On a more positive note

It says on the right of this page that Calton is not affiliated to any political party and, just to prove it, here are a few of his current 'likes':
Ed Miliband setting his sights on employers who exploit loopholes to pay workers less and firms who only advertise job vacancies abroad.
Nigel Farage on the Syrian refugee issue.
David Cameron on pensions - given that pensioners' savings are not earning any interest, it's the least he could do.
Danny Alexander on raising the personal tax allowance, which has been a boon to low earners.
The SNP's policy of free prescriptions.
Since we are still in the season of goodwill, and the year is not that old, Calton will leave his list of 'dislikes' for another day. He is trying to strike a positive note. Happy New Year!

Promises, promises

It seems that the SNP will promise anything if they think it will secure votes. This time it's pensions. Previously it was the council tax freeze, which has resulted in cash-strapped councils cutting services left, right and centre. No longer can voters decide whether they want to pay more for better services or pay less for fewer services when it comes to council elections. The matter is now outwith council control. So much for local government. What Calton wants to know is: what is going to be cut in order to afford better pensions in an independent Scotland? We may not live as long as the English but we are still an ageing population with fewer young people to pay for our pensioners. As Labour's pensions spokesman, Gregg McClymont, says - Nicola Sturgeon "cannot credibly say that something is affordable if she doesn't know how much it costs". Having failed so far to win over the electorate with reasoned argument and hard facts, the SNP are resorting to an appeal to peoples' baser instincts i.e. cash in pocket. Sadly, some people will fall for it and, if we become independent, we'll all pay for it.

How not to get washed away

The SNP want independence but they want to keep the pound. And the Queen. And the pensions and benefits system, at least for a while, provided they can change it to suit their own agenda. What is the point? The more we think about independence, the more it becomes obvious how intertwined we are with the rest of the UK and how difficult it would be to separate. That is why Calton is planning to vote No next year, even although he believes in the principle of self-determination in general. When it comes to the specifics, it is just too risky, especially in the current economic climate, and it seems unnecessary when we have so many devolved powers, with more possibly on the table. Even the Scottish Tory leader seems to be coming round to that idea, thus provoking the ire of some Conservatives who elected her on the basis of her 'line in the sand'. Looks like the tide has well and truly washed that one away, leaving Davidson looking ever so slightly tottery. Better to build your foundations on a rock, Ruth.

Banking on banking reform is not a good idea

Oh dear, here we go again. The Scottish Government has now received legal advice on Scotland's position regarding the EU if we become independent, but they won't tell us what it is. Given that their position has moved from 'automatic EU membership' to 'negotiated membership' post-independence, can we really trust what they say in their forthcoming White Paper without seeing the advice which is behind it? And can we really trust the SNP with our savings when Nicola Sturgeon seems to be banking on global reform of the banking sector to prevent a repeat of 2008? What about pension protection? Does Scotland have enough solvent company pension schemes to pay in to our own protection scheme so that members of collapsed pension schemes are compensated? Calton thinks not. As far as pensions go, there is definitely strength in numbers. A lot of questions like this are going to surface over the next 16 months and the Yes campaign are going to have to come up with better answers than they have done to date if they want to have any hope of convincing the likes of Calton that Scotland should go it alone.

Would you trust this man with your pension?

Calton cannot see how the First Minister can pledge that there will be no change to the amount of time pension firms are allowed to get their schemes out of deficit in the event of Scottish independence given that he also seems to rule out opting out of EU pension scheme arrangements, due to his continued love-affair with Europe. It was therefore no surprise to find that no details were given on how Salmond intends to protect Scots' company pensions post-independence. Clueless just about sums up the First Minister's attitude and Ruth Davidson is right to highlight the enormous gamble the SNP are taking with the future wellbeing of the people of Scotland. Unfortunately, instead of answering the question and giving us, the electorate, some concrete information on pensions, Alex chose instead to slag off the Tory-led coalition government down south. It's such an obvious tactic it's embarrassing. The upshot is that anyone with a UK-wide company pension would be well advised to vote no next year if they want to hold on to it.

What planet are they on?

It seems that John Swinney doesn't believe the SNP's line that it will be alright on the night either when it comes to independence and company pensions, according to the word on the twittersphere this evening. If Calton had a subscription to The Times he could read all about it online. As it is, all he can see is the first paragraph of the relevant article. That is worrying enough, with its mention of the 'substantial changes at a European level to safeguard all the current private sector pension funds' which would be needed. Swinney is far more optimistic than Calton if he thinks that the problems are surmountable. This is the EU we are talking about. The words 'tanker' and 'change of direction' come to mind. It's not the same as pulling a few levers and sending the train down a different track, Mr Signalman Swinney. It really seems sometimes that the main qualifications for belonging to the SNP are positive thinking and an outrageous optimism that defies reality. Living on another planet also helps.

Pensions - no laughing matter

It is a well known fact that we are not saving enough towards our retirement in this country, however it is a miracle that anyone is bothering to save for it at all, given all the current uncertainty surrounding pensions. First, we had the Westminster Government moving the goalposts (and Calton is still trying to work out exactly how many years National Insurance contributions he has) and now we have the possibility that a yes vote in the independence referendum will throw another huge spanner in the works for Scots. Does anybody really believe the SNP's line that it will all be alright on the night? Not Calton. He wants to see the figures, especially since part of his retirement income is going to come from a UK-wide company pension scheme. EU insistence that cross-border schemes be fully funded is a) going to prove a major headache if Scotland becomes independent and b) could scupper a large number of company pension schemes and, indeed, companies, not to mention the pension expectations of their employees. At the risk of being branded a clown by Ken Clarke (pot? kettle?) Calton sees this as yet another good reason for us to leave the EU (and stay in the UK).

In your dreams Nicola

When it comes to deciding whether to believe Frank Field or Nicola Sturgeon, it's a no-brainer, for Calton at any rate. It was not for nothing that Field was appointed poverty tsar by the coalition government in Westminster even although he is a Labour MP. He knows what he is talking about and is not afraid to speak his mind. Conviction politicians are a rare breed these days but Field is up there with the best of them. So, when he says that an independent Scotland will face an unaffordable pensions and welfare bill, Calton believes him. Let's face it - although parts of Glasgow have a lower life expectancy, well-off pensioners have been retiring to the nicer parts of Scotland for years, to the extent that some places resemble little England, and the net result is that we are going to have a higher proportion of over-65s to under-65s than down south. That means a bigger pensions bill with fewer tax payers to fund it. Sturgeon seems to think that oil revenues will solve all our problems and allow us to have a Scandinavian-style welfare system without the taxes to match. Dream on Nicola.

Squealing about cuts

Forget all the comparisons with the rest of the UK. The bottom line is that Scotland spent more than it earned last year. Even taking the most generous view of income, by splitting North Sea revenues geographically rather than per capita, we overspent by £3.4bn. That is a heck of a lot of money. Calton has always maintained that the SNP would have to raise taxes in an independent Scotland in order to finance their profligate spending. Now it transpires that, secretly, they are planning cuts instead, including cuts to our pensions. The SNP have also started to realise that oil revenues are volatile - nice to see that you've caught up guys. Better late than never. Now that we are all singing off the same page, how about coming clean with the costs of becoming independent, such as setting up our own tax system, foreign office, defence etc etc etc? Or does Calton have to get the claws out before you'll squeal?

Show me the money!

Alex Salmond is of the opinion that most people will not be better off as a result of the Westminster Government's pension changes, however he's not giving any detail of what he and his party would do about pensions if Scotland becomes independent. There was the usual guff at FMQs today about how the Scottish Government is doing its best but is limited under the current arrangements and how much better things would be if we all just vote the right (SNP) way in 2014. Calton has only one thing to say to that. "Show me the money!"

Let down by the Lords

Lord Forsyth was obviously of the same mind as Calton as he tried to torpedo the progress of the Section 30 order through the Lords today. Sadly he didn't succeed and so Alex Salmond and the SNP are free to ignore the advice of the Electoral Commission if they so wish. They probably do wish, since not listening to people seems to be their forte. Looks like Calton's confidence in the House of Lords was a bit misplaced. He is therefore heading off to bed with his head firmly under his wing and a resolution to try not to worry about the effect independence might have on his pension. Otherwise he'll never get any sleep.

Man the torpedoes!

Calton totally agrees with Margaret Curran because it certainly wasn't the independence debate that was keeping him burning the midnight oil last night - it was the thought of the 5 more qualifying years of NI contributions now needed for his pension! He can't actually see Bute House from his eyrie but he is willing to bet that, if Alex Salmond was awake in the wee small hours, it was not due to worrying about his MSP's pension. By the time the referendum on independence happens, goodness knows how much money will have been spent on it, money that could arguably have been better spent in this trying time, and so we must have an answer that is clear and decisive. It is therefore worrying that the sounds coming from the SNP camp are still ambiguous as to whether they will abide by the Electoral Commission's scrutiny of the referendum question. Michael Moore has fired a warning shot across the bows of the good ship SNP over their dodging of the issue. Calton would have aimed below the waterline.

This time it's personal

Calton was checking the headlines to see if there was anything worth commenting on but he didn't get further than the one on the proposed pension changes. By the time he'd finished checking to see if he is affected (he is), and had dashed off an angry letter to his MP, it was gone 10pm so the choice was blog on the pensions or not at all. He is sure many readers will empathise, particularly those who, like Calton, are nearer retirement than not. How the hell can any of us plan for it when the Government keeps changing the goalposts? Not only does Calton now have to wait until he is 66 before he gets the state pension, he now has to have 35 years of NI contributions when he thought he was home and dry with 30 years! And what is going to happen to his SERPS contributions? He entrusted the Government with them, instead of contracting out, in the expectation that they would give him an enhanced pension. Is that still going to happen? Or are they going to get swallowed up in the flat rate pension so that he gets the same as someone who didn't pay extra contributions? Calton is all in favour of simplifying things (and a decent basic pension) but if you don't reward savers, people will not save. Simples!