Anti-Glasgow?
Don't think the evidence stacks up.
off the back of the decision to cancel the proposed rail link to the city's airport.
There are two separate issues here: the rail link itself and the wider treatment of Scotland's largest city.
The link to Glasgow Airport has been cancelled on the grounds that the cost, especially in times of economic trouble, isn't justified by the proclaimed gains, according to ministers.
Pretty well exactly the arguments deployed by ministers when they cancelled the air link to Edinburgh Airport. Did that then illustrate an anti-Edinburgh bias?
Other say: but look at the trams investment in Edinburgh? Look at the replacement for the Forth Bridge?
Two points. John Swinney was completely against the trams project - and was forced to fund it by a Parliamentary vote.
The new Forth crossing is vital for the whole of Scotland. What do we do if the present bridge fails - or faces restrictions on traffic? Return to the ferries?
Further, ministers are able to point to other investment in Glasgow: the new Southern General Hospital, motorway extensions etc.
On my show on the wireless (Brian's Big Debate, it's awfully good, you should listen), Mr Purcell argued that this investment was largely driven by the city council.
He argued further that Edinburgh had benefited from capital city status cash.
Another issue arises.
The creation of a link to the airport formed part of Glasgow's bid for the Commonwealth Games.
It was an explicit element of the offer, with cross-party endorsement including a letter from the then deputy leader of the largest opposition party at Holyrood, one Nicola Sturgeon.
Fine, say ministers, but times have changed.
The Scottish Government argues it is backing other development projects - and that it can guarantee good transport for the Games participants and spectators.
So where are we?
Strictly speaking, the rail link could be revived if opposition parties join forces to insist that it is reinstated within the government's spending programme.
Will that happen? I think not.
Opposition leaders would require to state what else they would cut to fund the rail link.
Frankly, they have other priorities.
What does Glasgow City Council do now? My guess? Sustain its complaints - but, realistically, seek to extract other advantages for the city as recompense.
I suspect both John Swinney and Steven Purcell - both highly adept politicians - know precisely what is going on.
I'm 
Comments
or to comment.