Needless to say, they will be neatlessly sidestepping the boneheaded 'anti-Glasgow' line of attack as adopted by Steven Purcell, as if there is any significant difference between Glasgwegians and Edinburgers.
Ah well, that's West-coast thickos for you I suppose...
Anyway, the Tweets I speak of are as follows:
So it looks likely that there will be a motion or a press release coming out soon condemning the Scottish Government for reneging on its promise to the Commonwealth Games committee to deliver the Glasgow Airport Rail Link, as was part of the original bid.
This is all based on my assumption that GARL was indeed a 'promise' and not a mere 'aim'.
First up, it's worth noting that many Commonwealth Games have been held in major cities without rail links and have been a great success. Melbourne (2006) and Victoria (1994) are recent examples with Delhi (2010) also going to be lacking a rail link.
Kezia's charge that these cities may not have had rail links promised in their bids may well be true but it smacks of putting one's fingers in their ears and deciding they've won the argument prematurely. It is, after all, up to the Games' Organising Committee to decide how significant an issue this will be. John Swinney has already written to Games officials to explain his decision and it's very difficult to envisage a scenario where Glasgow won't be hosting the event in 2014 over something as trivial as this, particularly with Fastlink looking likely to get the go-ahead.
Labour were not so slow with their errant criticism that the SNP are 'anti-Glasgow', but the party should be careful with such catcalls in the light of this apparent line of attack.
Surely needlessly playing up the scenario that the dropping of GARL will jeopardise Glasgow hosting the Commonwealth Games is a much more negative message to send than the Finance Minister merely dropping one of the city's many transport projects due to unavoidable cash constraints?