Labour candidate takes aim over SNP’s record on housing

Labour has taken a pop at the SNP’s record on housing, as local candidate Robina Barton has pledged help for first-time buyers.

The party says the number of people in Scotland aged 34 and younger who have bought their own home with a mortgage has fallen by 15 per cent.

Just 28 per cent of those aged 16-34 in Scotland own their home with a mortgage, Labour claims.

That is the lowest level since the Scottish Parliament was established in 1999.

Robina Barton. Photo: Rosalind Griffiths
Labour Party candidate Robina Barton. Photo: Rosalind Griffiths

Ms Barton said more needed to be done. She claimed to have personal experience of Shetland’s housing shortage, which had pushed rents up.

Launching her election campaign, she backed her party’s first manifesto pledge ahead of the May vote to effectively double the level of help first-time buyers receive towards saving for a deposit.

Scottish Labour says a person who saves through a first-time buyer ISA with a government top-up to the value of £3,000 would be entitled to an additional £3,000 from a Labour government at Holyrood.

The party says this means that the average couple in Shetland each saving £100 a month would be able to save for a £15,000 deposit within three years.

Ms Barton said: “Too many young people are stuck paying high rentals or living with parents because they can’t afford a deposit for a home of their own.

“I have experience of that myself. The accommodation shortage in Shetland means that rental prices here are particularly high.

“This initiative from Scottish Labour will encourage and, more importantly, help people to save.

“It will also help to address Scotland’s housing crisis and boost the economy by targeting investment in much needed new houses and flats.”

Her Highlands and Islands party colleagues, MSPs David Stewart and Rhoda Grant, also backed the party’s first manifesto pledge ahead of the Scottish election.

Mr Stewart said: “Everyone deserves a home and a chance, but too many young people are either living at home with their parents or stuck in expensive rents unable to get that first foot on the housing ladder.

“Home ownership is a big ambition for hundreds of thousands of young people but for too many it remains an ambition rather than a reality.”

Mrs Grant added: “The expectation of home ownership, seen as almost a right for previous generations are out of reach for too many people. That has to change.

“Under Scottish Labour’s plan we will effectively double the help towards saving a deposit for first-time buyers, investing an additional £3,000 for first-time buyers saving as part of our plan.”

She added the party would fund its promise by reversing the SNP’s plans to cut air passenger duty.

“A tax cut costs money, and we think that money would be better spent helping make the aspirations of young people in the Highlands and Islands a reality rather than making a plane ticket cheaper.”
Both MSPs have challenged SNP candidates in the region to make it clear whether they back the Labour plan.

“Our plan will give young people a leg up onto the housing ladder but also encourages them to save over three years. Scottish Labour will use the new powers coming to Scotland to reject austerity and give young people the chance to turn aspirations of home ownership into reality,” added Mrs Grant.

• Scottish Labour says a couple saving £100 a month each would between them save up £7,200 combined over three years. If they are participating in the Help to Buy ISA, they would receive a UK government top-up of £1,800. Under Scottish Labour’s plans, they would receive a further £6,000, giving them a total deposit of £15,000.


Add Your Comment
  • David Spence

    • January 6th, 2016 14:26

    I really do think the Labour representative is totally missing the point in regards to housing.

    It is not a case of helping people buy their home (and why should the Government help people (waste tax payers money) to buy their home in the first place?) or to vastly reduce the budgets Councils have for housing, it is to do with years and years of Councils struggling to maintain what housing stock they have as a consequence of previous Conservative and Labour (Blair was a Tory) Governments cutting budgets, giving away Council houses well below their market value and Council budgets not increased to build new housing.

    As well as this, Councils forced to put people in ‘ private accommodation ‘ as emergency housing and paying ridiculous fee’s from private landlords who sole purpose is to rip-off the tax payer as much as is possible.

    If Labour want to help the Council properly, increase the budgets to build more housing and help the people to get a house without having to go through a process of ‘ I must have my own house mentality ‘. In short, the private market for housing does more damage than good.

  • Robina Barton

    • January 7th, 2016 8:02

    Hi David, I wouldn’t disagree that there is a major shortage of affordable and social housing that urgently needs to be addressed. Shelter Scotland published a report in September ( which details this very problem and calls for a radical programme to build more affordable and social rent homes. The Labour Party conference in Perth in November highlighted this as a priority issue and passed a resolution that an incoming Scottish Labour Government would back Shelter Scotland’s plan. You will hear more on this from Scottish Labour in the coming months.

    • John Jamieson

      • January 7th, 2016 17:49

      Why would Kezia Dugdale not give any guarantee on Labour building social housing at least equivalent to SNP proposals at FMQs on Thursday 7th Jan ?

    • David Spence

      • January 7th, 2016 21:21

      Surely Robina, the last thing any competent Government (excluding the Tories from this, as they are most certainly not competent at all – selfishness, money, greed and profits is their agenda) would want to do is to prop-up the banking system. Because that is exactly what you will be doing, and no doubt, in a few years time, we, the tax payer, will be forced to bail out, what irony, the biggest crooks in society again.

      I am intrigued as to why the Tax Payer is being forced to give money to people in order for them to buy their house??? Will these people pay back this money the Government have given them? Will the banks pay it back if they get a mortgage from the people who received Government help to buy their house?

      Based on this principle, all we are doing is potentially reducing state monies for LA Services, propping up a corrupt system of finance (the banks) and we, the people, will be worse off because Councils are having to make cuts due to monies going to first time buyers.

      I think it is wrong that tax payers money should be used in such a way.

  • Charles Gallagher

    • January 7th, 2016 11:10

    Hi Robina,

    Just remind us, how many Council Houses did the Labour, Fib/Deem coalition build in their eight years as the Government of Scotland?

    Was it:-

    1. – Six
    2. – Nine or
    3. – Eleven

    Answer: SIX.

  • John Jamieson

    • January 7th, 2016 11:50

    Is this a practical scheme ?
    Where would the average couple only saving £200 a month (towards a £15,000 deposit within three years) find a house where the mortgage repayments were similar ?

    • Johan Adamson

      • January 13th, 2016 9:01

      They would have their £200 savings and their £400 rent so they would have £600, but they wouldnt have any money for anything else

  • Robin Stevenson

    • January 7th, 2016 13:24

    Perhaps Ms Barton would like to share with us, just how many social houses did HER Labour party along with the Lib Dems build during their administration?…6…yes that’s right, between 1999 and 2007 they managed to build a massive 6 houses.

    David Spence, is absolutely spot on:

    “It is to do with years of Councils struggling to maintain what housing stock they have as a consequence of previous Conservative and Labour Governments cutting budgets, giving away Council houses well below their market value and Council budgets not increased to build new housing”.

    Would Ms Barton also like to explain where the £3,000 for first time buyers be coming from? Is Ms Barton under the same delusion as Kezi, that keeping APD the same as it is now doesn’t actually give you any more money?

    For a party that’s spent most of the last five years attacking the SNP over “middle-class freebies” on prescription fees, winter heating allowances, council tax freezes and university tuition, it’s inexplicable that its first big pledge is a huge giveaway to those exact same people.

    Poor people, whether unemployed or on minimum/low wages, can’t afford to save up thousands of pounds for a deposit.

    • Gareth Fair

      • January 7th, 2016 21:11

      The cheaply sold off houses end up owned by private landlords to make money.
      Here is one example 😉

      • Robin Stevenson

        • January 8th, 2016 10:41


        The only problem with it is that Cameron didn’t buy them from social landlords. The description of “ex-council” homes is used to deliberately mislead readers into thinking the properties had been taken out of the social housing stock, when in fact they were already privately-owned, which the Mail, the Hootsmon and other rags eventually grudgingly notes by saying she bought them “after previous owners could not keep up their mortgage payments”.

        (One was in fact left to her by her grandmother.)

        There’s absolutely no suggestion of any kind of illegality in any of the deals. Cameron has bought some houses from private owners and rented them out for income, just like millions of other people have done. And it’s not even news – the Herald reported all of Cameron’s property interests more than three months ago.

        The Herald itself is also apparently working through the list of SNP MPs alphabetically looking for dirt, sad, pathetic, but [unfortunately] expected on the run up to May?
        As I have said, stories for those that can’t see beyond a headline. So well done you.

        Looking forward to the next “SNP BaaD” article.

  • Vivienne Rendall

    • January 7th, 2016 16:29

    My understanding is that Shetland has over £200 million in oil reserves. I think a few million could be spared to build these houses. Otherwise what is the point of this massive wealth?
    Vivienne Rendall.

    • David Spence

      • January 7th, 2016 20:22

      This exactly what Thatcher tried to do in the late eighties, Vivienne. In short, force the SIC to tap into its Trust Funds, to provide Local Authority Services by the Tories slashing the budgets for the islands. I would not be surprised if the Tories repeat history, lets say.

      At the rate the SCT are wasting money (Viking Energy being a prime example) the £200 or so million we have will soon run out at the rate in which it is being fluttered away. Even with the unjust SCT cuts to services more worthy than VEP, £200 million is, put bluntly, loose change in the greater scheme of keeping Shetland wealthy????

  • Ali Inkster

    • January 7th, 2016 18:00

    There is supposed to be £25 million getting spent on affordable social housing in Shetland over the next 5 years £10 million as holyroods part of the repayment on housing debt and 15 million as Shetlands share of proposed spending by the snp, we shall see.

  • David Spence

    • January 7th, 2016 20:06

    It seems very evident that the mentality of the Conservatives and Labour in persuading people to either buy their Council house (I believe it is no longer the case in Scotland, but correct me if I am wrong) as a well below market value or the Government, as mentioned, helping first time buyers get onto the property market? However, I think it is more disturbingly ironic that the whole issue of buying property is purely based on keeping the banking system propped up and in good profits via mortgages or loan?

    If buying your Council house in Scotland is no longer and option, what can we do to waste millions of pounds, potentially, of the tax payer money……..oh, yes, give it to ‘ first time buyers of none Council house property ‘. Why??????

    I am lead to believe that the whole sorry situation with the banking system (and the tax payer forced to bail the banks otherwise the whole of western society would collapse (as we were spoon fed)) was the result of property and the banks becoming, as usual, too greedy in giving mortgages/loans?????

    Are we just repeating ourselves for another so-called bank crisis???

  • Robina Barton

    • January 8th, 2016 10:56

    Crikey, what a lot of comments! I will do my best to respond but space is limited. I will be hosting public events in the coming months which will provide a better opportunity for discussion and debate for those who are interested. For now I will say:

    John Jamieson – I don’t know but I do know that there were extensive discussions around this at the Labour Party conference and announcements will be made when policy is firmly set. Perhaps Kezia wishes to wait until all is settled to avoid backtracking later. As regards mortgage repayments, if we can help people to a mortgage where their repayments are lower than rental payments that would be a good result.

    David Spence – I think this could be likened to a kind of housing benefit. Clearly we live in a society where some people rent and some people buy. This initiative would help to buy so that home ownership is not simply the province of rich people.

    To be continued…

    • David Spence

      • January 8th, 2016 22:56

      So Robina, are you suggesting that the majority of people should buy their house as a means to prove the point they are socially accepted as being rich? I am intrigued, what does buying your own house prove???

      In contradiction to what you are advocating, in looking at the social climate from a conservative point of view, the number of houses which have been repossessed has never been higher. I wonder if this ‘ stupid mentality of political selfishness, this statistic is based on a political ideology which puts the ‘ rich first ‘ and everybody second?

      It seems that labour (the clone to the conservatives) is more than willing to act as an agent for the banks and building societies as a means of making them money and addressing the urgency of providing housing at all.

      Tell me Robina, has Tony Blair really changed the face of what Labour (a party for the people and by the people) used to be to this of the Tories? If you believe in social justice, fairness for all, putting the country first and not your political party (like the Tories do) then you should adhere to your true parties principles.

    • John Jamieson

      • January 12th, 2016 15:32

      My calculations for a repayment around £200 per month came out as a mortgage of £35,000 for 25 years, so there will probably be quite a lot of disappointment for people on the scheme when they find that they are looking for a house for £50,000.

      • Ali Inkster

        • January 12th, 2016 18:03

        Where can you rent a house even a council one for £200 per month? £400+/- is more like a housing association/council rent and I don’t see why we can’t aspire to be building houses that would be affordable to rent or buy whatever the preference of the individual. One thing we could do is get rid of a lot of needless legislation that puts the price of building houses through the roof.

      • David Spence

        • January 13th, 2016 0:05

        This reminds of a time where a couple I knew as friends were looking for a 2 bedroom house in Lerwick. At first I had my reservations their income could cope with a mortgage, but I went with them to a Building Society, Bank and Financial advisor. The property they were interested in was a 2 bedroom house in the north of Lerwick, going for £109,000.00 The building also required extensive work done too it in terms of wiring, plumbing and repairs to the roof, walls and floors. The mortgage payments varied by about £50.00 a month……….The mortgage itself was, as an average, £750.00 a month, which was more than 35% of their income. On this basis, as far as I am aware, no mortgage was given to them due to the amount the mortgage was in proportion to their income. The payments for the mortgage total, after 25 years, would have been £225,000.00 so, more than double what the property was worth.

  • Robina Barton

    • January 8th, 2016 11:00

    Charles Gallagher and Robin Stevenson – I don’t want to get into discussion of what a previous administration did – it won’t get us anywhere. I want to focus on what we will do about Scotland’s housing crisis in the coming years, with respect to the Shelter report:

    As regards where the £3000 for this scheme will come from, my understanding is this:

    Vivienne Rendall – I think that we need to be looking at this issue nationally and the government has that responsibility. (I’ll talk to you later mum!)

    I don’t intend to make further comments on this issue in this forum, but I will make opportunities for further discussion in the run up to the election.
    Best wishes

    • Robin Stevenson

      • January 8th, 2016 11:54

      Well Robina, firstly, I’d like to thank you for – at least – having the courtesy to respond [unlike Cameron Smith]
      I do think you’re quite right choosing not to discuss previous administrations, with their record, I too, would chose to avoid it like the plague.
      But as you must appreciate, previous administrations have a knock-on effect, thus the reason for a severe shortage of social housing, and frankly 6 houses in eight years is a damning legacy.

      The £3,000 for this scheme – according to Kezi – is being financed by the money raised through APD, which is the very same money that was supposed to be used for the NHS and education, so we’re still waiting for an explanation, “How do you spend the same money three times over?” notwithstanding keeping APD the same as it is now doesn’t actually give you any more money?

      I guess when a party has historically let down voters and has little chance of being elected, they can promise them the moon?

      • John Tulloch

        • January 8th, 2016 13:31

        You’re right, Robin, well done Robina for responding.

        Cameron Smith’s not the only one, though, Danus Skene never responds, either – especially, if what’s being discussed is anything to do with Shetland.

        Oh, remind us again, please, who was it that “terminated” the SIC’s £2.3 Mpa housing support grant?

        What did the SNP do with that money before the referendum and what are you doing with it now?

      • Robin Stevenson

        • January 8th, 2016 15:35


        I like your first five words of your post, but then [sadly] we’re back to the usual “SNP Bad” mantra.
        As you know, answering the number of anti SNP/Scottish Government posters on this forum alone, is almost a full time job, while Robina [with all due respect] talks about it, the SNP are busy getting on with it, Danus generally responds, you’ll note, when something becomes so ridiculous that he needs to step in and correct – what is more often than not -mis-information, as he has done on many occasions.
        Meanwhile, I imagine, there are enough supporters of the Scottish Government prepared to fight their corner – that Danus perhaps feels – are doing the job reasonably well enough?

        I must congratulate you on turning a Labour issue into an SNP issue, but as you know, I’m still waiting for a link with regards to the “extra” £2.3ml – supposedly – given to the Scottish Government to pay Westminsters historic debt? I take it, you haven’t, because they never did? Instead expected the SG to pay it off of their Block Grant.

        The SNP have since [kindly] offered to contribute £10ml just to get rid of it.

      • Robert Sim

        • January 8th, 2016 17:01

        Aren’t you speaking directly to Danus, John, in your capacity as Chair of Wir Shetland? And all the other candidates? Surely deals are being thrashed out?

      • Gordon Harmer

        • January 9th, 2016 17:39

        Robin, we have been telling you that you have a full time job answering all of the anti SNP/Scottish government comments. At last you have admitted it, is this why we vary rarely hear from the usual SNP/nationalist’s suspects as they have been told to stay silent and allow you to post the official SNP propaganda. 😉

      • John Tulloch

        • January 9th, 2016 21:49

        Robert Sim,

        Whom I am or am not in contact with on behalf of Wir Shetland is none of your concern.

        I merely pointed out to Robin, following his criticism of Mr Smith, that there is none worse than Danus Skene for not responding, especially, if the topic being discussed has anything to do with Shetland.

      • John Tulloch

        • January 9th, 2016 22:07

        Robin Stevenson,

        Where have you seen Danus Skene responding “many times”? Because this is news to me.

        The SIC was paid about £2.3Mpa every year until SNP housing minister Margaret Burgess decided to stop the payment i.e. the SIC was £2.3Mpa worse off as a result of that single action.

        And if I’m having to criticise the SNP so regularly that you think it is a “mantra”, perhaps, you should be taking some notice, after all this time?

        Because you will continue to be reminded of the damage you’re doing to Shetland.

        None of these injustices will be forgotten and you must face the consequences at the ballot box in May.

      • Robert Sim

        • January 10th, 2016 12:43

        Ah, but it will be the concern of your members, John. And they may be a tad confused to find you acting like an ordinary member of the public on these pages attacking candidates when (I thought) the stated aim of WS is, according to your website, “to involve local political parties in discussions aimed at achieving our goal”. Maybe that’s changed?

      • John Tulloch

        • January 10th, 2016 16:18

        “Ah but…” says supposed communication expert, former teacher Robert Sim ????

        Our members will soon let me know if they need any information.

        We have a facebook page for member discussions where we answer any and all queries about our work and members can also contact me directly, at any time.

      • Gordon Harmer

        • January 10th, 2016 16:58

        Robin, Danus doesn’t answer questions from any one who disagrees with him, not even on his Facebook page. Here is the link for you to go and see.

      • Brian Smith

        • January 11th, 2016 13:27

        Robert, I expect all Wir Shetland’s negotiations are with the Tories.

      • Duncan Simpson

        • January 11th, 2016 16:16

        Very mature Brian Smith. The tactic of accusing Wir Shetland of being Tories is both tired and pathetic. I notice that the ONLY people who are saying this are devout Nationalists. We will hold discussions with anyone who can help further our aims whatever party they represent.

        I keep repeating this but it seems to be falling on deaf ears. Wir Shetland is made up of people from all political opinions, the common thread is we want what is best for Shetland and are unhappy with the current state of affairs.

        If you feel threatened by our aims then that is your problem not ours. If our campaign does not fit in with the SNPs grand plan for Scotland then that is also not our problem. Our aim is not to scupper Scottish Independence, as some seem to think, it is simply to right some of the grievous wrongs which have been and continue to be inflicted upon our Islands.

      • Robert Sim

        • January 11th, 2016 16:49

        I guess you’re right, Brian. Whichever it is, I don’t think John will have much time over the coming months to do any negotiations – I am just about to approach him to see if he’ll write my biography since he has flatteringly done so much research already and is evidently keen to flaunt the fact at every opportunity.

      • ian tinkler

        • January 11th, 2016 16:49

        Brian, not much point in discussion with Labour, they are on a quest of self-suicide at the moment. Labour Link works directly within the Labour Party to take UNISON’s policies into the heart of the party. Interesting, I thought Labour had just amputated its heart, or was that its brain?. Mind you Robina is much more my cup of tea than the Old Etonian!!! Be fun when this political fund becomes equitable. Perhaps Robina should go independant, the Corbyn bit is scary.

      • Gordon Harmer

        • January 11th, 2016 19:40

        Brian, one would expect any “negotiations” to be with the party in power, that just happens to be the Tories. What is the famous catchphrase of Homer Simpson? Doooohhh, I cant remember.
        Once again fishing and crofting come to mind.

      • Ian Tinkler

        • January 18th, 2016 17:15

        One bit of fun news for Robin and Robert. The latest poll on Scottish Independence shows the “Yes” vote on only 44%. Perhaps it really will be once in a generation. Maybe Nicola’s honeymoon is over and the real mess the SNP have made of things is beginning to hit home. What a shame Labour is led by such a donkey, keep Trident, but do not arm the submarines!!! A bit like abandoning Trident and using American nuclear under NATO into Scottish ports. Socialist defence policies are such fun. Lol.

  • David Spence

    • January 8th, 2016 23:03

    So Robina, are you suggesting that the majority of people should buy their house as a means to prove the point they are socially accepted as being rich? I am intrigued, what does buying your own house prove???

    In contradiction to what you are advocating, in looking at the social climate from a conservative point of view, the number of houses which have been repossessed has never been higher. I wonder if this, stupid mentality of political selfishness, statistic is based on a political ideology which puts the ‘ rich first ‘ and everybody else second?

    It seems that Labour (the clone to the conservatives) is more than willing to act as an agent for the banks and building societies as a means of making them money and than addressing the urgency of providing social housing.

    Tell me Robina, has Tony Blair really changed the face of what Labour used to be to this of the Tories? If you believe in social justice, fairness for all, putting the country first and not your political party (like the Tories do) then you should adhere to your true parties principles and not this of the Tories.

    • Duncan Simpson

      • January 10th, 2016 8:22

      David I am pretty sure the majority of people want to own their own home. It provides security. The problem arises when people are encouraged to buy homes they can’t afford. It is nothing to with “proving a point of being rich”. In older times almost everyone in Shetland owned their own homes rich or poor.

      Do you suggest we all line the pockets of wealthy landlords for our entire lives or would you suggest the Government should provide cheap social housing to everyone at massive cost? Neither seem appealing to me?

      • Brian Smith

        • January 11th, 2016 19:28

        It is not true that ‘in older times almost everyone in Shetland owned their own homes rich or poor’. During the whole period that we know anything in detail about Shetland’s history – from c.1300 on – most Shetlanders were tenants of landlords.

      • Duncan Simpson

        • January 12th, 2016 12:36

        “in older times” was probably the wrong term, I did not mean in the time of the lairds. I meant in say the last 50 years. I may be entirely wrong on that and you can correct me if so? The point remains that I don’t think you should have to be rich to own your own home (as in the time of the lairds).

      • Mark Ryan Smith

        • January 12th, 2016 13:32

        What are the Wir Shetland suggestions on housing policy? That is, suggestions not based on the fantasy that most Shetlanders in the past owned their own homes. Thousands of families have had to live here with very little security of tenure. An unfettered, privatised accommodation market, and the stigmatisation of people who live in ‘cheap social housing’, both take us closer to a twenty-first century version of that.

      • Duncan Simpson

        • January 12th, 2016 17:40

        As has been stated many times before Wir Shetland, at this current point, cannot state specific policies for an autonomous Shetland because we are not a political party and cannot presume to know what the Shetland people would decide after we achieved autonomy.

        There was no “fantasy”, I said I would be happy to stand corrected. That being said I don’t believe the current housing policy is particularly effective and I certainly don’t believe building hundreds of new houses in Lerwick and very few anywhere else was the right decision. Is there a problem with stigmatisation? I haven’t been aware of that, certainly not in Whalsay anyway. The ridiculous private accommodation rates are a big problem in Shetland.

        An autonomous Shetland would certainly have more freedom to change the housing policy to suit than the SIC does.

  • Johan Adamson

    • January 11th, 2016 9:39

    It is great Robina has responded. No one usually does, SIC, SCT (apart from JW), Viking, Flybe. We are not usually worthy. And so it seems that if they don’t hear the critics, there is nothing wrong with anything they are doing, so they can continue down any road of their choosing, in their own happy world, la la la! This ignores the fact that criticism can be good for you. It can stop any Emperor and new clothes situations. And if you feel particularly bad towards them, you can always just let them go out undressed and say nothing. And some of them will eventually feel it in the ballot box, cos that is the only power we have if we are not allowed to critique anything.

    • David Spence

      • January 11th, 2016 23:59

      Johan, I would even question the so-called Ballot Box.

      It is disturbingly amusing how quick we are here in the west to question the validity of elections held in other countries………accusing it of being fixed, rigged etc etc but we do not question the validity of our own elections. Who is to say the powers that be ‘ give us a little game to play called ‘ an election ‘ when in reality it has no value at all, but we are brainwashed into believing we are taking part in a democracy where voting is the deciding factor ‘. (As the USA proves, it is the Industrial Military Complex which decides, and not the people).

      Who was it that said ‘ There are lies, lies and lies and then statistics ‘ ? lol

  • Haydn Gear

    • January 13th, 2016 11:13

    David , I think you meant to say “Lies, damned lies and statistics”. No shortage of any of them. !!

  • Haydn Gear

    • January 13th, 2016 12:03

    An oversight on my part David—- the comment about lies was made by the one time British Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, presumably in the House of Commons. It seems a very fitting venue!!

    • David Spence

      • January 13th, 2016 18:43

      Thank you Haydn, for the correction and insight into the origins of the quote. As you have said, it is quite a fitting quote for the HQ of our politics and the associated member’s (with the exception of the very few) thereof……..especially the Tories, where such attributes are second nature to them. lol

    • Bill Smale

      • January 14th, 2016 11:08

      Mark Twain attributed the comment to Disraeli but there is no evidence he actually said it. There are plenty of other possibles.

  • Haydn Gear

    • January 16th, 2016 10:16

    It is claimed and even believed by some Bill that God created the Earth in six days and rested on the seventh! I don’t blame him ! There is no evidence to support that either LOL! ????


Add Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.

200 words left

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Get Latest News in Your Inbox

Join the The Shetland Times mailing list to get one daily email update at midday on what's happening in Shetland.