s also time, of course, for the Herrod to be a bit more mature and stop trying to scare the old folk who might still be up for voting No next time.

Journalism is a matter of making choices. Underlying these choices are mental processes operating sometimes at the sub-conscious level. Confronted with RCPCH’s landmark State of Child Health report, released today, what a journalist writes will inevitably involve a process of selection and of prioritising information. A junior reporter knows that they cannot just write what they want but, either consciously or more often sub-consciously, they already know what those above them in the organisation expect and they work toward those expectations as they report. The editor who will accept, modify or reject their draft also is working toward someone above them and they know what is required. In Scotland’s overwhelmingly anti-Independence and anti-SNP media, reports which might reflect upon the Scottish Government must, with few exceptions, present a negative view of Scotland in some way. Reports may have positive elements, but the overall picture cannot be taken by the reader to be complimentary to the Scottish Government, the SNP or even Scotland generally given that even the latter might be interpreted to reflect well on the government of the day. Rare exceptions are allowed, as these enable the claim of impartiality, but their infrequency means that they cannot change the overall impact and are known by political scientists as ‘repressive tolerance.’

So, when we see the Herald use, in a story on the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health’s 2018 report, a link to a January 2017 report with the headline ‘among worst in Europe’ suggesting we will be reading more about the 2018 RCPCH report, we see again, the agenda revealed. There is a similar phrase toward the end of the 2018 report, but many other choices could have been made along the way and it is not even one of the main messages intended by the RCPCH. My headline above comes very early in the report and looks headline-worthy but of course does not fit the story the reporter feels obliged to tell. Long before we get to their headline phrase, we see and could select these:

‘Policies that will improve childhood obesity rates, breastfeeding rates, women’s health during pregnancy, child poverty and child and adolescent mental health have all been welcomed in the new scorecard, which sees the Scottish Government performing far better than the Westminster Government when it comes to its focus on child health. However, doctors say that in Scotland, ‘the key now is to ensure these policy commitments are delivered.’

We then see an impressive list of achievements recognised in the report:

‘Key recommendations from State of Child Health that have been adopted include:

• An announcement to expand the number of health visitors by an additional 500 by the end of 2018 through the full roll-out of the Family Nurse Partnership programme.
• A commitment from Scottish Government to ensure specialist breastfeeding advice and support is delivered to women
• A commitment from Scottish Government to review statutory sex and relationships education in all schools
• A commitment from Scottish Government to create a system to ensure that child deaths are properly reviewed
• A commitment to deliver a Child and Adolescent Health and Wellbeing Action Plan
• A commitment from Scottish Government to tackle obesity by supporting families to lead active lives, encouraging more women and girls to take up sport and launching a consultation with the view to publishing a strategy later this year’

Still long before the bad news, we read:

‘Dr Steve Turner, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health’s Officer for Scotland, said: It’s heartening that the child health and wellbeing agenda is moving forward in Scotland. At the end of 2017 the Child Poverty (Scotland) Act was passed by the Scottish Parliament, providing a positive first step towards reducing child poverty. The Scottish Government has led the way nationally by setting a minimum unit price on alcohol, it has committed to deliver a child and adolescent health and well-being action plan in 2018, an obesity strategy and has committed to adopt a ‘child health in all policies’ approach. All of these developments indicate how serious Scottish Government is taking child health and they will help Scotland become a healthier country for children. “Considering only a year has passed since the launch of our State of Child Health report, it is encouraging that so many commitments to child health have been made. The key now is to make sure these commitments are delivered effectively.’

As we approach the latter parts of the report we find the bit that jumps out to the relief of any reporter from the Unionist media:

‘Currently Scotland has amongst the worst outcomes for child health in Europe, and it’s clear much more needs to be done, specifically around ensuring the health system meets children and young people’s needs.’

https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/what-we-do/rcpch-uk-and-roi/rcpch-scotland/state-child-health-one-year/child-health-agenda-moving-fo

Now why did the RCPCH leave this information so late and why was their headline:

‘Child health agenda moving forward but policy commitments must be delivered, say doctors’?

It’s simple, the RCPCH report was an assessment of what has been done and what still needs to be done by the Scottish Government to reduce child health problems. It was also clearly a report aimed at praising the Scottish government for its achievements so far and to encourage it in further developments. It was not a report about the actual health outcomes. That is clear in that no data on this are actually presented nor is there any discussion on the possible causes of the health outcomes such as UK government austerity policies.

Yesterday under the headline:

‘SNP Government doing ‘far better than Westminster’ on child health’

we read:

‘DOCTORS have praised the Scottish Government for doing “far better than Westminster” on child health policies such as breastfeeding and tackling childhood obesity, but warned that urgent action is still needed in areas such as GP training and reviewing child deaths.  A report by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health scored Scotland, England and Wales on their performance against a series of key recommendations a year on from a landmark report by the professional body.’

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15889305.SNP_Government_doing__far_better_than

So that’s good then? Well it was, but only a few lines down we get the chance to click on this:

Read more: Inaugural child health report warns Scotland ‘among worst in Europe’

So, in space of a few lines we have news that the SNP is doing ‘far better than Westminster’ but before we get too cheered up, we are slapped down with the suggestion we’re ‘among worst in Europe.’

But, when you click in the link you don’t get the report. You get another Herald piece from January 2017, with the speech marks suspiciously removed. We then get:

‘Meanwhile infant mortality across the UK is higher than nearly all comparable western European countries including Ireland, Finland and the Czech Republic.’

Sneaky again. Why have we jumped to infant mortality ‘across the UK’ as opposed to in Scotland? Well it’s obvious. See this based on data taken from a BBC website:

‘In the Nordic countries – Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Iceland – the rate of stillbirths and deaths of babies within 28 days is 4.3 per 1 000 live births. This is the lowest in the world. In the USA, it’s about 10. The Scottish figure has now fallen to just 4.72 with the rate for the UK at 5.61.’

Read more at:

Scottish stillbirth and early infant death rates lowest in the UK and approaching lowest in the world

I’ll have a look at the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health and report back later.

Image: Shutterstock/ELN

As Scotland accelerates toward 100% electricity production by renewables well ahead of its current 50% target for 2030, the Scottish Government has pledged an additional £60 million to low-carbon innovation.

Scotland rushing toward 100% electricity supply from renewables by 2020

See this from Energy Voice yesterday:

‘The Low Carbon Infrastructure Transition Programme (LCITP) will fund large-scale projects which support the ambitions of Scotland’s energy strategy, the Scottish Government said. Projects which deliver low carbon heating solutions, integrated energy systems, and ultra-low emission vehicle charging infrastructure will be able to apply for up to £100,000 to develop investment-ready business cases. Alternatively, financial support of up to 50% of the total capital value of a project up to a maximum of £10 million per project is available for capital-ready projects.’

https://www.energyvoice.com/otherenergy/161546/60million-available-scotlands-low-carbon-energy-infrastracture/

This initiative further emphasises the Scottish government’s commitment to reducing greenhouse gases contrary to the self-loathing reaction of BBC Scotland back in January 2017:

Are Scotland’s emission cuts goals ambitious and world-leading as most suggest or too much of a ‘technofix’ as only Reporting Scotland finds?

Today, still looking for any negatives they can scrape up, BBC Scotland News reported:

‘The Scottish government said funding for climate change measures was rising by 20% this year to £558m. But the committee questioned whether that figure gives a full picture.’

For ‘the committee’ read Labour or Tory or Lib Dem MSP leaking selectively committee debate to feed their and BBC Scotland’s Unionist propaganda. No proper sources are revealed to protect the report from scrutiny.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-42793051

As often before, a more objective view can be found outside of the Scottish Unionist media. See these earlier reports:

From Business Green on January 19 2017, see this:

‘Scotland already leads the UK and many of its European neighbours in terms of its greenhouse gas emission cuts, having exceeded its 2020 carbon reduction target six years early by slashing emissions 46 per cent compared to 1990 levels by 2014.’ 

https://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/3002936/scotland-raises-climate-ambition-with-new-plan-to-cut-emissions-two-thirds-by-2032

On the same day, the Guardian newspaper headlined and enthused with:

‘Scotland sets ambitious goal of 66% emissions cut within 15 years’

‘In one of the world’s most ambitious climate strategies, ministers in Edinburgh have unveiled far tougher targets to increase the use of ultra-low-carbon cars, green electricity and green home heating by 2032.’

 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/19/scotland-sets-ambitious-goal-of-66-emissions-cut-within-15-years

Watching Sky News this morning, making sure I don’t even catch a glimpse of Jackie Bird, I saw a short piece on how London police have been learning from Glasgow police on how they might reduce knife crime especially fatal stabbings. There were 80 last year in London and none in Glasgow, none in Scotland even. I’ve reported on the much-changed Scottish situation recently, here:

Of 35 children and teenagers killed with knives in Britain in 2017, not one was in Scotland, yet in 2005, the UN called Scotland the most violent country in the developed world.

In 2005, Strathclyde Police set up a Violence Reduction Unit which used an holistic approach involving education, social work and other agencies to tackle the problem. Fatal stabbings have fallen dramatically as has violence generally in Scotland. Indeed, in a study of University cities, Scotland’s four had much lower levels of violence with injury than any of those in England, See:

Scotland’s university cities by far the safest places to send your children

However, London has seen the worst rise. According to Sky:

‘Last year saw the highest number of fatal stabbings in a decade in the capital, with 80 people killed. In response to last year’s 80 fatal stabbings in the capital – the highest number for almost a decade – the Metropolitan Police is increasing its use of stop-and-search tactics, but insists it will be more targeted at habitual knife carriers and applied in known knife hotspots. The force also has officers based full-time in youth offender institutions and others who visit schools regularly talking to pupils of all ages about the dangers of knives. It works, too, with former offenders who advise officers on gang culture and how to talk to gang members. A relatively new tactic is to have police officers stationed in all hospital emergency departments, encouraging medical staff to share information on evidence of knife injuries. It’s an holistic approach that has helped reduce knife crime dramatically in Glasgow, a city branded by the United Nations 12 years ago as the most violent in the developed world.’

https://news.sky.com/story/london-knife-crime-surge-needs-multi-agency-approach-11218973

In Scotland, there may have been other factors contributing to the changes and these are discussed in my earlier report. London also has marked differences with Glasgow in terms of size, ethnic mix and government policies with regard to poverty. Poverty, is likely to be a major factor and the difference between the harsh UK and caring Scottish governments’ approaches is considerable.

Finally, I can’t find any coverage of this other than on Sky. It reminds of the time I watched, only on Sky of course, Scottish police teaching New York police to hold their fire:

Scottish News Media Conceal Global Status of Police Scotland’s Methods

The story was not to be found on Scotland’s Unionist media for the obvious reason that they were busy demonising Police Scotland and the SNP for creating them at the time.