The Scottish government have decided against going ahead with plans to place local authority public notices on the internet. The proposals were expected to have saved Scotland’s hard pressed councils upwards of £6 million a year but lacked parliamentary support.
The plans were also fiercely opposed by the Scottish newspaper industry who had claimed the potential loss of advertising revenues would have a devastating effect on many titles. Opponents also claimed that a lack of broadband internet connection could leave many people unable to access the notices.
Finance Secretary John Swinney said:
"The UK government is imposing the first cut in Scotland's budget since devolution next year and further reductions in spending are inevitable in years to come. Facing that increasingly challenging financial environment, Scotland's councils identified a need to cut spending on public notices, which currently cost around £6m a year.
"The purpose of this legislation, which government began work on in 2006, was to give councils the option of using a more effective way of improving communication with the public and deliver increased value for money.
"As a minority government it is incumbent on us to build consensus and in this case that has not been possible. Given the strength of views expressed, we have decided not to proceed with the legislation."
The decision mirrors a similar one taken 3 months ago by the UK Labour government who had been considering placing planning applications online in England. Labour had commissioned the Killian Pretty Review to look at ways of improving the English planning application system.
The resultant report, published in November 2008, recommended that “local authorities should be given greater autonomy and flexibility to determine the best approaches to use in order to notify the public about planning applications, thus allowing them to decide whether to use local newspapers.”
The report had been formally welcomed by the Labour government who agreed to consult on placing such ads on the internet as opposed to local newspapers. The consultation took place in the Summer of 2009 and saw the newspaper industry voice fierce opposition.
Labour’s Holyrood leader Iain Gray said of the SNP decision: "This decision is a victory for democracy and a humiliating climbdown for the SNP. John Swinney's proposals to allow local councils to put public notices online instead of in newspapers were undemocratic and I am glad that they have now been dropped."
Comments
Labour would have talked it down, even if the country would benefit to the tune of billions, and thus it will ever be until the Labour Party sweeps away the dreck we see sitting behind Iain Gray every Thursday, screeching like fish-wives, men and women!!
Independista, placed against the backdrop of all the other things the Lib/Lab administration could have done, but didn`t, like GARL, the new Forth Crossing or the Edinburgh Tramset, this "oversight" is pretty small beer. But, as you say, the hypocracy is truly boakworthy.
Young David Millar, though, on GMS this morning blew Pauline McNeil`s case apart before she even got started by asking her when she herself last read one of these Public Notices and what it was about. The question completely flummoxed her and gave the game away immediately in doing so.
In my opinion, these adverts amount to a handout from local councils to the local press and as such, they stand in the way of councils being held to account because editors are understandably reluctant to bite the hand that feeds them.
It`s a crazy idea to interpret these money-saving plans as an attempt to deny anyone the right to read public notices and announcements.
While I acknowledge that "Not everyone has or even wants access to the internet.", those who don`t have it can access it freely at their local library and those who don`t want it would probably never read a public notice irespective of where it`s placed.
People have a right to scrutinise public notices but your assertion that there is a "statutary obligation on all governments and councils to make public notices as widely available as possible" must, in reality, be seen in the context of the tightening financial constraints they now face.
If anything is insulting, it`s the fact that councils use tax revenues to pay through the nose for something they can do themselves at far less cost.
" Are you really saying that the press and by that I include all our local newspapers, should be controlled by whatever government happens to be in power at any given time" - where did I say that ? It`s precisely that which I and many others have been railing against for years.
"Just because some things appear which you do not like does not give anyone the right to advocate press censorship." - I have no clue which of the points I have made you think you`re replying to with this line so I`d be grateful if you`d just respond to what`s actually said.
"It is the right of every citizen to have a free press. " - at least we agree on something but you should try telling that to the BBC, the Herald, the Scotsman, the Record and all the other trenchantly unionist media in Scotland.
Were they denying anyone the right to scrutinise public notices and announcements ?
Were they trying to control the media ?
Were they advocating press censorship ?
Don`t think so, they were just trying to save money by using new technology available to them.
For the record, I agree that an "important revenue stream" would be stopped. As I pointed out before, this easy money can, and often does put editors off digging too deep on controversial issues.
In my local area there is great public disquiet about a major local planning issue but the local paper`s coverage of it is half-hearted at best and, for the avoidance of any doubt, I live in Fife and my council is SNP controlled.
I was as much against this type of idea when it was muted by the Lab./Lib. govenment and I said so at the time in letters to the press.It was easy for me you see because I am neither a Labour or Liberal supporter.Local newspapers in particulas must be supported by all means because one of their important functions is to allow people to express their views through the "Letters" pages.I get the impression that is something snp supporters are good at and I'm sure your MSP's never miss an oppotrunity to get their 'photo in the paper. They would miss these papers when there gone.
Donate to Newsnet Scotland
Latest Comments
- BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
Just had misfortune to see BBC One Show ... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
Have you complained to the ICO? You shou... - Eric Joyce charged with breach...
The plot thickens; Eric Joyce denies bei... - Frustration and anger over red...
I suggested the same a few months ago an... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
What we need is a Whistleblower telephon... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
No. It's up to the BBC. The information ... - SNP MSP leads debate on a nati...
My first thought was for the Rowan tree ... - Treasury claims on independenc...
The Westminster establishment and it's p... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
BBC would never dare cut off David Camer... - Frustration and anger over red...
Why not build some slaughter houses if t... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
Another own goal for the bosses at the B... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
OT but this is disturbing is.gd/z6ptTL (... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
It isn't brilliant. As most will not hav... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
However, according to BBC Scotland Head ... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
Keeping the financial books on guests' ... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
From a practical point of view would it ... - Scotland's enormous resources ...
All Scots need to get hold of this repor... - World's largest wave energy fa...
£705 million for an interconnector seems... - Eric Joyce charged with breach...
"NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE" How can this man c... - BBC Scotland refuses to disclo...
Joker, it may be their own fault, but th...