Where are our "leaders"?

North London goes up in flames, stock markets crash and burn and national economies burn to a crisp, while David Cameron languishes in Tuscany and George Osborne lounges by a pool in Los Angeles.

Imagine, just imagine, the media outcry and the opposition "fury", if Labour leaders - Gordon Brown say, or Alisdair Darling - were to behave in this lazy, not to say insouciant, manner in the middle of miltiple crises.... 

The Balloon Bursts....

It's interesting how the media changes its angle to suit (its interpretation of) the facts......

From yesterday's Herald... Labour Jitters....    Alex Salmond was apparently, "homing in" on the voters of Inverclyde. Seven (or is it eight) visits to the constituency by the FM, (and even reports that yesterday he was touring polling stations as if he was the candidate), had woven that special Eck magic. The SNP was poised for another stunning victory, Labour was on the run and politics in Scotland would (for the umpteenth time) never be the same again....

Then, the actual result...... Labour takes 54% of the vote, the SNP challenge is respectable rather than sensational or even dramatic. The  Herald opines Labour relief...SNP surge...

According to their report ....

".... the result allows Mr Salmond to claim the momentum of May’s Scottish Parliament victory is still behind the Nationalists. He will say the result strengthens his case for increasing the scope of the Scotland Bill and that there is a groundswell in favour of the additional powers he wants. It will also be a confidence-builder for his planned independence referendum..."

But that's not how I see it. Labour needed to hold to feel better about itself, but the Nats needed to come a lot closer to keep their momentum going.

Labour will take more from this result than the Nationalist Party.

People who voted SNP in May voted Labour in June, which tells me that, whatever their reason for voting Nationalist in May, it was not to give the SNP a carte blanche to do what they want. And in particular it says "independence" is not on the agenda.

It also says that the people may have intended to give Labour a bloody nose in May, but they never thought that the consequence would be an SNP majority in a parliament that was designed to ensure that no party would ever get a majority. They voted Nationalist for any number of reasons, an anti-Labour vote being one of them, but they didn't vote for a triumphalist Nationalist Party to attack the courts or to rush through and consequently cock-up anti-sectarianism legislation and they certainly didn't vote for "independence".

Cuts are coming and the SNP, having been in power for four years, can no longer blame everyone else for the outcomes. They're the government and they will have to begin to govern and take their share of responsibility for the state of the country.

The SNP may wish to take whatever encouragement they can from the Inverclyde result, and the Herald may wish to encourage them, but it was not a good result for the Nationalist Party and it signals, IMO, the bursting of the SNP bubble, or at least the first hiss of escaping gas.....

A Party Political Broadcast with hope and no lies!!!

 Pretty good after the SNP's bogus claims to have built 330 new schools and other guff...



I like it, what about you?

Biased BBC.....

...is the call we frequently hear from the SNP and Tories.... A lot of lefties cry our  Conservative friends, wet liberals preparing for a Marxist state..... you often get the impression that many Tories would like to see the back of BBC News and Current affairs... they ask too many pointed question, dont'ye know...

...Scottish establishment Labour stooges, cry the Nats. They're out to do us down at every opportunity and puff up Labour. It'a cosy unionist cabal....

I wonder what the Tartan Tories and the real McCoy would have said if their spring conferences were barred from live broadcast by the BBC? Would Eck speak only to the faithful? Would he heck! Would  Dave travel all the way from Kensington to speak to the yokels if Live TV wasn't on offer. Yoiks to the oiks! he would cry, I'm orff!

Seriously, this is a strange decision by the BBC in Scotland. The excuse (that Labour's autumn conference was covered live) is weak. There wasn't an election campaign on in the autumn but there is now.

I knw that the BBC is committed to "balance", but to cover all the conferernces live, except for Labour, is an extraordinary decision and hardly balanced by any sane definition.

I can just hear Annabel and Eck phoning in their protests to the Controller Scotland: "Not fair my man. Hardly balanced and democratic.. we insist that Labour gets equal treatment with us...".

The Polls Narrow...or do they?

The Herald reports a new ICM Poll for Scotland in which the gap between Labour and the SNP narrows, but with Labour still ahead. An ICM Poll shows Labour on 39% for the constituency vote with the SNP on 35%, and Labour 37%, SNP 34% for the list vote.

"The ICM poll of more than 1000 voters was commissioned by the SNP and shows the Nationalists just four points behind Labour’s 39% in the constituency vote and three behind Labour’s 37% for the list vote."

The Tories are at 12% and 13% for the constituency and list votes – while the Liberal Democrats are struggling on 10% and 9%. The Greens scored 4% and others 7% on the regional vote.

The poll would have Labour on 57 seats, with the SNP on 46.

According to the Herald, in another poll, conducted by YouGov, Labour were on 41% for the constituency vote, the SNP 38%, Conservatives 10%, LibDems 6% and others 5%. I can't find this poll online...UPDATE. Found it thanks to Lallands Peat Worrier.


Nicola Sturgeon welcomed the poll as showing that the SNP were performing better than the actual 2007 election result. But at this time in the 2007 campaign both ICM and YouGov had the SNP ahead by about 5 points in both the constituency and regional votes. Labour in 2011 is well ahead of its 2007 election result and also ahead of the polls at this stage of the campaign. 

The poll was matched by a council by-election in Renfrewshire which saw Labour take the seat from SNP

Labour increased its share of the vote by 17 points. Labours Roy Glen won 49.3% of the first-preference votes, compared to the SNPs 32%.As a result, Labour is now the largest party on Renfrewshire Council (18 seats for Labour, 16 for the SNP).

So opinion polls versus real votes...this stage in 2007 versus today's polls...are the polls narrowing or are they not?


As I said when the previous exclusively Scottish Polls were announced,  it's still all to play for and getting out the vote is crucial. That's still the case.....

Give us the chance....

In 2007 the SNP's pitch was "give us a chance to show that we can govern properly...".

The question is: having been given the chance, have they taken it or have they blown it?

Alex Salmond would claim that they have taken the chance with both hands. The SNP decided to take on the challenge of minority government. They would, they pledgd, be different from other parties in government. They would deliver, and in delivering, they would show that they could be entrusted with power, and indpendence could and would bring a better Scotland.

Have they delivered? Well, they have and they haven't. And where they haven't they have they have made the excuse that they're only a minority, and the other parties have blocked their actions...stymied their policies.

So how do we judge? The obvious place to start is the 2007 campaign and Manifesto. What was the campaign fought on? What were they key pledges that the SNP made to get elected?

There were a number of major issues that the nats gathered votes on. One was the unpopularity of the Labour/LibDem coalition that preceded them. Another was the unpopularity of Labour in London and the prevalent anti-Iraq war sentiment.

The policies that dominated the campaign (at least the policies that I remember) were the NHS and the unpopularity of the Kerr/Kerr changes (which they sold as saving local A&Es and other local hospitals), the abolition of Student Debt, the abolition of "the hated Council Tax", the replacement of "the hated PPP" with a Scottish Futures Trust, class size policy, the promise of 1000 "new" police on the street and the promise to match Labour's school building policy "brick for brick".

On the NHS the SNP kept its promise and abandoned the Kerr/Kerr changes. Whether that was wise is not known, but it was delivery and Nicola Sturgeon has improved her reputation. And the 1000 police looks as if it will be delivered, although the peak numbers will quickly shrink in the next year, so it will bea promise met, but not for long.

But of all the other big promises, they have not delivered on most. They didn't abolish student debt as it turned out that they hadn't done the sums and it was far too expensive. They froze the Council Tax, but didn't abolish it, because their replacement policy of a Local Income Tax was not thought out properly and was never credible. They didn't replace PPP because their replacement policy of  a Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) was never properly thought out and was never credible. The class size policy was not delivered because it was never properly thought out and not credible. And the promise to match Labour's school bulding programme "brick for brick" was never met because they wouldn't use PPP and the SFT (see above) was never a credible replacement.

What all of this shows is that the SNP gained protest votes from the unpopularity of its opponents. And also from unpopular policies which it promised to replace, but largely did not. These were, by and large, "policies" which it used to get votes, but which were never going to work, because they were no more than a line in the Manifesto: "You don't like PPP? Neither do we. You want a Scottish Futures Trust? All right, we've got one here, on the back of this fag packet. Sure, it'll work... trust me, I'm a politician...".

There is one way that I can see to make some sort of judgement. The SNP has a page on its website showing all of its achievenements, and Labour has a page detailing what it calls the SNP's "100 broken promises.

Compare and contrast what the SNP claims as achievements with what Labour claims as broken promises. The decision is yours: do the achievements outweigh the broken promises? Did the SNP take its chance to show it could govern....?

I know what I think, but the lists give you the chance to make up your own mind....

Labour ahead in Scottish polls.

The Press Association is reporting a poll in the Scottish Mail on Sunday by a group called Scottish Progressive Opinion (of whom I have to confess, I have never heard).

Of those certain to vote, 43% backed Labour in the constituency vote, with  37% for the SNP, 11% Tory and 5% LibDem, Scottish Socialist 2% and Greens 1%.


In the list vote, Labour polled 44%, with the SNP on 37%, Conservatives 11%, Liberal Democrats 4%,.

The results mean Labour would end up with 63 seats - up by 17. The SNP would have 49 seats, the Lib Dems would  be reduced from the current 16 down to five and the Tories would lose five seats - leaving them with 12 MSPs.

These figure compare with  a YouGov poll on 27th Feb which had;

Constituency: CON 15%, LAB 41%, LDEM 8%, SNP 32%

Regional: CON 15%, LAB 40%, LDEM 7%, SNP 26%, GRN 6%

Giving Labour would get 59 seats.

And an Ipsos/Mori poll of a month ago, which had the figures at 36% SNP, 35% Labour, giving the SNP a narrow lead at Holyrood.

The SNP has had it's conference this weekend. Maybe we will see some surge of support for them and their promises from this.

In any case, the polls are close enough to ensure that neither party will become complacent. As I said before and I say again: it's all about getting out the vote.

Labour's First Election Film, The Road to Recovery

Labour's first  film of the campaign. I liked it. It's optimistic without being cock-eyed. It acknowledges problems, points out that the Conservatives got it wrong at every step in the banking crisis and negotiating the recession. Cameron and Osborne were lost in a storm they didn't understand and couldn't control. If it had been left to them, the UK economy really would have been in the dustbin of history.

The Labour film appeals to the best side of the human character. Stick with it, be steady, be constant, all good human qualities, and while we may have some way to go, don't despair, Labour knows the way and working together, we can all make it to a better place.

No tax bribes...... 

New Poster Art

I like the new Labour poster. Not just for the message which is never mind the Nats, they're not relevant in this election: it looks quite smart.

 Quite mid-20th century poster arty, IMO.

No more Non-elected Non-doms as Labour plan an all elected House of Lords

"An all-elected House of Lords"... how sweet that sounds to any true democrat. Well, it may just be on the way.

The Telegraph website is reporting that Jack Straw is ready to place his plans before Parliament. Three years ago the Lords rejected an all elected second house, despite the Commons supprting it.

The favourite for the new name would be likely to be The Senate.
The remaining 92 hereditary peers – the relic of a deal done under Tony Blair's premiership in 1999 – would also be swept away under the proposed reforms.
Mr Straw's plans go further than the tentative reforms sketched out in his 2008 white paper – which said the new-look chamber should have between 400 and 450 members and be either 100 per cent or 80 per cent elected.
Three years ago the Commons voted by a majority of 113 to reform the upper house to an all-elected chamber – but that move was blocked by the House of Lords itself, which voted for a fully appointed assembly.

 I have to say it's a great idea: non-elected non-doms have had it their own way for too long.

Silver Lining Time

As Labour takes a beating in the English local elections, the good news is from Scotland, with two decisive council by-election gains from the SNP in Glasgow and North Lanarkshire and a third victory for Labour.

Two of the vacancies were created by Nationalist councillors standing down after becoming MSPs proved none too safe for the Nats. Iain Gray rightly claimed that these were "stunning" results for Labour in Scotland.

Ian Gray said: "It is a personal humiliation for Alex Salmond that two of the seats won were vacated by his SNP MSPs standing down from their dual council roles. Unlike their boss they gave up their dual mandate and voters replaced them with Labour."

In Drumchapel-Anniesland ward in Glasgow, Labour beat the SNP by 2,584 to 1,509 in first-preference votes.

In Coatbridge North and Glenboig (North Lanarkshire), Labour beat the SNP by 1,529 to 1,254 in first preferences.

And in East Dunbartonshire, Alan Moir won the Bishopbriggs South by-election following the sad death of local councillor and Provost, Alex Hannah. Alan Moir won 38 per cent of the first-preference votes, and an overall majority of 561 over the SNP.

These labour victories are a kick in the teeth for the Nationalist Party and, just possibly, an indicator that any upcoming General Election is not the foregone conclusion that opposition parties and the media foresee.

Ireland no more...Iceland no more...

Honest. Ye couldny make it up!

Kenneth Gibson, MSP of the SNP persuasion, wants Scotland to be like Cyprus! That's right, no need to rub your eyes: he wants us to be like Cyprus.... Cyprus, in case you had forgotten, was invaded by Turkey 35 years ago and was partitioned until very recently. Half the population hates and distrusts the other half. The position has thawed a little in the last few years, but Cyprus remains, for all intents and purposes, a split country and divided society. Why would anyone in their right mind want Scotland to be like Cyprus?

You may ask whatever happened to the famous "Arc of Propsperity", of Ireland and Iceland which were supposed to be the examplars for an independent Scotland. Well ...not a lot....

.... except it failed!

The Arc collapsed. It let the Nationalists down. The "tigers" lost their teeth, they got mangy. They got lame. So the Nats have kicked the Arc into touch. Ireland no more. Iceland no more. Now these countries have failed to live up to the SNP's foolish expectations and predictions, the focus moves to Cyprus. And Estonia. And Luxembourg.

Mr Gibson famously made the front page of the Sun soon after his much disputed election. Maybe the most charitable explanation of his latest pronouncement is a burning desire for more headlines. Maybe "We've got what it takes to be like any split, divided and inconsequential country in the world". Not very attractive, but what else can you say....

For info, the MSP has tabled the motion below:

SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT MOTION FROM KENNY GIBSON MSP. Date of Lodging : 26 May 2009

Short Title: Stronger Apart

That the Parliament notes that, following the European elections on 4 June 2009, the independent nations and EU member states of Malta, Luxembourg, Cyprus, Estonia and Slovenia, with a combined population of 4.9 million, will be represented by 30 MEPs, while Scotland will have only six; recognises that Luxembourg alone, with fewer citizens than Edinburgh, will match Scotland’s total; is aware that an independent Scotland like Denmark, would have 13 MEPs, and believes that, if all the nations of the United Kingdom had independent representation, the number of MEPs in the United Kingdom would rise from 72 to around 92 and that we are therefore weaker together, stronger apart.

Read it and weep.

What does "brick for brick" actually mean?

Yesterday at FMQ's Iain Gray asked Alex Salmond to take responsibility for the lack of delivery by Education Minister Fiona Hyslop.

The latest admission by Hyslop, that there are 1000 fewer teachers in Scotland's schools than a year ago is bad enough.

But the SNP has already abandoned it promise of reducing class sizes in P1-P3 to 18.

As for the SNP's promise to match Labour's school building programme "brick-for-brick": it is a disgrace and a disaster. Not one new school has been commissioned since the SNP came to power.

Meanwhile Fiona Hyslop and Alex Salmond travel the country opening the latest of the almost 200 schools that Labour commissioned and built, and shamelessly basking in the reflected glory of the achievements of others.

This is more than just another party-political bunfight. The education of our children is a key to our future prosperity. The provision of new and efficient buildings in which teachers can teach and children can learn is vital to this process. The non-delivery of new schools is a crime against a whole generation of youngsters, and the Scottish Nationalists should be ashamed of their failure to deliver such a basic requirement of any competent administration.

Two weeks ago, three junior ministers were sacked. I don't know how competent or otherwise they were, but it seems to me that Ms Hyslop's incompetence is so great, and she is so close to the First Minister, that it gives her a paradoxical protection from the the fate which she surely deserves.

What's the point of independence?

It occurs to me that I have spent my adult life listening to Scottish Nationalists telling me that "independence" would be wonderful. But I've never actually seen or heard any of them explain why. Or what exact difference it would make. If any.



The SNP in power has proved to be singularly incompetent. They have failed to deliver any of their main manifesto promises so, presumably, "independence" is not what the SNP would do... otherwise it would be a total mess.



And who could believe in a total mess?