THE Scottish Government have been asked to match a £20m investment in Inverclyde from Westminster penny for penny by a local councillor.
Ward five representative Martin McCluskey has written to depute first minister Shona Robison to request the extra funding for the area.
His letter follows this week's news that Greenock had been given a further £20m cash injection by the UK Government to help improve its town centre and boost regeneration.
In his request, the Gourock representative claims that it would take ‘much more’ than £20 million to ‘undo the damage of over a decade of neglect by both SNP and Tory governments’.
The councillor also requested that Holyrood bosses do not cut Inverclyde’s real terms budget in the Scottish Government’s upcoming budget.
The elected official made referenced a £70m funding plea which was recently made by the Inverclyde Task Force, a joint working group which aims to help stimulate the local economy.
Its wish list included an expansion of Kelburn Business Park, the upgrading of Port Glasgow Industrial Estate, redevelopment of Clune Park and the regeneration of Port Glasgow town centre.
Mr McCluskey says that a commitment from the SNP-led government to match the UK investment in Inverclyde would ‘go some way’ towards helping get the proposed projects off the group.
Inverclyde MSP Stuart McMillan has today branded Mr McCluskey's request for Scottish Government resources as 'laughable'.
The SNP politician said: “By its very nature, the UK Government’s Levelling Up Fund is a tacit acceptance that Westminster governments have neglected parts of the UK for decades.
“There’s no way to rationalise targeting investment in parts of the UK without admitting that some areas have been left behind over many, many years.
“To suggest the Scottish Government should match the £20m funding, as if they are in some way equally responsible, is laughable.
“Mr McCluskey also references the £70m funding ask that has already been put to the Scottish Government by the Inverclyde Taskforce – but it’s unclear whether he is asking for the £20m match-funding to be included in that or over and above that figure.
“Either way, Mr McCluskey doesn’t actually set out what this additional £20m would be used for other than an ‘ambitious programme of regeneration’ which could relate to any number of projects.
“I’ve never shied away from calling on the Scottish Government to provide more resource to Inverclyde given the challenges we face, many of which are a consequence of decades of Westminster neglect.
“However, if Mr McCluskey really wanted to see Inverclyde’s fortunes improve, he would accept that independence is the only way we can end Westminster austerity and negligence once and for all.”
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “While the Scottish Government welcomes all extra funding for Scotland, it would be much better if provided to the Scottish Government via the Barnett Formula in the normal manner.
“It is extremely disappointing that we have not been consulted on how the investment could be prioritised to complement our ongoing work, and we are unclear on how the priority locations have been identified.
“We will nevertheless work with the UK Government and local authorities to ensure the impact of this investment can be properly realised.
“We have already been working with local authorities to revitalise our town centres.
“Scotland was the first part of the UK to make a commitment to a Town Centre Action Plan and to adopt a town centre first principle, backed by over £300 million from our Place Based Investment Programme.
“While Scotland is facing the most challenging budget settlement since devolution due to ongoing UK Government austerity, this year Inverclyde Council will receive £201.9 million to fund local services – which equates to an extra £5.3 million on last year.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel