Second point – there is absolutely no evidence I am aware of that a strong public sector undermines a strong private sector. That’s a widely held opinion but where is the evidence?

If you look at the various indexes of competitiveness that are published the Scandinavian countries are always up there. If the theory that a large public sector undermines a competitive private sector was true then these countries would be languishing in poverty. But they are not.

If you were wanting to reform the public sector – that’s were I would start. No more rewarding failure. No more allowing the contract winner long term contracts that actually encourage them to fail in meeting delivery targets. In fact unless there is a verifiable benefit to the tax payer in having private sector involvement – I would have nothing to do with them except on the supply side – stationary – hardware and the like. Because, frankly, their involvement to date, particularly ICT contracts has been an unmitigated disaster, made worse by the fact that failing reaps them great financial rewards.

Were possible examine the possibility of using trading fund status for certain agencies. Like Registers of Scotland…. switched to trading fund status back in 1987 and hasn’t relied on block grants or subsidies ever since. It’s not always possible or desirable to go down that path, but far more accountable that outright privatisation.

Also if you want grass roots level entrepreneurship – invest in it, encourage it. You won’t get it by sacking people left and right and farming out ever huge piles of tax cash to private sector groups seeking to do public sector work on a cost plus basis…it is that which is unsustainable.

As for companies seeking to leave Scotland – frankly I don’t see it happening. I remember the same hysteria from a few loud mouths back in 1997 if labour got in, and again if Scotland voted yes to devolution. It didn’t happen. I don’t think a tory party that is unelectable and relies on London party funding and the odd rich donor has that many friends in Scotland. Literally a case of all talk and no trousers.

Same with teachers, its daft to suggest teachers don’t create wealth, they may not generate cash directly, but good luck running a business if your workforce can’t read, write or count.

Sure, there’s a balance to be made between the two. What wee Ruthie said has been debunked, the true ratio of public versus private sectors in Scotland is within 2% of the wider uk. It still probably needs to shrink, I see folk at work who definitely aren’t doing much for the economy, but to say nurses (for example) make no direct contribution in terms of GDP, is rubbish.

As for the tories and their shares for rights idea. I’m not buying it. They rely on this wealth-trickling-down idea and I think we can all agree, its not happening any more. The gap between the rich and not so rich is growing.

Scotland’s public sector is TOO BIG, but has grown thus in our capacity is a satelite of SouthEast-centric UK government, where we basically have a colonial attitude towards us – well, yes, and most of the rest of the UK too! But it is easier for the Scots to do something about this.

Our relative position – against a backprop of overall UK decline – has improved under devolution, especially under the SNP in challenging economic circulstances. Think how much better it would be under independence where the intention is to grow our economy and thus reduce the GDP share of the private sector to give us economic stability.

But it is offensive to suggest that just because someone works in the public sector they are not contributing to national wealth. The inequalities between public and private sector employment do need to be addressed, however.

And how does this save money? How does it make it easier for employers? Does abolishing the right for someone to ask (and that’s all it is) for flexible working help your company be more productive?

Not that I was expecting much better from the Tories. The £10bn cut from benefits was my personal favourite fantastical/moronic policy. Let’s throw thousands off benefit to find work! In a no growth economy! Cos it’s worked like a gem so far…

There is something delightfully contrary to distinctly Tory values when owners don’t cream off all the profits despite their having the good idea in the first place. There is admittedly a risk that managers will offset employee shareholdings with lower salaries.

I still think in theory this is an excellent idea that would make the country (UK or Scotland) considerably fairer.

It is completely nuts. Even if you really enjoyed your work and got on with your employer why would you want shares in return for reduced security? There is nothing in it for the employer.

I suspect it is just an announcement to be seen to do something about red tape.