Preparing for battle
I am painfully aware that I have rather neglected Scotland's other leadership contest, that within the Scottish Liberal Democrats.
In that regard, my behaviour probably mirrors that of the nation as a whole which is either on holiday, at work, watching the Olympics or waiting for the opening of the Scottish football season on Monday.
(One or two affect to believe that the season opens on Saturday. They are mistaken. The season only truly begins when the mighty United face Hamilton on Monday. All the best to Craig and the lads.)
However, back to the Lib Dems. This blog is eclectic and egalitarian in its outlook. So I should have mentioned the contest ere now. Mea maxima culpa.
It is, in itself, an intriguing fight. Two ex Cabinet Ministers, Tavish Scott and Ross Finnie, plus one of Holyrood's awkward squad, Mike Rumbles.
Incidentally, from me and from many Lib Dems, that is an expression of praise. If Mike Rumbles had been in the pre-Union Scots Parliament, he'd probably have joined the Squadrone Volante, demanding a tough line on those Court and Country backsliders.
Tavish Scott must be reckoned favourite. He has the most prominently declared support - although, as Mr Scott will be the first to recognise, that can be a downer in the Lib Dems who wear their iconoclasm along with their sandals. (Cheap, Brian, cheap: they abandoned sandals long since. They now wear clogs.)
I'm intrigued by Ross Finnie's stance: arguing for a purer Lib Dem message. Plainly he feels that has been somewhat jeopardised by the years in government.
In response, Mr Scott might note that he took arguably the hardest line in the short-lived coalition talks with the SNP last May.
Independence didn't form part of the Lib Dem agenda - and he would, consequently, have nothing to do with the Nationalists.
This has been a good, clean fight - with just the odd hint of the guile for which the Lib Dems are occasionally renowned, at least among their opponents.
Either way, whoever wins may swiftly face an intriguing conundrum. What to do about the council tax?
The Lib Dems are in favour of a Local Income Tax. Simple, then. They'll vote with the SNP to scrap the Council Tax and replace it with LIT.
Except. Except we've now heard muttering from Vince Cable, the party's sage at Westminster on these matters, that LIT might not, perhaps, be utterly wonderful.
There were even suggestions that Mr Cable might favour piloting the new tax in Scotland. Memo to Vince: study your poll tax history first.
Except, part two, I don't really hear enthusiastic evangelising from Scottish Lib Dems about the merits of LIT. I hear them say it's their policy. I hear them criticise the Council Tax. I don't really hear gutsy, all-out pressure for LIT.
Except, part three, the present SNP proposal is for a fixed rate tax across Scotland, 3% everywhere. That, as the Lib Dems point out, isn't local. So they won't back that.
Could that change though? SNP Ministers are hinting again that they're ready to talk. Nicol Stephen offered such discussions. Will his successor take them up?
Or might he more inclined to listen to the alternative offer - from Labour and the Tories, to consider reforms to the Council Tax.
There are political and practical problems aplenty with either option. Back Labour/Tory - and be painted as the defender of the council tax, abandoning your own manifesto.
Back the SNP - and what? If LIT is popular (OK, no tax is popular - less hated, then), won't the SNP just take all the credit? If LIT bombs, will the Lib Dems share the blame?
Welcome to leadership, Mr Scott, Mr Finnie or Mr Rumbles.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~06~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Clearly an exceptional contest
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Brian
I've been waiting for this thread! Potentially it is more important than which Labour MSP gets to ask Salmond a couple of questions at FMQ, until the Holyrood elections, they resign or whatever.
The Lib-Dems have recently positioned themselves in a difficult position with the electorate - Labour Mk II, 3rd Unionist Party etc., and haven't managed to articulate a distinct identity - though Federalism might actually be more in tune with Scottish opinion?
Complain about this comment
ZZZZZZZZ
burp!
Are we there yet Dad?
Complain about this comment
Brian
Just came across Tavish Scott's campaign leaflet. He quotes you as complimenting him - so clearly can't lose!
Complain about this comment
Cap'n Mainwearing is a decent enough bloke but not a leader. Tavish has made a strategic mistake in taking the hard line with Alex and co. Whether we like it or not, Scotland is on the road to independence, although nobody (including the SNP) is too keen to define what they mean exactly by independence at this point.
Which leaves Major Mike as the only choice if the Lib Dems want to stay up with the hunt. He's the only one with the nimbleness of foot to keep their collective head above water.
But I have no doubt the Lib Dems will vote for Tavish and consign themselves to political oblivion in Scotland. And, I have to say, few tears will be shed .......................................
Complain about this comment
With the best will in the world, it's hardly an intriguing fight Brian. Three nobodies scrapping away for the dubious honour of leading the beige party. I've nothing against the Lib Demzzzz, but nothing for them either. What are they for?
PS As I'm sure you're aware Brian, the Scottish football season ended on Tuesday night, at least for those of a one-eyed, blue-nosed unionist persuasion ;o)
Complain about this comment
Brain - duh! - they all wear Crocs now.
Rumbles is their best hope in Scotland. The other two will just look like another couple of London muppets to the rest of the country.
Complain about this comment
Tavish seems to unnerve the nationalists the most, probably because he's both a supporter of the Union and a federalist. In normal politics, these would be seen as perfectly normal positions (and they're in line with public opinion). But when dealing with the annointed ones, his deviance from their path makes him 'irrelevant'.
Complain about this comment
Hi brian
hope your face has recovered from its meeting with the stairs.
anyway scott finnie or rumbles?
nope.
still dont care.
I never voted for them before may 2007 and the shenanigans and planned stitch up of democracy they got up to with ming cambell and brown doesnt make me any more likely to vote for them now.
In fact im more likely to vote labour than i am lib dem because of that.
At least you expect labour to stitch you up.
Complain about this comment
Can we please stop pretending this is a contest? Tavish has been running the show for much of Nicol Stephen's tenure. I remember well the May election launch; which went so badly for Nicol that Tavish has to step in and tell the press pack what his leader had just said.
Complain about this comment
10 Patty
I think that is exactly the point. How do the Lib-Dem members (remember they have an OMOV system) feel about how their party's strategy has gone since their last leadership election in 2005?If you're right and Scott is a shoo-in, then his decision not to focus on constitutional issues will kill them and forfar-loon's question "What are they for?" will resonate in all but the most traditional Liberal areas.
If Rumbles gets it (and I note that he has spoken to half of the households with Lib-Dem members, and his supporters have spoken to the rest), and argues the Federal case strongly then things might become interesting.
There might be an alternative for those Labour voters who don't mind fiscal autonomy, don't want independence, and have seen how Labour's (non)leader election has made them a complete irrelevance.
Finnie is so gaffe prone, that he doesn't seem a serious contender.
Complain about this comment
Maybe they should have asked the expert on all things Political in Scotland " Brian Wilson " the highland seer to give his opinions on who best person to lead the Lib Dems. Now that he's rubbished the Labour leadership candidates, I'm sure he could do a fine job on the poor quality material in the other contest. Though if his voting record in the house of commons was anything to go by , he'd change his mind so often we'd never know what he meant in the first place.
Complain about this comment
What the Liberal Democrats appear not to have noticed - and what the Labour party clearly have not - is that there are now only two political parties in Scotland. There's the Nationalists, ably led by Alex Salmond, and the Unionists, ably led by Annabel Goldie.
When the tide is coming in, building little individual sandcastles does no good. This election - and that other L*b 'leadership' election happening in another part of the forest - are sideshows. They aren't any longer realpolitik.
Complain about this comment
PR was the Lib Dems most high profile ,identifiable success within the coalition,yet at the outset Labour showed no inclination to implement it.But they eventually succeeded. Lesson? Get to the cabinet table and use the position to your advantage,after all you are in the driving seat.Obviously T Scott prefers to snipe(sorry prefers the moral high ground) from the sidelines-where is the risk of parliamentary support,not for independence, but for approval for a referendum?But a more serious problem confronting the L Dems is what is their "narrative",as Finnie coined it.In fact is it not the case that platitudes describe the quotes from ALL Scottish parties-we all want apple pie?But who knows how to provide it?Answers on postage stamp!
Complain about this comment
SHAME on you, Brian.
To suggest that the SCOTTISH football season is in any way linked to the "Greed is good" SPL fixture list.
For the majority of REAL football fans, who support their LOCAL teams year-in and year-out with no prospect of glory, the season is already well under way with the league and [in some cases] two cup campaigns already commenced.
Dundee United? They play in dark blue, don't they...?
:->
Complain about this comment
Poor wee Ross! He has sorely missed his ministerial car and all the perks that surround it. However, he posesses all the warmth of a puff-adder with piles and as a leader he would be at best secretive and at worst downright loathed. He is too old and it must be said, too compromised in the health stakes to take the helm. Sure, Wee Eck would have a sound adversary in terms of rhetoric but not in terms of real substance.
I feel sad that the LibDems have fallen on hard times. They were, it must be said, a kind of conscience whose temperate ways calmed many stormy parliamentary seas. However, people can't really forget that they shored up several Labour administrations and were effectively mere puppets.
So Messrs Rumbles and Scott, go to it and may the best man win etc., etc.. And Ross, have a word with pretty-boy Clegg and get that nice Peerage, youv'e earned it...Baron Greenock of the Three Towns sounds good!!!
Complain about this comment
It was great to hear bagpiped "Scotland the Brave" getting a fair outing during the athlete's marchpast at the Olympics opening ceremony this afternoon (Scottish Summer Time, that is).
Given their unswerving obedience to their London overlords, I sometimes wonder if MSPs would even know the words...
As to LibDem leadership,
...if you want endless Captain Mainwaring gags, elect Ross Finnie.
...if you want to be accused of the same "all change, no change" as Blair/Brown, elect Tavish Scott.
...if you want someone who really wants to lead (even if no one wants to follow), elect Mike Rumbles, but don't be surprised if his maverick ways cause more than a few gaffes and embarrassing faux pas along the way.
Complain about this comment
To oldnat-comment 2
Federalism has been LD policy for years-but what does it mean?It suggests to me that they should be supporting a multi question referendum with a detailed explanation of the term.And why are they not in government fighting for their local income tax?
To kaybraes-comment 12
In a PR parliament perhaps we need more "Wilsons" and Rumbles,MSPs who are not disloyal but exhibit a degree of independent thought who can contribute to the general policy debate eg T Dalyell,F Field,even Byers and Milburn.There is something demeaning about lobby fodder MPs, MSPs.Who was the Glasgow East MP and how was he regarded? Can anyone name an interesting/provocative MSP?
Complain about this comment
#18 longjohnbarleycorn
Ray Michie (Liberal - Argyll) used to make a good case for a federal UK, but whether what she wanted is what the Lib-Dems believe in - who knows?
Both the existing Incorporating Union and Independence are closely examined. I'd like to see the myriad variations of the Federal / Confederal positions argued for and against as well.
Complain about this comment
#11 oldnat &
#17 cousteau699
Good posts. Rumbles may well be a risk, but the LibDems looks the best hope of being able to do business with the SNP and distinguishing themselves from the unionists.
Scott seems to have forgotten that Jo Chamberlain deserted the Liberal Party over home rule for Ireland to co-found the Conservative & Unionist Party. Maybe he should join Annabel's Tories.
Complain about this comment
#18 longjohnbarleycorn
"It suggests to me that they should be supporting a multi question referendum with a detailed explanation of the term.And why are they not in government fighting for their local income tax?"
Absolutely. I can only assume they're not because of poor leadership both in Holyrood and Westminster.
Complain about this comment
#19 oldnat
For the LibDem "party line", see their PDF policy paper [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator].
Most of the federal bit is in 6. "Devolution and Decentralisation" on p25 et seq.
Complain about this comment
#21 Brownedov
I think there is another reason. I don't believe that the "moderate Labour" lot (Williams/Jenkins etc) who formed the Social Democrats believed for a moment in Federalism.Welcome back.
They still believed in centralism, but didn't want to see it in the hands of Benn and Militant. To form the union with the Liberals they were happy to sign up to some Liberal ideas, because they never thought that they would become an issue - in any case they were the dominant partners and would get their evil way (c/f Spitting Image).
It may be that this election will show whether the Lib-Dems in Scotland are "Lib" or "Dem".
Complain about this comment
oldnat
BTW, hello again. I was completely politicked out last week and your Let the battle begin #32 finished me off.
It is relevant to this discussion, though, if you substitute "SDP" for your "Lib-Dems" in your list of "centralists". IMHO, that's the main reason for the apparent dithering from the LibDems of late, with Scott and Clegg much more from the SDP half than the Liberal tradition of Steele, Campbell and Kennedy.
Complain about this comment
#24 Brownedov
"post modernist" is a guaranteed killer!
Complain about this comment
#25 oldnat
Nah - It was being grouped with the Tories that took a lot of getting used to. To a "lefty" Liberal, that comes pretty hard, but I accept it in the context the point was made. I've also done some more research on the SNP and think they just about come on to the de-centralist side of that equation.
BTW, my #22 was a reply to your #19, now referred to the mods presumably because it links to a PDF of the LibDem constitutional policy. I've had PDF links accepted before, but in case it doesn't come back, you can find it on their POLICY PAPERS page as "For the People, By the People". That dates from last September, so it's possible Clegg hopes to get it changed at the Bournemouth conference.
Complain about this comment
#23 oldnat
My #24 was posted before your post was visible, which comes to much the same point of view, if less elegantly expressed.
I agree 100% with your last sentence if you delete the opening "It may be that".
If they're "Dem"s they would do better to re-merge with Labour to form their new left-wing.
Complain about this comment
#26 Brownedov
Thanks for the link. Lib-Dem Federalism is a sham!
While this is almost an entirely English document, since I assume it was for the "federal" conference the Scots Lib-Dems presumably signed up for it.
The give away is this phrase
I may post a reasoned response later - but my immediate response is that Simon #13 was far too gentle - these Lib-Dem ***** should be utterly eradicated from the Scottish body politic!
Complain about this comment
#28 oldnat
Up to a point, Lord Copper!
Trouble is, there's still an element of the "sogginess" us Liberals have been accused of all my life. If you look at "6.1 Division of Competences" on p.25, it doesn't look nearly so bad.
I suspect that the bit you quote was drafted by a Social Democrat and my bit by a Liberal. If they do badly next time, I think there's just as much chance of the LibDems splitting as there is with Labour.
A merged party is 100% different to being in a coalition or electoral pact where you share defined common goals. David Owen was right about that at the time of the merger and I think about half the LibDems could be thinking of rejoining him, in which case the rest can rejoin us Liberals.
Complain about this comment
Think i'll Thorpe out on this one.
The famous 4, to the dreadful 3.
By the way, wasn't Scott, the one responsible for the second mortgage fiasco.
A bit of LIT- taxation there?....
Complain about this comment
#29 Brownedov
(Rant #2, since this thread will probably be Brian's shortest ever)
Too late, Brownedov!
Woe is me that I was tempted by Brian to betray my secret flirtation with Rumbles and his hellish legions! (But what else do you expect from a United supporter)
Henceforth, I shall swear allegiance to Wee Eck and his band of angels (patty, karin et al) - admitting my sins while regretting the passing of the Garden of Eden that was Ray Michie's vision!
Complain about this comment
#31 oldnat
There's no answer to that.
Too late for now, perhaps, but they may yet come to their senses and enter coalition with your SNP chums at a future date.
For me, it's just physically too late, so goodnight all.
Complain about this comment
The federalist Liberal Democrat Party has a body of experience applicable to the case of Home Rule that is incomparably greater than that possessed by any other unionist political party. If from timidity, prejudice or sheer neglect it fails to use it, it will earn the heavy censure reserved for those who sin against the light, as Erskine Childers might have put it.
The Lib Dems had better get their federalist act together quickly, and on a UK basis, so that they can offer a programme of constitutional reform upon that basis before some other party does. Not a likely scenario in the past, but the political landscape has recently been hit by a tremor which may well indicate what it will look like if the expected earthquake occurs at the next UK general election.
In that landscape something will be needed by the unionist parties to halt the SNP. That will be federalism, if they or one of them can bite the bullet and persuade the English electorate to go along with it. Unfortunately, the Lib Dems are not the old Liberal Party, and the English have a quite uncanny ignorance of their own history, which, if they were as familiar with it as they should be, should permit them to find a way through the darkness of the truly horrendous constitutional nightmare that is going to descend upon them in the next couple of years.
If the Scottish Lib Dems have got a leadership candidate who is up to meeting this historic challenge, why does one hear nothing about federalism from him?
Complain about this comment
I honestly don't know why they bother.
The Lib Dems managed to screw a few things up when they shared power with Labour.
South of the border they are losing support overall as people realise that to definitely get rid of Labour they need to vote Conservative in many areas.
The Lib Dems have also suffered from problems - or perceived problems - with their leaders: Charles Kennedy likes a drink, Nick Clegg can't keep his temper and everyone thought - unfairly - that Menzies Campbell was too old.
But up here in Scotland the apathy is even worse. I follow politics, but am pushed to name more than 2 or 3 Lib Dem MSPs, such is the excistement of their policies.
At least the Scottish Tories appear stable!
Complain about this comment
The Lib Dem election is HUGELY more important than the Labour one, and I'm surprised neither Brian nor any of the comments has really picked up on the fact.
The Labour election is essentially meaningless - all the candidates stand for the same thing, namely opposing everything the SNP does on principle. None of them are fit to lace Alex Salmond's loafers, and they'll continue Labour's fade into irrelevance because they're tied to the Tory policies of their London masters.
However, if the SNP can win Jack McConnell's seat in the autumn when he leaves to take up his nice little gig in Malawi (and who'd bet against that?), the arithmetic of the Scottish Parliament will change very significantly - the SNP and Lib Dems together could then form a majority. With Rumbles as leader, they'd very likely support a referendum on independence, and help constructively with regard to replacing Council Tax, all bypassing Labour and the Tories entirely.
If Scott is elected, the party will continue the policy of petulant sulking and negativity that's seen the Lib Dems plummet from a party of government to 4th place behind the Tories in the space of a year - because he is one of the prime architects of that policy - and their support will continue to haemorrhage, perhaps even faster than it's doing already. (Mostly, I suspect, to the SNP.) I can see them being utterly wiped out in 2011 if they continue on their current suicidal path.
So I suppose the SNP will win both ways, but Rumbles as Lib Dem leader could usher in a whole era of positive co-operative politics in Scotland. As someone who votes Lib Dem myself (I live in England), I hope he does win, because Tavish Scott is a smirking, witless embarrassment of a clown who will consign the party to the wilderness.
Complain about this comment
Reverend,
If Wee Eck falls for that, I'll be surprised. Minority government is far better than to sell out to LD - now, if it were to be a true Liberal subset from a split LD, that might be worth consideration.Slainte
ed
Complain about this comment
Oh Dear! All the Lib-Dem supporters are coming out of the woodwork now, heads looking over their shoulders at the past and failing to notice the onrushing train.
Let us consider their predicament - Tavish Scott is clearly the most popular with the Party, but can't cut a deal with the SNP, or if he does his credibility will drop to zero. Mike Rumbles, way too much of a loose cannon, the SNP won't touch him with a bargepole. Which leaves Ross Finnie who could cut a deal with the SNP. Whether the Party are smart enough to realise that, given the evidence on this thread, is open to question.
Now let us turn to the SNP - Will they go into coalition with the Lib-Dems? Will Alex Salmond remove a couple of his Ministers to accomodate his new coalition partners? Absolutely not. The FM has to keep both wings of his own party together, removing Ministers for the dubious advantage of Lib-Dem support would be political suicide. The best the Lib-Dems can hope for is a non-agression pact and a short-lived one at that.
Now turning to LIT - as I indicated on a previous posting, this is a potential timebomb which the FM as an economist in a previous life should know. I rather suspect that he is hoping that this particular policy will be voted out by the other three parties then he can blame them roundabout the time of the referendum (If he can get that through - which is a big IF).
So, in my opinion the Lib-Dems will remain in the political wilderness and the SNP will stick to being a minority administration with Tory support when it matters or when it is advantageous to the Tories. LIT will be quietly sidelined with Labour taking the blame and the referendum will probably not go ahead because it won't achieve the necessary level of Parliamentary support. Big disappointments all round, I fancy, except for the Tories who are playing a very shrewd game.
Complain about this comment
I wonder if, having waited several generations for a taste of [even shared] power, the LibDems were glad of a break come 2007 - being in Government is a real job, something of which all too many of our modern career politicians have little or no experience - but have now decided that the slower pace of opposition is no substitute for P.O.W.E.R. (esp. the loss of civil servants to do legwork).
At the moment, the SNP ministers seem fresh and invigorated - having waited several generations for a taste of power - but I suspect that, even when utterly exhausted and deflated by the minutiae of administration, the allure of the glittering prize of independence will be a greater 'stimulant' than any to be found in Beijing Olympians' samples over the next two weeks.
For the other parties, governing under devolution is the ultimate goal; for the SNP, it is merely one of the final hurdles on the way to the ultimate objective...
FREEDOM!
Complain about this comment
Forfar Loon #6.
Our right to self determination is of greater importance than any football club including those based in Govan and Parkhead.
Your comments are both offensive to ''blue noses'' who support independence and of course those who don't. Either way you cannot hold on to support, or gather more with misguided remarks, your comments could not be further from the''Nil By Mouth'' SNP backed policy.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
#36 I said a majority, not a coalition. I don't see either party entering the latter, no matter who leads them. But a majority could get some crucial votes passed while rendering Labour/Tory opposition irrelevant.
Complain about this comment
#34 Neil_Small147 &
#37 Dick-Whittington
"The Lib Dems managed to screw a few things up when they shared power with Labour."
Undoubtedly, but they did ameliorate the worst excesses of the NuLab virus, which is perhaps all that was feasible for the junior partner in a coalition.
"South of the border they are losing support overall as people realise that to definitely get rid of Labour they need to vote Conservative in many areas."
Yes, but voters are showing that they are prepared to vote tactically. All 3 Labour Westminster by-election losses have gone to the party that was 2nd in 2005 with 1 victory each to LibDem, Tories & SNP.
That trend is likely to continue at the next General Election, which is why the LibDems are concentrating most on seats where they're 2nd to Labour.
Of the 40 Scottish seats held by Labour in 2005, the SNP were in 2nd place in 18 (inc Glasgow East). the LibDems in 15 (inc Dunfermline & West Fife) and the Tories in 7. Too much SNP/LibDem squabbling could let 33 NuLab cockroaches crawl home. The SNP must also now stand a good chance in Martin's seat of Glasgow North East, especially if Martin stands down next time.
OTOH, a non-aggression pact between SNP and LibDems could result in their almost total fumigation plus a multi-choice referendum backed by a majority in Holyrood.
I accept that it's much too late for the SNP to want to go into coalition right now, but a pact which resulted in a guarantee of holding the referendum in 2010 and gave the SNP excellent prospects in 19 Westminster seats would surely be of interest to the FM.
I agree with most that Scott couldn't deliver the above, but don't see that Finnie could either. Certainly Rumbles would be a risk, but he just might have the sense to do it.
Complain about this comment
Rev S Campbell
If the SNP will have learnt anything from the labour experince of power in Holyrood then it is keep the Lib Dems at arms length.
I live in the unfortunate areathat has become the Lib Dem Highland heartland they can be typefied by claiming credit for everything good done in the parliament (not much I know) and having nothing at all to do with anything unpopular, it was all labour's fault.
Wee eck is far to smart to get in bed with them, no matter how the maths stack up.
However minority governement should be what holyrood is about in the current climate. It is what the voters decided, which in a democracy is what should happen. It requires consenus politics, where issues are identified and common ground sought that leads to hopefully better thought out legislation.
My biggest dissapointment so far has been the lack of effort from all parties on how to build consensus on any issue. The electorate would warm to someone who actuallys tries to get things done, opposition for the sake of it is negative and destructive.
Perhaps the issue of Local government taxation is a point where they could all start from? Lets face it none of the policies on the table look very well thought out so no one would be wasting a lot of work by starting with a fresh bit of paper!
Complain about this comment
Re 41
Voting in a byelection is always different to voting in a general election.
In a general election issues and party policies are examined in a lot more detail by the media and the electorate and people realise that it is a straight choice between the conservatives and labour.
"A non aggression pact with the SNP could achieve total fumigation" My this has been a bitter divorce.
Your repsonse is fairly typical of a lid dem in that they only had a little bit to do with the caolition and it was all labours fault. Won't do I am afraid.
Complain about this comment
#42 & #43 northhighlander
and We live in times where politics is fast changing, and the old certainties which underlie your second statement cannot be assumed still to be true. Even if they were, then your first statement demonstrates that not all parts of the UK follow them.There is an inherent contradiction in your posts -
Complain about this comment
Where do the LibDems go now, is the real question.
On the Tavish Train to Nowhere or the Finnie Haddie Express or the Rumbles Magic Mystery tour? Doesn't really matter as I suspect the destination will end up the same, Oblivion Central.
The SNP has laid out its vision, to compete the others have to do the same. If the LibDems do have one, I have yet to see it.
Complain about this comment
Re 44
To much haste not enough speed
Should have explained myself better I agree
My point is that when electing a UK government the electorate are much more likely to come to the viewpoint that the next PM will either be the labour or tory leader.
Voting intentions in General elections are less likely to change than in by-elections which strongly feature protest votes and single issues. Essentially progress made in byelections is not a reliable pointer to a general election.
However In Scotland that is different in that we definately live in a time of some political change. That is good for politics in that it may encourage fresh thinking and progress.
With regard to Lib Dems in Highlands they now claim to have no influence in the past governement for decsisions on education and health spending, it was only labour that had any say.
Complain about this comment
Notice there are no female candidates in this election. Not surprising, as there are only 2 out of 16 LibDem MSPs, the least, proportionally of any Holyrood Party. In fact every party has improved, dramatically mostly, on their gender balance at Westminster. Apart from the LibDems. Raises questions such as:
-Are there no talented LibDem women?
-Are the LibDems biased against women?
-Does there selection process discourage women from standing?
I don't know the answers but given the impact female MSPs have had in the SP, I think the LibDems are missing a trick
Complain about this comment
#43 northhighlander
Of course there are differences, but the numbers I quote in #41 are from the 2005 GE, and NuLab could be finished off with some kind of electoral pact. With the crazy plurality system for Westminster and NuLab so unpopular, tactical voting against them is more likely next time than ever before.
I don't think Scottish voters have found it "a straight choice between the conservatives and labour" for at least the past 2 GEs but next time the English will probably prefer BluLab to NuLab. That bodes very well for the Tories in the 200 English seats where they're 2nd to NuLab, but certainly doesn't mean wipeout for the LibDems in the 83 English seats where they're 2nd to NuLab.
If the Tories have any sense, they'll back off campaigning a little in the LibDem 83 in exchange for the LibDems doing likewise in the Tory 200. That won't need to be an electoral pact per se, just plain common sense.
The arithmetic is much harder in Scotland, where full-blooded 3 or 4-way fights would leave the 41 NuLab (inc Martin) seats much more likely to be retained. An electoral pact with the SNP would also affirm the Scottish LibDems' independence from control by London while probably giving the FM a majority of Scottish Westminster seats. Win-win for both sides?
I don't agree that it's "a bitter divorce" simply because coalition government is not a marriage in the first place. I do think that Scott hasn't shown he's learnt much from the experience.
I am an old Liberal and neither a LibDem nor a "lid dem" - an expression I've seen you use before so suspect it's not a typo. My view is an outsider's one of the result of the coalition. It's certainly viewed that way by many south of the wall. I agree that it "Won't do", but that doesn't mean a future coalition is an impossibility. Not before 2011, I suspect.
Complain about this comment
Re 48 Brownedov
I don't use the term Lid dem meaning any slight, it is just a typo. I will endeavour to improve my typing.
Interestingly none of the lib dem leadership candidates acept any blame or offer any apology for the mistakes of the coalition. Nor do the labour candidates.
I think voters would like to see politicians who genuinely apprear to have studied and learnt the mistakes from there past. Scott hasn't, Finnie appears incapable of doing so and Rumbles appears the only one not too badly tainted from the government
When will we see a politican who demonstrates some principle and leadership?
I think both SNP, Labour and tory will be very wary of a coalition with the LIbdems, especially if minority government is made to work.
Any should the extent of the Libdem leadership candidates ambition be a future coalition?
Complain about this comment
As an SNP activist I'd like to see Tavish Scott chosen. He comes over in the media as a hectoring bully and turns people off.
The contest is irrelevant anyway. It doesn't matter who leads the LibDems. Their mindless attachment to a unionist cause which most of their support is at best ambivalent about and their propping up of Labour has led them into the final wilderness. Their refusal to support an SNP led government in coalition was a huge strategic blunder and seriously illiberal.
In effect over the last decade they became the refuge of disaffected Tories who couldn't make a transition to Labour. That situation is now fading and there will be a drift back to the Tories out of the LibDem support.
For what it is worth Mike Rumbles is the only one who do the sort of things that would increase their support but I suspect their timidity on the constitutional issue gives huge and continuing advantage to the SNP. The constitutional issue is now the only game in town and it is incrementally destroying the unionist parties.
Federalism is just another complicated hurdle introduced to try to trip up the progress towards normal independence.
Paradoxically a federal UK, if desired at all, could be better and more easily achieved after Scotland achieves independence
Complain about this comment
#48 Brownedov
Not sure that your analysis necessarily works in Scotland for 2010.
Let's assume that it is thoroughly established in Scottish minds that the election is a "done thing" and that the English will put the Tories back in power (perception is what matters).
Those of a wholly "British" political mind set will then have a choice of voting for their Unionist preference, or voting tactically in their constituency to minimise or maximise the Tory majority.
Those with a largely "Scottish" approach will probably vote for the non-Tory party felt most likely to protect Scotland from the Tories (regardless of the fact that Cameron is a very different animal from Thatcher).
Under FPTP, the SNP would maximise their seats, by having the Unionist votes splintered among as many Unionist parties as possible.
Complain about this comment
Good blog Brian! Just one thing wrong though...
C'mon the Accies!!!!
There - better!
Complain about this comment
#50 sneckedagain
I think you're right. A thousand years ago when I was a Liberal, the assumption was that Federalism would be essentially a re-negotiation of the Treaty of Union away from the Incorporating Union of 1707.Once we establish the basic fact, that we joined England by a Treaty, and not an Act of Parliament, I'm more than happy to join with the other nations of the UK in a Confederal Union - which would ease transition problems, especially in Europe.
More importantly, Aberdeen will beat Caley Thistle!
Complain about this comment
#49 northhighlander
Fair enough, I just wondered if "lid dem" was a new piece of slang I just hadn't come across.
I am certainly no apologist for the LibDems, but as they're the only UK-wide party in favour of electoral reform and are not by any means all unionists, I think they represent the leastworst option across much of Britain, and the best hope of ending the Labour/Tory buggins' turn at Westminster. That's the only realistic hope of the federal LibDems.
For the Scottish LibDems, the realistic hope must be to have a say in defining the referendum question(s) and to help get rid of NuLab before the Tories recover enough to benefit too much from the NuLab demise.
In this, that they certainly have some common ground with the SNP is all I'm really arguing. At the next general election, the SNP clearly have the option of "going for broke" by themselves, and if Scott becomes leader that's probably just what they will do.
Trouble is, that may well not be enough to root out the NuLab canker.
Complain about this comment
I think the party at large would like Mike Rumbles if he become leader, since he at least seems a three-dimensional character. But how would this go down at Holyrood, where he is likely to be third out of the three candidates?
A recipe for factionism.
If not for vanity, he could be leader of the Party in Scotland whilst allowing MSPs to select their own leader to head the group at Holyrood.
---
Ross Finnie could have been the top contender had he not been so prominent in his previous roles. Being visible is only of use if you're achieving something, and poor Ross always seemed to be bluster without substance.
His best chance is if those who strongly oppose one or other of his rivals (but cannot bring themselves to vote for the other) go for the available option to stop their personal bogeyman. [Sounds like the LibDem modus operandi for decades past.]
---
Tavish Scott?
A man whose charisma level was previously considered to be exceeded by that of Nicol Stephen.....
Complain about this comment
Lib Dems? Who are they? What do they stand for?
This is a party which is badly split. Its what comes from sitting on a barb wire fence for so long.
I do agree with you Brian, with your reference to the football season. I too remeber the heady Mclean days of the eighties!
Complain about this comment
# 50 sneckedagain &
#51 & #53 oldnat
"Their refusal to support an SNP led government in coalition was a huge strategic blunder and seriously illiberal."
Agreed. It's definitely a sign of their SDP elements coming to the fore, as was Clegg's stupidity in voting with NuLab over Lisbon. I don't think it's quite finished them, but they certainly have a lot to do to recover.
"Not sure that your analysis necessarily works in Scotland for 2010."
Neither am I, but then a year ago nobody anywhere in the UK would have predicted the NuLab meltdown taking place in quite the way it is and many in Scotland could not have predicted how well the SNP minority government would do.
You may be right that in the next general election the SNP could scoop the pool by letting the "unionist" vote fracture itself, but I suspect that a meltdown of the LibDem vote caused by Scott would be more likely beneficial to the NuLab & Tory "strict" unionists, whereas Rumbles just might split the (con)federalist vote.
If the SNP leadership take the long view, they just might prefer to take it one step at a time and be prepared to deal with Rumbles in a way they simply couldn't with Scott.
"Once we establish the basic fact, that we joined England by a Treaty, and not an Act of Parliament, I'm more than happy to join with the other nations of the UK in a Confederal Union"
Agreed. That's what I understand The Liberal Party position still to be. An aside is that under the Swiss system, the "commune" of Berwick would be perfectly entitled to vote in referendum to leave the "canton" of England and either form its own "canton" with like-minded neighbours or to join the "canton" of Scotland.
Anyway, I'm off to the real world for the afternoon but will look in later.
Complain about this comment
There was a mention of Ray Michie in a previous post. Worth remembering that Ray's father, Johnny Bannerman, was a founder member of the SNP while retaining his link with the Liberal Party. Ray was very aware of that and of the fact that a significant section of the old Liberal Party was well disposed to Scottish independence. In the SNP in Argyll we had a decent relationship with Ray and many an open and vigorous discussion on the constitutional question with our Lib opponents- an impossibilty today with today's dreadful LibDem unionist imposters.
I remember well an informal parley some of us had with some Lib activists at which it became clear that the only difference between us on the constitutional question was that we were going for one step to independence and most of the Libs thought it would take two steps - federalism first then independence. That was before Scotland's Libs became infested with disaffected Tory and Labour unionists.
Complain about this comment
I see it differently, I think Liberals are more likely to be anti-war and anti-nukes like the SNP (they were the two party's who opposed the war and notably, the Liberals rightly, did very well on the back of that).
As we seen in Glasgow East, Unionists have shown they can vote for the SNP, whether or not they believe in independence. I would predict that many Liberals have moved and will move to the SNP.
Complain about this comment
This site is getting worse, it will only accept about 1 in 5 posts... my last post was in response to Brownedov, but it would not accept me quoting him/her.
Complain about this comment
BoNGO_1
The usual reason for posts not getting accepted is that you're using the symbol & - it needs to be specially coded for it to be accepted, otherwise your post fails. Ed has posted instructions as to how to do special postings. In the meantime use "and"
Complain about this comment
BoNGO_1
Ed has posted his advice here
Complain about this comment
Bongo (& all),
Wee tutorial, and note that "symmetry" seems to matter, i.e. if you use <b><blockquote> you should 'back out' in reverse order: </blockquote></b>
Always wise to check that your post has been (or hasn't) by looking to see if it's "awaiting moderation" If not, use the "back" button and try and find eithwe an & or some non-symmetry or some minor omission (i.e. unclosed quotation marks (") on a hyperlink address (URL)
And don't forget to smile
Slainte
ed
Complain about this comment
Being forced in to forming a minority administration has been the best thing that has happened to the SNP since the election in May last year.
It allows them to set the agenda by themselves; and thereby provide the appearance of a dynamic government with a sense of direction, which was been so lacking in past "Executives".
Salmond would be very foolish to go in to coalition with the Liberals following this leadership election. The current scenario allows the SNP to set out its vision and show the limitations of the system at one and the same time. Why allow a unionist "fifth column" in to the government when they have so little to offer? Make the parliament work via consensus politics (i.e. cutting deals with Liberal and Tory alternatively) whilst showing the limitations of the current devolved constitutional "solution". This could not be done in tight coalition with the frankly unreliable Lib Dems.
Complain about this comment
Since my fitba' prediction was 100% wrong, I'll assume that will also apply to politics.
I therefore predict that Tavish Scott will win, and lead the Lib-Dems to overwhelming victory!
Complain about this comment
#65, oldnat
A Tavish Scott win, a winning start to the jambos' season....
How wide could Alex Salmond's smile get?
Complain about this comment
#60 BoNG0_1
Slavic names usually add an "a". Hence Safin is a male tennis player and Safina, his sister, is a female one. Were I female, I would have used the nom de plume "Brownedova".
Sorry if an ampersand caused your posting woes, as the link quoted shows, you need to enter the HTML entity "&" to display one.
#65 oldnat &
#66 cousteau699
LOL. Wishful thinking, I hope!
Complain about this comment
Having been along to the leadership hustings (I'm a member), Ross Finnie was by far the most lucid and convincing, compared to Mike Rumbles and Tavish. Mike was pretty good, whilst Tavish was the least convincing. He does look the best and have the slickest media operation, but his speech could've come from any politician, of any party.
If we could transplant Finnie's brain into Tavish, we'd have a star performer. As it is, I'll vote for Finnie, because I'll always go for substance over style. He looks like a small, quiet man, but his voice is deep and strong. He's also the most liberal of the three candidates, as was put to me, a Liberal to his bones.
Complain about this comment
#68 Anaxim
Genuinely thanks for your input. I was hoping to see some Lib-Dem input.
You were kind enough to answer some of my questions earlier. If I could impose further?
What's your take on my concern about the Lib-Dem constitutional policy.
I read it as enshrining sovereignty in the UK Parliament, only devolving power to the nations of the UK, as opposed to the old Liberal view that first brought me into politics in 1960 - that sovereignty lay with the Scottish people, but that it made sense to cede some aspects of that sovereignty to a Federal Parliament of the UK?
Complain about this comment
#68 Anaxim
Glad to hear it, but there isn't much about them in the media for us to get our teeth into.
As you're a member, you might remind your chums that the Scottish Liberal Democrats website has nothing about the contest and certainly no pitches from the candidates.
Complain about this comment
#39:
First reaction: lighten up fella! Anyone offended by my tongue in cheek description must have thinner skin than a spring onion.
More considered reaction: a little light-hearted football banter was my sole intent, following on from Brian's lead above. But if you were offended (as opposed to merely being irked by a cheeky dig at Rangers' misfortune) then I do apologise.
For the avoidance of doubt, this is one Forfar loon who actually supports their home town team - despite their defeat to Cowdenbeath today :o(
Oh, and just to keep this "on topic": I once saw Ross Finnie in the Jolly Judge pub off the Royal Mile. He seemed like a nice enough chap. Not sure I'd trust him to run my country though.
Complain about this comment
The death of LIT as suggesed on one post is premature. The fabled problems with it are more a result of the unionists trying to invent holes in it than any fundamental weakness. The SNP is happily looking towards the day when it fights an election after the London Labour Government has refused to hand over the £480million council tax rebate that Scotland is due.
Can you imagine it? Scots taxpayers contributing their share of taxes to fund Council Tax benefit while the government wont give any of it to Scotland.
Ya beauty, as Chick Young is reported to have said a few times.
London Government keeping money off Scotland's old and poor and sick.
What more could the SNP ask for (bar the return of Wendy as leader).
Complain about this comment
#72 sneckedagain
Interesting that Kerr (and Gray?) now want to end the council tax (at some point in the future, and if the real leader lets them). in the Sunday Herald
Complain about this comment
oldnat states:
"I read it as enshrining sovereignty in the UK Parliament, only devolving power to the nations of the UK, as opposed to the old Liberal view that first brought me into politics in 1960 - that sovereignty lay with the Scottish people, but that it made sense to cede some aspects of that sovereignty to a Federal Parliament of the UK?"
It sounds like a recipe for majoritarian rule. A legislature like the UK Parliament is a discrete social structure into which traditions and/or a written constitution can be easily embedded. It's self-defining, compared to 'the people' which could be twisted in all sorts of ways which undermine individual liberty.
Complain about this comment
#73 oldnat -
The race is on amongst these Labour wannabes to see how many of the SNP's best policies they can adopt and still convince the rump of the Labour vote in Scotland (that hasn't already decided to vote for the SNP) that they have a shred of dignity or integrity left.
However, as they keep slicing the salami ever thinner, it'g getting more and more difficult to get a cigarette paper between the policies of the would-be Holyrood Labour leaders and the policies of Alex Salmond's cabinet.
I suppose they're trying to pull off another Tony Bliar-style shell game where they adopt all the policies of the party that's hammering them at the polls and then just deny that they're doing that and hope that the mugs aren't paying sufficient attention to notice. Worked for Tony!
Complain about this comment
#74 Anaxim
Thanks for the reply. You believe that "the UK Parliament is a discrete social structure". I wouldn't disagree. It's full of people who use it as a London club.
More importantly, without actually stating it, you confirm that you see sovereignty lying with an institution, rather than the people.
You clearly dislike the idea of a majority of the people influencing the decisions of the small clique who actually run that corrupt institution.
You must be delighted with the protection of individual liberty produced by your preferred option - Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act, Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, 1985 Interception of Communications Act etc etc.
I'm not surprised that you support Captain Mainwaring, and I look forward to the destruction of your centralist Lib-Dem dogma. John Bannerman would be turning in his grave if he could hear such a stance described as being "Liberal".
Complain about this comment
Brian, It has already been mentioned before but...is there anybody bothered about a lib/dem leadership contest...No. Thought not.
Complain about this comment
#75 bighullabaloo
True, Blair did it once. But as Bush said- Any of the Lab/Lib leadership contenders would be proud to have been so succinct and clear as Bush!
Complain about this comment
#77 philandkirsty
I thought the SLiDe election might be more interesting than the English dressage team at the Olympics. I was wrong.
Complain about this comment
Well Wee Eck does not mince his words!
But it looks like our Alistair has other problems!
Complain about this comment
#72 sneckedagain
I suspect it is me you refer to about LIT being dropped.
You are quite correct that LIT is apparently fair and easy to collect. It does, however have two very fundamental weaknesses.
1. Tax is never popular. Major tax changes are even more unpopular and the party bringing them in derives no benefit whether they are fair, easy to collect or better than the previous system. There are always winners and losers.
2. Council Tax is only paid by householders, not by their families residing with them. LIT, like the hated Poll Tax, hits everyone irrespective of their earnings. Ergo, more people are losers than winners which is not a smart move for a politician and Alex Salmond is a very smart politician.
So LIT is likely, and I stress likely, to be sidelined with Labour taking the blame and the electoral hit. Iain Gray is another very smart politician, although admittedly not in the same league as Salmond, and is already preparing his defences against the fallout from the failure to bring in LIT by, you will note, a lengthy consultation process. This is politico-speak for marking time till he sees the proposals and identifies an exposed flank (and believe me there will be one).
#76 oldnat
First of all, can I thank Anaxim for confirming my previous posting that Ross Finnie is likely to be the man. It confirms my suspicions that Lib-Dem activists are rather smarter than these posts would have us believe.
Oldnat, can I perhaps point out that Liberalism means a mechanistic system of government through laws and taxes and does not refer to liberty meaning freedom , but liberal meaning generous. From your posts, whilst you would like a liberal form of government, your own personal tastes i.e. sovereignty of the people is, in fact, an organic system of government - only two parties espouse that doctrine - the Nationalists (obviously) and the Conservatives which might cause you some sleepless nights
Complain about this comment
Looks like another hard working Politician with his nose to the grind, or should that be snout in the trough?
Although the article does not mention it the Councillor is an Independent.
30,000 a year tax free, beats the hell out of stacking shelves at your local supermarket.
Complain about this comment
The Councillors Salary and Expenses can be verified at the following link.
Complain about this comment
#81, Dick-Whittington
"2. Council Tax is only paid by householders, not by their families residing with them."
Council tax bills are sent to the householder, but joint and several liability does come into play. It is assumed that the householder will be the breadwinner, and that the household members will collectively pay the amount due.
The community charge, for which I still have great admiration in its INTENT to relate liability to the compsition of households (and, hence, costs to local services), suffered because young adults didn't like being asked to pay for the services they were using. "My parents should have to pay, not me; it's not my house," was not an uncommon protest.
Local Income Tax is a step forward because there are NO BILLS to be paid; for those on PAYE, the money is deducted at source, and what you've never had is more easily missed.
Complain about this comment
The LibDem leadership contenders should cosy up to anyone who will help to bring in Local Income Tax, and work to amend the Bill to as close as possible to their own desired form.
At the moment, when you pay your Council Tax, you use money on which you have ALREADY paid Income Tax at 20-40 per cent (or used part of your personal allowances, if not reaching the threshold for tax).
Any party which plays its part in the removal of such an iniquitous form of double-taxation should surely see the potential for electoral advantage.
Complain about this comment
#76
Instead of getting all fire and brimstone on me, oldnat, you could outline what you actually mean by 'the people'. Some countries use the people as the final basis for their constitutions, which is perfectly sensible. A generally invoked principle of popular sovereignty is another thing entirely.
A lot of Labour's oppressive legislation is populist, tabloid-chasing stuff; presumably invoked with the consent of 'the people'. If 51% of the people decide to oppress the other 49%, is that OK?
I'm certainly not dogmatic about this. If the UK Parliament is completely broken, for example, David Cameron getting in but not reversing enough of Labour's bad policies, then I'll look again at independence.
Complain about this comment
Interesting, it seems Gordon Brown is more concerned with the current Scottish uprising than with events in Georgia. He apparently was in Edinburgh for the book festival rather than carrying out diplomatic responsibilities.
Glad to see Labour have their priorities right.
I'm not sure about Brown's skill as an author, but heres hoping he plays a significant part in Scotlands rightful journey to independance. *;o)
Complain about this comment
#81 Dick-Whittington
"Liberalism means a mechanistic system of government through laws and taxes and does not refer to liberty meaning freedom"
Sounds like that came straight from NuLab philosophy!
Seriously though, where on earth did you get that quote from? My old OED defines the liberal as originating as an
"epithet of those 'arts' or 'sciences' that were 'worthy of a free man'". A bit sexist, perhaps, but otherwise not a bad starting point.
For a current definition, I suggest you look at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry for Liberalism or even the Wikipedia entry.
The former starts with a quote from Maurice Cranston, the late Professor of Political Science at the LSE: "By definition a liberal is a man who believes in liberty". Again a bit sexist, but a very good start nonetheless.
Complain about this comment
#85 cousteau699
Spot on, which makes it all the more curious that the LibDems in Holyrood have made so little attempt to find common ground with the minority government. They never pretended to like all Labour's policies when they were in coalition with them, and have long extolled the virtues of coalitions to exert a moderating influence on "extreme" government.
Yet they've been behaving of late with near contempt of the SNP by continuing the "one-issue" jibes. Here there is some clear common ground yet nothing is being built on it.
Complain about this comment
OMOV in political parties creates an issue. It is clearly the most democratic system, however, that places equal weight on the views of an MSP, councillor or 20hr a week activist and a member who pays £15 a year then does nothing more ever. In practice, the nutters cancel each other out, but the most passive members who know little of party goings on vote for the one they have heard of. In effect, a beauty contest.
So its Tavish then, highest profile, most high profilce endorsements, prettiest. Pity though, Rumbles annoyed me once a decade ago and i would like the sweet revenge of watching him flounder as Lib Dem leader
Complain about this comment
A side issue for me to air, one i have aired before. Please note i am not claiming that any party is composed predominantly or even largely of thickies, nasties, bigots or nutters, but the four parties have them in varying propostions.
My own view is that Labour has the highest proportion of really thick members, the SNP despite efforts retains a slightly larger proportion of bigots, the Tories include more than other parties of simply unpleasant people, and the Lib dems bless em, the highest propostion of those divorced form reality to the point of medical diagnosis.
Tha clear majority in all four partries sincerely want to work for a better society.
Complain about this comment
#87 BoNG0_1
"heres hoping he plays a significant part in Scotlands rightful journey to independance"
I'm sure the FM found "Duff" Gordon's contribution yesterday a ray of sunshine to brighten his otherwise dull, wretched life.
Re "events in Georgia", perhaps any unpleasantness relating to the birthplace of his great idol, "Uncle Joe" is too distressing for The Supreme Leader to comment upon in public.
Complain about this comment
"If 51% of the people decide to oppress the other 49%, is that OK?"
I don't think anyone here's arguing that, and in fact the preservation of individuals' rights within a written constitution is key LibDem policy as expressed in the "For the People, By the People" policy paper I refer to in my #26.
Where LibDem policy is woollier is in the area of self-determination of the people per the UN charter in it's applicability to the inhabitants of the British Isles. The current leadership seem to be backing off that idea, to say the least.
It's in that context where the apparent adherence to the idea of supremacy of the Westminster Parliament is worrying.
Complain about this comment
"It's in that context where the apparent adherence to the idea of supremacy of the Westminster Parliament is worrying."
The Westminster Parliament has given up sovereignty before, with Ireland, Canada, Australia, etc. There's no reason to expect anything different this time.
Secession is a basic democratic event. I think it's usually a short-sighted mistake, like protectionism, but it's always going to happen.
Complain about this comment
#86 Anaxim
"The people" is a useful shorthand for the concepts contained within "civic" or "liberal" nationalism. A useful starting point is Rousseau's Social_Contract That, and subsequent philosophical thinking underlies the 1989 Claim of Right "We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount."
The Claim of Right is directly opposed to Dicey's doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty which underlies the belief system of the UK parties - they can "devolve" powers, but can, at any time, take them back.
Complain about this comment
#88 Brownedov
Actually the quote came from me, based on five years doing History, Politics and Philosophy at university. What I found most interesting is that you quote the OED and some book on philosophy, presumably written by people who never ever got themselves elected or practise politics red in tooth and claw, again unlike me.
The fact that a man believes in liberty is neither here nor there. You either believe something or you don't, politics does not deal in absolutes, but in the dissemination of power. Power is either passed down mechanistically or grows up organically. Any other conception of power results in either despotism or anarchy.
May I refer you to the following quotes which tell everything you need to know about politics:-
'War is the continuation of politics by other means.' Clausewitz - Vom Krige.
'A Prince may govern by love or by fear. Fear lasts longer.' Machiavelli - The Prince.
'Remember, dear boy, in front of you sits the Opposition, behind you sits your enemies.' Harold MacMillan.
and finally
'Freedom does not give you the right to shout fire in a crowded theatre when no fire exists.' United States Supreme Court.
Complain about this comment
#94 Anaxim
Most of what you say is true, and the Liberal Party learned it the hard way when Jo Chamberlain split it over Irish home rule.
It just strikes me as rather odd that a party which has half its roots in the Liberal Party should at the same time distance itself from the Tory & NuLab unionists by wanting increased devolution for Scotland and side with them in decrying the SNP as a one-issue party.
They took a much more constructive view a century ago with the Irish Nats, and if it had not been for WW1 the beginnings of a federal UK including the whole of Ireland might have existed by 1920.
Right now it should just be a question of pragmatics. What is the most effective way of getting as much LibDem policy implemented as possible and ensuring that as many LibDem MPs & MSPs as possible are elected next time?
Not a lot of progress on either front in the past year, I would say, so time for a change of tack, methinks.
Complain about this comment
#94 Anaxim
Ireland, if I may so, is a spectacularly bad example for your argument. The Westminster Parliament only reluctantly yielded partial sovereignty, resulting in bloody Civil War. The Irish finally simply took their independence in 1937.Canada and the other Dominions rejected the Sovereignty of Westminster de facto, and Westminster had no option but to enshrine that de jure in 1931.
You seem to have a touching faith in Westminster. Cllrsandy seems to have a point.
Complain about this comment
#81 & #96 Dick_Whittington
I will refrain from the obvious cheap jibes, and simply point out that many of us posting here will have good degrees. Your comment is a little bit pompous, but with practice you can attain real pomposity. Some would argue that "organic systems of government" are but a consequence of Nietzche's "active nihilism", but I doubt that applies in Canada and Ireland (to name but two) where the term is used to describe their constitution.
You may be confusing the term with the neo-Darwinist strand within Facism which talks of the "organic growth of the nation", and is indeed a danger for those who espouse ethnic nationalism.
Complain about this comment
#96 Dick-Whittington
Thank you for your gentle put-down. You're quite right that politics is usually a cynical old business, but I'm mildly surprised that you didn't make it clear in your #81 that the definition you gave was a personal opinion rather than established fact in some sense or another.
May we assume from your "presumably written by people who never ever got themselves elected or practise politics red in tooth and claw, again unlike me" that you have been elected to some democratic body?
If so, it would surely be relevant to let us know which one and whether it was as a member of some "party"?
If not, it needs restating in basic English for us mere mortals to understand it.
Complain about this comment
#96 Dick_Whittington
I shoulld also have added, that the possession of a degree does not impart wisdom.
Complain about this comment
#101, oldnat
Nor does the possession of a [bachelor's] degree indicate anything about knowledge or intelligence, merely about the ability to remember/recall things long enough to pass final exams.
P.S. I am writing from personal experience re my three such degrees, rather than commenting upon the abilities of other contributors.
Complain about this comment
Re my own #102,
For "bachelor's degree," read "first degree" since the comment would include non-higher Masters degree such as conferred by the ancient universities of Scotland.
Obtaining a higher degree SHOULD say something more substantive about the individual 'student'; although my view may change depending upon whether I am successful in my current studies.
Complain about this comment
cousteau
Best of luck with your studies - but remember that my #101 applies to us all!
Complain about this comment
#87 BoNG0_1
Further to my #92, there's a super report of it in today's Independent on Sunday: Brown takes starring role at the Festival
The FM will love finding out that the PM regards the SNP as a "phase" that Scotland's going through, but I expect he'll be thrilled by my favourite quote from The Supreme Leader: "I wouldn't like a Scot to be denied healthcare in England"
Unless Brown's completely lost his marbles this can only be a statement of intent to leave the EU, presumably replenishing the NuLab ranks with Tory eurosceptics and the whole of UKIP. I'm surprised none of the other media have followed up on this "scoop".
There's more bad news for Miliband, too. Before Brown's finished, he says: "I want Aung San Suu Kyi not only to be released but to be in power in Burma."
I wonder if Captain Scott suffered from such delusions as the cold started to get at him?
Complain about this comment
A case of foot-in-mouth?
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
Brownedov
In the clip of the Book Festival shown on TV Brown also said that he wanted us to be "equal partners" on this island.
I look forward to his next announcement that he is going to negotiate the Treaty of Union, but that he will represent both sides in order to ensure equity.
Complain about this comment
#107 oldnat
LOL. They didn't show that on BBC World. The website clip only had him praising Mandela.
You're probably right, and it looks like he already has the DUP in his pocket for N. Ireland.
Complain about this comment
Hard to find anything about the LibDems in the media today, but the Grauniad has a new article this afternoon on LIT: Property tax is not theft.
If Vince is having 2nd thoughts about it, as the article suggests, this may be why the LibDems at Holyrood aren't biting just yet.
I can't say agree with the premise that property tax is fairer because it's less "avoidable", though. IMO, LIT is much fairer for individuals whereas if the Income Tax rules still have too many loopholes they should be closed for both LIT and "union" IT.
Sounds like more of a pro-fiscal separation argument to me. Unless Business Rates can be switched to Local Corporation Tax, they should not be affected.
I can see implementation problems but not ones of fairness.
Complain about this comment
"A case of foot-in-mouth?" are you sure he hasn't been bitten by a midge!
Complain about this comment
#106 Ed Iglehart &
#110 cynicalHighlander
Perhaps he was just "tired and emotional", to use the epithet Private Eye coined for his '60s near-namesake, George.
Complain about this comment
One of the problems with the Lib Dems going with Ross Finnie, and there are many, is that he may not get elected the next time. He is a Lib Dem list MSP who saw their vote collapse in Renfrewshire, especially his own area of Inverclyde. He was once a member of that Council, that under Lib dem control was rated the worst in Scotland(the similarities with Aberdeen are remarkable). He has no natural base. If as expected the SNP take more FPP MSP then I think that his job as an MSP must be under a great deal of jeoparday.
Complain about this comment
Most interesting blog. Thank you.
I don't understand why the council tax is considered unfair as opposed to, say, there not being enough small affordable houses to trade down to or why should 27 immigrants pay the same as 2 brits. As a tax it seems pretty good; is it the uses of the tax that are unfair?
LOL the sound of one
Complain about this comment
All the candidates for Labour's (non)leadership in Scotland have now declared against the Council Tax Either they're beginning to test the waters on being different from London, or Brown has so little authority that he's being ignored. Remember it was him who told McConnell to reject Burt before it was even published.
Complain about this comment
Sorry all, I've just realised that I've posted something about the Lid Dem leadership election instead of just having a go at Gordon Brown. How stupid of me forgetting what this blog site is all about.
Complain about this comment
#113 handclapping
Your post is fairly incomprehensible (or racist which comes to the same thing).
Complain about this comment
#95,
Parliamentary sovereignty isn't directly opposed to popular sovereignty, because there's a third kind of sovereignty, individual sovereignty. Mostly, countries will have written constitutions which invoke popular sovereignty to establish a representative government and uphold personal liberty. Invoking popular sovereignty without an absolutely cast-iron guarantee of the others is a bad idea. Actually, invoking any of the kinds of sovereignty without a view to the others is a bad idea.
I wouldn't say that the claim of right is completely underpinned by post-Rosseau thinkers, because it fails to mention individual liberty, a topic of overwhelming concern to them. It could also be interpreted in historicist nationalist terms, rather than in terms of a social contract.
Complain about this comment
#114 oldnat
Yes, though they seem to have no actual reason behind wanting to go back to rates. At the same time, the LibDem 3 seem to be awaiting words of wisdom from Vince.
The FM must think every day is Christmas just now.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov
Fame at last!
Your #105 (source credited) has been posted in the Herald blog.
Complain about this comment
#118 Anaxim
No. Parliamentary sovereignty as promulgated by Dicey overrides all other sovereignties. This is the position supported by all UK parties, and has been used to pass retrospective legislation.
Complain about this comment
#119 oldnat
Yes - found it. Shame that subrosa calls me "Brownelov" - just about the opposite of my moniker, I would say.
Still, it does surprise me that the Scottish media didn't get on to it first. I suppose that festivals in Edinburgh are pretty much a Scotsman thing apart from the London luvvies.
Complain about this comment
oldnat
I'm coming from the position that all taxes are unfair in some degree to some people.
If we do not know why the council tax is unfair we are likely to lurch from one unfair tax to another to pay for these local services.
Is CT unfair because we have been so conditioned by the Gotta have a Home syndrome that people are ending up with houses that are too big / expensive and there are not enough wee / less expensive houses to move to, so we can cut our cloth according to our means?
Or maybe, CT is unfair because we think that 27 people living in the same squre footage as a family of two must be using more local services and should be paying more?
I don't know the answer but I would like to know before CT becomes unfair just because everybody says so.
Complain about this comment
#121 Brownedov
. I especially like the opening of the 2nd paragraph.I've been searching for a quote I saw earlier in the day - its at the end of a Scotland on Sunday article re Brown at the Book Festival. At the very end of the article this -
Complain about this comment
The reason I would like to know why the Council Tax is considered unfair is seeing all these leadership contenders trying to get on wee eck's bandwagon. The trouble is, I see this bandwagon as a FM ploy to get a seeming fair proposal squashed by the unionists so that the snp can cry foul and inch Scotland closer to independence.
Complain about this comment
#123 oldnat
Yes, even the bowdlerised Scotsman version of the story has some nice snippets. I wouldn't have expected them to purge all of his unionist sentiments though.
It's the London Times who're the media sponsors of the bookfest and even they don't have as much as the Indy.
I looked on the bookfest website in case there was a transcript, audio or video of the Rankin, Brown double-act but nothing newer than 2007 as yet.
Patience may yet allow us to hear it all for ourselves if the Indy report hasn't set the No.10 minders into tape-erasing mode.
Enough for tonight, I think. Goodnight all.
Complain about this comment
oldnat:
"No. Parliamentary sovereignty as promulgated by Dicey overrides all other sovereignties. This is the position supported by all UK parties, and has been used to pass retrospective legislation."
Not all parties, the preamble to the Liberal Democrat constitution states that sovereignty derives from the people. It is however wrapped up in liberty and federal representation, as I have been saying.
It's not illiberal to consider naked popular sovereignty (which nationalists often invoke) as potentially dangerous. Writers like Mill and Madison agree.
Complain about this comment
#126 Anaxim
True. The "sovereignty of the people" is something the LibDems have retained from the old Liberal Party.
Sadly, both retain a touching faith in "representative democracy" which neither MSPs nor MPs have done a great deal to deserve of late. Both also sadly reject the Swiss model of direct democracy in suggesting referenda should only be "granted" to the people over constitutional change.
In this, neither are prepared fully to trust the people, which is a shame. Of course "naked popular sovereignty" is potentially dangerous, but that is why a written constitution which defines the rights of the individual and sets high hurdles for constitutional change is a prerequisite for such a system to operate fairly for all.
As both the LibDems and the Liberals are in favour of a written constitution approved by referendum, it's hard to understand why they're not prepared to go the whole hog.
Complain about this comment
# 121
My sincere apologies. Now that I'm getting decrepit I shall have to realise my touch typing may still be good, but the eye to hand process requires more concentration. :-)
Complain about this comment
#126 Anaxim
This is not only contradictory to Scottish Constitutional Law, but totally contrary to any Liberal principle.I'm not arguing with you over the need to have a constitution with checks and balances, or the need to balance individual liberty against the Utilitarian needs of society, or on any of the other principles of a civilized society.
Our disagreement (and it may be tending towards "angels on a pinhead") is over
1. the assertion in your #117 that "Parliamentary sovereignty isn't directly opposed to popular sovereignty". The Dicey principle leaves no room for any other sovereignty -
2. While we agree that "sovereignty derives from the people", the question is which "people"? I've made my position clear - that the sovereignty derives from the Scottish "body politic", which is free to cede or retrieve aspects of sovereignty as it sees fit. Let me return to you the question you asked me in your #86 I read your policy of "devolving" powers from Westminster as implying that you mean the "British people". Since you disdain "identity politics", perhaps you could explain the apparent dichotomy.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov (127)
I enthusiastically second your remarks!
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
Brian
Nothing to do with the Lib Dem leadership, sorry!
But, just to say thanks for a great afternoon at the book festival yesterday.
We didn't know you were the presenter and went along to hear Val McDermid.
She was highly enjoyable and I look forward to the new book.
But we all enjoyed your banter too, which really added to the event.
ATB
JohnMcT
Complain about this comment
#128 quietscotsmac
No offence taken subrosa (?), just mild amusement. I know the feeling of tempus fugiting myself so will not cast the first stone but merely remark that for that very reason I usually copy and paste too much rather than too little.
Thanks also to you and oldnat for making me realise that the Herald comments are usually a cut above the run of press blogs generally. I've long felt the Herald itself is the leastworst for Scottish political commentary.
Complain about this comment
#129 oldnat
I don't think it's quite at the "angels on a pinhead" stage just yet, but getting close.
If parliamentary sovereignty is subject only to a written constitution it could potentially become so, but if unfettered it permits bills of attainder and indefinite extension as well as unwriting history.
Strictly speaking, that's the situation we have now, subject only to any residual rights of QEI/II to withhold royal assent and to dissolve Parliament.
With No.10 looking increasingly desperate both in its words and poll ratings (see the latest YouGov details in PDF at tinyurl.com/5nru4d) we may yet live to see those tested.
#130 Ed Iglehart
Thanks. It's a lonely furrow to plough in the UK and good to know I'm not totally alone.
Complain about this comment
#133 Brownedov
It was his third principle which led him wholly to reject the concept of a written constitution, because that would create "laws which are above the courts". Hence the sovereignty of Parliament cannot be "subject to a written constitution".Another angel for the pinhead -
Dicey's analysis was that there were 3 basic principles in English law -
If we are to have a written constitution (as I, you, Anaxim, Ed and others all want, for whichever state we prefer) then there is NO sovereignty for Parliament - it then exercises power on behalf of the people, and is not sovereign over them as is the current situation.
Incidentally, Dicey developed his thinking on this as part of his bitter resentment at the idea that Westminster should cede sovereignty over the Irish! - plus ca change ......
Complain about this comment
#133 Brownedov
YouGov poll -
Unfortunately the sample seems to be impossibly skewed.
In answer to the question "Do you generally think of yourself as a little closer to one of the parties than the others? If yes please tell us which party?" The responses were Lab 29; Con 27; LD 11; SNP 3; BNP 3; UKIP 3; Green 2; Plaid 1; None 17; DK 4
Yet more evidence that we need proper Scottish polling - unless anyone believes that extreme British Nationalists in Scotland outnumber the SNP 2:1 and that Plaid is the "natural" party of 1% of Scottish voters!
Complain about this comment
Brownedov (133)
The Swiss do seem to have a considerable degree of success with their methods.I have no real objection to "representative democracy", if it takes account of Paine's observation:
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
Ed
BTW How did you post TT & T without the spaces on Justin Webb's blog?
Brilliant riposte to MA2!
Complain about this comment
PS to my #105
The BBC has finally picked up the Independent on Sunday story with a much fuller account of "Duff" Gordon's bookfest ramblings at: Brown writing book on Britishness.
Their version of the quote is very slightly different: "I wouldn't like to see health care denied to a Scot in England or to an English person in Scotland."
Same meaning though, unless he expects the SNP to change their EU policy after independence. I would say that breaking manifesto commitments is more a NuLab thing than an SNP thing myself.
Thoughts anyone?
Complain about this comment
#134 oldnat
Point taken. I'll have to read him again (haven't for nearly 40 years), but not light bedtime reading if I recall correctly. Does he mention attainder?
#135 oldnat
Yes. One of the main reasons I went to YouGov was to see if I could find more about the poll the SNP commissioned. No luck yet, but I'll keep digging.
#136 Ed Iglehart
Re Paine, I don't think he foresaw the cankerous growth of the party system in quite the way it has. In the current state of UK politics, avionics in relation to porcine creatures springs to mind.
Re Switzerland, I think they're fundamentally happy with the system they have because they're free to squabble as much as they like internally while presenting a united front to their bigger neighbours, by whom they jointly agree they do not wish to be swallowed. And BTW re taxation, it's mainly the cantons who do the calculation and collection not the federal government.
Must dash off to the real world for a while but I'll be back tonight.
Complain about this comment
#138 Brownedov
Combined with his comments on healthcare, it really seems like Brown doesn't understand the EU. (Could this be what lay behind his determination not to enter the EU?)
Both my wife and I have more family in the USA than in the UK - should we want Scotland to become the 51st state?
My friend's daughter is married to a Dutchman and she lives in the Netherlands. Should we be in a Union with the Netherlands to allow ease of travel and continuation of the social union? - Oh, we are, and a good thing too.
Complain about this comment
My final shots before leaving until tonight is that the SNP have published their YouGov poll results at SNP hails 'sensational' new poll.
That's from a Scottish sample of 1,028 but I can't yet find further detail on the YouGov site. The results the SNP publish look both encouring and reasonably fairly presented.
Anyone looking for some light relief might enjoy the new (post Bookfest) guynews.tv video: The Horror that is FrankenBrown!
Chat to you all later, and please feel free to post any of my stuff verbatim anywhere you like.
Complain about this comment
#139 Brownedov
Dicey and attainder - I'll leave you to do the digging!
My memory is that he supposed that Parliament had the power to bypass the courts by combining the crime, the criminal and the punishment in the same Act - though I'm fuzzy on that.
Complain about this comment
#141 Brownedov
I'd seen those results from the SNP sponsored YouGov poll, but they haven't released the voting intention data.
Either they're drip-feeding the data to maximise the publicity they get from their polling, or the results are not what they want, and they'll be buried.
Time will tell.
Complain about this comment
Re the SNP/YouGov poll: Who pays for this, the party or the taxpayer? I mean, talk about stating the obvious! Do you like liquorice allsorts or a slap in the face? Does anyone care?
Complain about this comment
Oldnat.
Simple Type AT&T
;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
Re my #135 - Absolute garbage! I was looking at the UK percentages.
Actual percentages of "primary loyalty" for Scotland were
Conservatives 8
Labour 26
LibDem 10
SNP 32
Others 4
No Preference 20
Complain about this comment
oldnat states:
"This is not only contradictory to Scottish Constitutional Law, but totally contrary to any Liberal principle."
I don't agree about it being totally contrary to any liberal principle. The aim, goal and focus of liberalism is liberty. In general, popular sovereignty is better for ensuring individual liberty. But parliamentary sovereignty may be just as capable in some cases. There's no reason to assume that popular sovereignty is always the best and parliamentary sovereignty is always the worst. New Zealand and Finland have parliamentary sovereignty; are they contrary to liberal principles?
As I said, if the UK parliament has turned fundamentally against liberty, then, like a polluted swamp, it may be best to leave.
"I read your policy of "devolving" powers from Westminster as implying that you mean the "British people". Since you disdain "identity politics", perhaps you could explain the apparent dichotomy."
You already answered this yourself with the social contract. I also stated that federalism gives an additional check on the power of the executive (or the states, for that matter), a la James Madison.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov states:
"Sadly, both retain a touching faith in "representative democracy" which neither MSPs nor MPs have done a great deal to deserve of late. Both also sadly reject the Swiss model of direct democracy in suggesting referenda should only be "granted" to the people over constitutional change."
Does the SNP support direct democracy for constitutional change as a general principle, or is just a one-time-only affair? The risk for them would be Scots voting to rejoin the Union if independence is unsatisfactory.
Complain about this comment
#140 & #142 oldnat
I'm not sure Brown understands anything much any more, and I don't think either Scotland or England really wants to become the 51st or 52nd state.
Re the EU, I think there's a British "it's being so cheerful that keeps me going" (and I'm too young to remember ITMA live) attitude about it, perhaps slightly more prevalent South of the wall.
Maybe the sole way for NuLab to mend the situation is to pass a Bill of Attainder against Brown and have him publicly beheaded on Tower Hill.
That would be a wow with the tourists (esp. from the US) and help the economy as well as uniting Scots and English for once. Of course the downside would be that Miliband (least unpopular in the YouGov poll) would be almost as bad as Bliar, but you can't have everything.
Complain about this comment
#147 Anaxim
That is best achieved through institutions which limit the power of the Executive.I knew of New Zealand and Israel, and their UK derived positions, but not of Finland - thanks for the steer on that.
If I understand my quick web search on Finland correctly, it has a constitution, but that can be "temporarily" abrogated by Parliament - thus making Parliament supreme, and thus matching Dicey's criteria.
I don't see that the fact that 3 of the 4 countries with Parliamentary sovereignty currently act as liberal democracies changes the argument. Liberty is protected by law, and these laws should not be capable of abrogation by a legislative assembly with unlimited power.
I'm sure that you wouldn't argue that Israel, however, acts as a liberal democracy. Feel free to do so, however, and Ed Iglehart will be able to produce a huge body of evidence that it is not.
That the UK is not considerably less of a liberal democracy than it is, is only due to the Lords. I'm not prepared to trust my liberty to an institution where the Executive can arbitrarily increase its placemen to form a majority there.
I agree that in a Federal structure, the constituent parts may act as a check on the Federal authority. However. if the power is only devolved, then they do not have that right de jure.
We have stated our positions. I think the angels may have danced enough.
Complain about this comment
#143 oldnat
It's certainly possible that they're either drip-feeding the data or that the results are not what they want, but I'd give them a day or so's benefit of the doubt.
I did get an out-of-office reply from their main HQ email when I tried to contact them, saying that Victoria Pyle (their Information and Policy Officer) is back on Wednesday, and I haven't yet had a response to the forward of my email to Susan Ruddick (their Website/Press person). Judging by the way the info has been put up on the SNP website, I'd say it's not been done in their usual fairly professional manner which suggests a temporary hand at the controls.
#144 brigadierjohn
Good question. I simply don't know but can confirm from my search for the info on the SNP, Scottish Government & YouGov sites that there's no mention of it on www.scotland.gov.uk.
Not conclusive, so why don't you ask them on the SNP website? You may care to note that their blogs are now open to non-members, though I haven't signed up myself.
Complain about this comment
#148 Anaxim
"Does the SNP support direct democracy for constitutional change as a general principle, or is just a one-time-only affair?"
Great question, and I'd like to know the answer too. Their website doesn't seem as comprehensive on core policies as the Liberal or LibDem ones.
They did support a referendum over Lisbon - see EU Treaty, but of course that may have been a tactical move.
Complain about this comment
#150 oldnat
"We have stated our positions. I think the angels may have danced enough."
Well put, they must certainly be getting sore feet by now if not sore heads too.
Whatever our philosophical positions, I think we're actually all agreed with Dick-Whittington's thesis on politicians in his #96 to the extent that all politicians are essentially rascals and need watching like hawks at all times.
Complain about this comment
#153 Brownedov
At least Anaxim made me re-examine my position - as I hope I did him.
Complain about this comment
Typical. I turn up and the party's over! (And I'm not referring to Labour!)
Complain about this comment
PS to my #105 & #138
I haven't stopped hunting for more on this, but not much luck on audio or transcripts yet and surprisingly the hacks don't seem to have brought the issue up in today's No.10 press briefing (from which Brown himself was absent).
There's just a little of interest on the awful bookfest website. No wonder "Duff" Gordon's audience were a bit miffed when they'd paid GBP 9 or 7 apiece to attend: "An opening event like no other! To celebrate our 25th anniversary and launch this year’s festival, we bring you a renowned figure from the world of politics in a unique and illuminating conversation with Ian Rankin." Hardly a great surprise that there were a few hecklers methinks. Unfortunately the audio and video section still has nothing from this year's fest.
However, connoisseurs of great raconteurs will be cheered to note that the next event with BSL Interpretation will be John Prescott at 1:30 PM on the 12th. Pity the poor signer! And pity the poor (sold out) audience as there's no indication that instant translation into English will be provided. I do hope there's audio of that in due course!
Complain about this comment
For those of you who don't follow the fitba' - Accies 3 - United 1.
Expect rough treatment for someone in Brian's next thread.
Brian
A bad week for the New Firm.
Complain about this comment
#155 power_to_the_ppl
Sorry about that, but at least you'll find it a virtually NuLab-free zone
Complain about this comment
Nah it's OK! I'm going to leisurely read through the posts and have a beer I think
Complain about this comment
Brownedov,pleased to meet you, did you get my name.
"A rolling stone gathers no moss"
Does a static political party,gather no votes?
Will progressive politics, lead to a one party state.Will there be a coming together of political minds (LIBERALISM) Hmmm,all things to all people.
Complain about this comment
Back to the LibDems. Here's an interesting excerpt from their current constitution.
"We believe that sovereignty rests with the people and that authority in a democracy derives from the people. We therefore acknowledge their right to determine the form of government best suited to their needs"
In the light of the above, which seems a fairly straighforward statement, could some LibDem contributor explain their present opposition to a constitutional referendum
Complain about this comment
#160 derekbarker
I'm quite fond of Mr Zimmerman's lyrics and music but not at all familiar with his political views nowadays.
I'm afraid I don't follow the rest of your post. Can you clarify what you're on about?
Liberal politics might lead to a no-party state, but not in the immediate future.
Complain about this comment
The broad road of politics has narrowed,political parties,who remain true too their core values,simply fade away.
Take the case of regional federalism,no matter how much make up you put on the EU member state's,their political freedom is encased,within the round walls of Brussels.
Future politic's,not so much about people,more like, an end of the road,with total control..........any clearer Brownedov
Complain about this comment
Never been Liberal, too opinionated for that, I looked on Liberalism as being somewhere between old Labour and Conservatives (nee Independent in a lot of cases) but erring towards the upper income bracket, more often talking the talk but when push came to the shove they thought again. I could have this totally wrong but it is how they have across to me, is that their problem? I don't think it's mine.
Forget Finnie the choice has to be between Scott and Rumbles, one extreme or the other then the electorate will know what they stand for and more importantly are willing to go the extra mile for what they really believe in, not pussy footing by abstaining on principal and letting everyone down.
Complain about this comment
#164 Highlander
Anaxim and Dick_Whittington are Lib-Dems. Brownedov and I are old Liberals. And you think you're opinionated?
Complain about this comment
#163 derekbarker
"any clearer Brownedov"
Not much but perhaps just a tad.
"political parties,who remain true too their core values,simply fade away"
Only in the few quasi-democratic countries left with the archaic plurality voting system, which will change in England sooner or later and for the UK, or its former constituent parts, sooner rather than later.
"their political freedom is encased,within the round walls of Brussels."
There's a clear 3-way choice: Leave, accept it or improve it from within. What's your choice and why?
"Future politic's,not so much about people, more like, an end of the road,with total control"
Of whom, by whom?
Take your time as I'm logging off for the night soon.
Complain about this comment
#164 cynicalHighlander
There aren't even any Liberal councillors in Scotland at the moment, so it's not obvious that your 1st para is relevant, but for what it's worth the, IMO fundamental difference between Liberalism and Socialism is mainly about individual vs. state control and localisation vs. centralisation. The merger of most Liberals with most of the SDP resulted in the LibDems, resulting in a tendency to veer from one side to the other.
I tend to agree with your 2nd para, but would point out that Scott doesn't seem to strike fear into the heart of the SNP so perhaps a change of tack would be beneficial to the LibDems.
Complain about this comment
#165 oldnat
LOL, but not so sure about Dick_Whittington - I'd have guessed Tory but not with much certainty.
Anyway, goodnight all.
Complain about this comment
Choice? do you believe the people of ossetia have a choice?
"AKS NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU,BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR COUNTRY" did that evolve?
Cromwell's 17th century state of federalism "ONE VOICE ONE RELIGION ONE WAY" too whom,to all............
Complain about this comment
Anaxim
If this goes through, we might be allies sooner than later.
Complain about this comment
Tish Brownedov, that's Mr Jagger, not wee Rab Zim!
I'm an even bigger fan.
Slainte!
ed
P.S. Oldnat is right to warn you not to praise Palestine/Israel in my hearing..;-)
Complain about this comment
And regarding the Trans Caucus,
It's well worth following the link to listen to the programme. His remarks come about 3 minutes 50 in, followed by three other very cogent contributors, and again, with my paraphrased bit at 10 minutes, but the whole programme is worth the time.Paddy Ashdown (look him up) was on Radio 4 Any Questions this weekend, and said something well worth repeating
Peace to all
ed
Complain about this comment
#170 oldnat
Certainly very illiberal proposals and good to see the LibDem reaction much stronger than that of the Tories. Can't see anyone outside NuLab being keen on them, except possibly the DUP.
You did, however, allow an extra character to creep into your link to produce a 404.
The Times story is at: Uproar at plan to hold inquests in secret.
Complain about this comment
#172 Ed Iglehart
Yes, I listened and agree with him. The full transcript plus the listen again audio is now available at: Transcript: Any Questions? 08 August 2008
Complain about this comment
#169 derekbarker
Re Ossetia, probably not. Is it an issue related to this thread?
Re USA/JFK did that evolve? Probably not, but again I don't see the relevance.
Re Oliver C, I don't see the relevance. Whatever he was it was not a federalist.
It's still not clear who you support either for the Scottish LibDem leadership or indeed in Scottish or UK politics generally.
Complain about this comment
Re 174
Appalling thing for a labour government to consider. this erodes further the ability to take a government to task, a corner stone of democracy.
OUr MP's will need to kick this into the long grass or even more will be looking for P45.
Will David Davis need to have another byelection?
Complain about this comment
Having been absent from the blog for a few days I see that the threads seem to be moving away from the subject which was about the contest for the Scottish Lib/Dem leadership. Just to throw another spanner in the works the question I would be asking is why did Nicol Steven resign?
I find his reasons not very convincing. He must have known that long before becoming leader that the position would make huge demands on his private life as it would do for any party leader. I am surprised the media has not really looked into it.
His timing seemed odd having resigned very soon after Bendy Wendy. So why did he resign?
Complain about this comment
#176 northhighlander
I think you were referring to my #173 and oldnat's #170, in which case I agree wholeheartedly, although there was certainly little comfort for NuLab in the Any Questions referred to in my #174.
Maybe somebody else should do the David Davis thing this time and see whether the NuLab reptiles have the guts to stand against him or her. I won't be holding my breath.
Complain about this comment
@oldnat
A pleasure debating with you.
@sneckedagain
"In the light of the above, which seems a fairly straighforward statement, could some LibDem contributor explain their present opposition to a constitutional referendum"
You left out:
"...commit ourselves to the promotion of a democratic federal framework within which as much power as feasible is exercised by the nations and regions of the United Kingdom."
This doesn't imply a general support for constitutional referenda. I won't defend the party's incoherent EU referendum policy.
In a post-independence Scotland, would the SNP support a referendum on reunification if a opinion polls showed it to be popular?
Complain about this comment
#179
"In a post-independence Scotland, would the SNP support a referendum on reunification if a opinion polls showed it to be popular?"
I wouldn't worry too much about it as we will all be well dead by then!!
Complain about this comment
Re #179 and #180:
Would the rest of, erm, let's call it "Britain" (since the "Great" bit would have been removed when Scotland became independent!) have us back, even if we wanted to reunify?! Presumably that would need an obliging government in Westminster, or a successful referendum on the other side of the border.
Complain about this comment
#181 forfar-loon
If, as seems likely, the next general election results in a long Tory grip on power in Westminster, I can't see Wales sticking with England for too much longer either.
By then maybe oldnat's idea of a very loose confederation may have some utility.
Complain about this comment
The Grauniad has another Labour insider saying they are in deep trouble. Nothing spectacular, but worth a quick look if you're bored.
Complain about this comment
#143 oldnat
It's the drip-feed approach.
See SNP record biggest ever poll lead
Complain about this comment
#184 Brownedov
Thanks for that. Granted that the actual election won't be quite as dramatic as that, the SNP might well be by far the largest Scottish Party at the GE.
"SNP - 58 constituency seats (plus 37)
Labour - 8 constituency seats (minus 29)
LibDems - 6 constituency seats (minus 5)
Tories - 1 constituency seat (minus 3)"
Somewhat staggering!
Complain about this comment
I've kept out of this Liberal leadership debate because I have no strong views. What defines a Liberal? I suspect anyone who comes up with an answer would be hard-pressed to find another Liberal who conforms to the image. Regardless of any academic attempts at definition, I have always interpreted Liberal as "loose."
I mean a loose consensus of more-or-less like-minded people, who generally agree that their broad ideas are sort of common sense. I rather like the notion, but it can be hard to support someone who, faced with a dilemma, tends to come firmly down on both sides! Hard to dislike them, too.
Liberalism first entered my consciousness via the shenanigans of Jeremy Thorpe and his coterie at the Liberal Club in London (and almost any Liberal Club anywhere) where games on the snooker tables were probably unfamiliar to Ray Reardon. My generation has probably regarded them in that light ever since.
But I wish them well. Vince cable at Holyrood? Now that would be something I'd pay to see! Sadly we'll have to make do with soiled goods. If that's not too illiberal.
Complain about this comment
PS to my #184
No wonder they're taking their time over releasing the rest of the detail. They must have needed to pinch themselves to be sure they're not dreaming with national voting intentions of:
SNP: 44% [+11]
Labour: 25% [-7]
Lib Dem: 14% [-2]
Con: 13% [-4]
Other: 4% [+2]
On those figures, the prediction of Holyrood pluarality seats is:
SNP: 58 (+37)
Labour: 8 (-29)
LibDems: 6 (-5)
Tories: 1 (-3)
Pity Nichol didn't get in on the action, and pity his successor having to start from here.
I think it's fairly obvious the FM will be enjoying his hols a wee bit more than the PM.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov, Thanks for the transcript link. No more need to paraphrase.
P.S. For what it's worth, the admirable Hugh Sykes agrees
Slainte!
ed
Complain about this comment
#186 Brigadier
LOL A clever observation.
Complain about this comment
#185 oldnat
Yes, that's the lunacy of the plurality system I'm afraid. But I'm less unhappy for the SNP to benefit from it in Scotland than for the Tories to scoop the Westminster pool with it in England.
See you beat me to it on one of the Herald threads!
Complain about this comment
#187 Brownedov
And we still have the List MSP poll and the MP poll to come. This could be fun over the next few weeks.
Complain about this comment
Given the gloomy outlook for the LD party, might now be an opportune time to consider becoming two parties again? Two bites at the cherry and the possibility (however remote) an improved aggregate presence, especially if there were enough wisdom/savvy to effect non-aggression...
Just idle thoughts.
Slainte
ed
Complain about this comment
#188 Ed Iglehart
You're welcome. I'd have posted a quote myself if I'd thought your #172 wasn't a fair representation of what he'd said.
Complain about this comment
#191 oldnat
You're probably right - I suspect the FM has a similar wicked streak to yours. He's also probably livid about the PM getting a fairly good reception by the London press over his rantings at the bookfest and wants each drip that comes out to be directed to best effect.
It certainly doesn't seem that there is much bad news to worry about.
Complain about this comment
#192 Ed Iglehart
Poor timing, I think, but their best hope must be some form of non-aggression pact with the SNP.
Would the FM refuse support for a multi choice referendum on his date of choice and a clear run at NuLab in 18 seats where the SNP are 2nd?
Complain about this comment
The Herald has finally got around to getting some new info from the candidates at: Lib Dem candidates make leadership bids
Mr Scott said he wanted the Lib Dems to focus on the economy. Really?
Mr Finnie claimed the party had failed to explain why people should vote Liberal Democrat. True, but a bit late just now.
Mr Rumbles said that with the SNP advocating independence and Labour and the Tories supporting "devolution-lite" there is a chance to put the Lib Dem case for Scotland to have control of its own affairs while remaining part of the UK. Absolutely.
My bowdlerisation to avoid breaking copyright.
Complain about this comment
#186 brigadierjohn
I have to go along with oldnat's #189.
At least it should give us all something to smile about in the coming winter if they choose Rumbles.
Complain about this comment
PS to my #196
Oops.
I managed to mess up the link 1st time.
Try Lib Dem candidates make leadership bids
Complain about this comment
Re 196
We could witness a rare phenomenon a LIb Dem with something to say that is worth listening to.
If Mr Rumbles was elected then this could present a real choice in scotland where Lib Dems would actually be offering a novel policy that connects and isn't just a rehash of what has gone before.
I would welcome his election it would be a positive step for politics in Scotland. However it appears the media are tagging him as a bit of a maverick and lacking credibility. This is unfortunate as new ideas are very rare today, take the recent thrad on LIT as an example.
Will the Lib Dems have the courage to vote for change? Me thinks will find it difficult to move from there comfort zone
Complain about this comment
If Finnie's seat is vulnerable, would choosing him as leader be a wise move for the Lib-Dems? While he'd doubtless get back in on the West of Scotland list, that would have to damage his credibility.
If the YouGov poll were accurate then Labour would only be left with Wendy Alexander, Paul Martin, Margaret Curran, Ken Macintosh, Johann Lamont, James Kelly, and Elaine Murray from their current set of constituency MSPs - unless they change their rules again to allow candidates to stand for both constituency and list.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov, clearly no whitedov.
Just out of curiousity,are you one of those loose ex MSP's,prepared to back any political party that has a relevant theme too your needs.....
take your time now!remember,"THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE"
peace be with you..........
Complain about this comment
Iain McWhirter has one of his usual good analyses of the Labour crisis in his blog.
Complain about this comment
Not to mention the flatulence....Complain about this comment
#199 northhighlander
I agree wholeheartedly, and would point out that they can't have much of a comfort zone left and so relatively little to lose.
#200 oldnat
I'd wait until we get a little more drip-feeding from the poll. In my hunt for the full YouGov PDF, I managed to miss the Sunday drip from SNP HQ on name recognition: Labour contest of 'the invisibles'.
That shows 75% know little or nothing of Iain Gray, 62% of Andy Kerr, and 38% for Cathy Jamieson. This compares with 11% for Alex Salmond, 28% for Nicola Sturgeon and 39% for Annabel Goldie.
Perhaps the LibDem candidates have a treat in store from a future drip.
Complain about this comment
#201 derekbarker
I'm a semi-retired expat with too much time on my hands in Switzerland just now thanks to the awful summer we're having limiting my ability to go sailing and hill-walking. I have no desire whatsoever to put my snout in either the Holyrood or Westminster trough.
Do you actually have any political views at all or are you just a regular Tory?
Complain about this comment
afternoon all. the lib dems have a years worth of catching up to do . after the last election they should have been promoting their own stated position of a federal uk which also goes by the name of devolution max or full fiscal autonomy. what happened was they got politically shafted by the labour party again. will they ever learn??? they failed to get their message out and for most people in scotland the lib dems had dissapeared. there is a sizable chunk of the population who neither want the status quo or independance. we have been poorly served by the lib dems will any of the leadership contenders admit this and if so what will they do about it?
Complain about this comment
#202 oldnat
Yes, the headline: "Scottish Labour must declare UDI" says it all really, but that won't happen before the man in the Southwold beach hut is dragged - possibly straitjacketed - from the scene.
It also needs some of the NuLab hacks in the London media to peek outside the Westminster village occasionally. So long as they're saying it can all be turned around there will be plenty of NuLab "heavyweights" only too glad to believe them.
#203 Ed Iglehart
Good quote from the article oldnat links to, but I think the odour you mention is more that of a putrid corpse than mere flatulence.
Complain about this comment
#206 sidthesceptic
Absolutely. My guess is that the only hope now is to push as hard as they can for a multi-choice referendum and to "come out" as being much closer to the SNP than the strict unionists.
Goldie must be laughing her socks off at the demise of NuLab and at becoming the only acceptable face of unionism.
Complain about this comment
On the Trans Caucus, Shrub said
Give him his due! he was a lot quicker off the mark this time than he was about Israel's disproportionate response in Summer 2006...
Salaam, etc.
ed
Complain about this comment
Brownedov,I hope the weather clears for you.
A tory,never,however in todays economic climate the majority of citizen need a conservative approach to spendature.
An Independent Scotland would probably be engulfed by the EU,diluting the notion that Independence would create better choice.
The liberals plus the social democrats,a bit like the lib/lab pack,doomed from the start through a conflict of political interest.
Do i have a political believe, YES, absolutely,however todays political parties are narrowed by the same agendas,choice,not a great deal to choose from.
Complain about this comment
The Belfast Telegraph is suggesting that a "Department of the Regions" might finally be on the cards. That name would produce a few more SNP/Plaid votes, but the DUP could hardly accept a "Department of the Nations".
Complain about this comment
#210 derekbarker
Thanks.
You sound rather like Michael Flanders' in the '60s: "Our council is strictly non-political, they're all Conservatives".
Complain about this comment
The greatest asset for a prospective political leader is anonymity, and the total absence of any history of caring one way or another about any contentious issue.
So that'll be Tavish "Wouldn't know who he was if he and I were alone in a 'Meet Tavish Scott' convention area" Scott, then.
Complain about this comment
#211 oldnat
More deckchair shuffling, it seems. If The Belfast Telegraph that the new man in charge of regional "steerage" is Woodward, he may be one of the few NuLab reptiles left after the next General Election. In the St Helens South seat he received as a reward for his apostasy, he has No. 230 in terms of the size of swing needed to defeat him. I wish the LibDems all the best in achieving the 13.2% swing needed to defeat him next time, and I'm sure most Tories will too.
Browne's (9.85% swing needed to lose to the SNP at Kilmarnock & Loudoun) potential "loss" to the Scotland Office will be sadly mourned at Holyrood, no doubt.
Complain about this comment
#213 cousteau696
He does remind me of a client I had in the 70s who told me: "My final decision is maybe."
Complain about this comment
Brownedov,
Again you mis-represent the Swan song.
If only we had a political candidate with the calibre of Keir Hardie or Aneurin Bevan,"YES" today more than ever the distribution of wealth is at the heart of social and political progression.
On an insubstancial point,do you really believe Ossetia, is irrelavent on any thread?
Complain about this comment
#216 derekbarker
I don't think Flanders & Swann did a Swan song. My quote was from the intro of the Gnu Song.
I don't believe Ossetia is in any way relevant to UK politics right now. There are World and European threads you can air it on to your heart's content.
I think I had better stop responding to you as you seem to be getting less comprehensible.
Goodnight.
Complain about this comment
The Scotsman has a story about the Court of Appeal ruling against the GMB with serious financial implications for them Unite and Unison.
At this rate the Lib-Dems may have more money to fight the next election than Labour!
Complain about this comment
And another interesting Scotsman article.
Complain about this comment
The Scotsman has a story about the Unions
At this rate the Lib-Dems may have more money to fight the next election than Labour!
Complain about this comment
Looks as though its getting a wee dirty in the NuLabour leadership race!
Complain about this comment
#219 & #220 oldnat
Unfortunately, there's now only an intriguing snippet of the two Scotsman stories, the articles having been desgnated "premium" content. Cannot bode well for NuLab funding, though.
#221 Roll_On_2010
Great story, if not exactly a total surprise. It truly beggars belief that the national NuLab leadership is quite so out of touch with feeling in their heartlands. The Herald comments are usually a cut above the run of press blogging too. My favourite so far was:
"Aye between Gray and Tavish, the opposition are presenting the SNP with an Open Goal, only Aunty Bella stands in the way...."
Too true.
Complain about this comment
#204 Brownedov
I did find this recent YouGov poll on Westminster voting intentions in Scotland, commissioned by the SNP.
The poll is in PDF format and a link directly to it throws up a security pop-up on the PC so I have included the link to its selection page for people to follow. The PDF is the top of the list, and can be selected as follows;
Surveys since 2005 General Election
08/12/2008 - Scottish Voting Intentions [ Scottish National Party ]
The poll shows SNP 36%, Labour 29%, Tory 18%, LD 13% and Others 5%.
Complain about this comment
The poll, pointed to in my previous post, does show Scottish Constituency voting intentions also;
SNP 44%, Lab 25%, LD 14%, CON 13% and Others 4%.
Complain about this comment
#223 Roll_On_2010
Thanks very much. I'd looked at the SNP website this morning, but not at YouGov. That YouGov page is the one where they usually put their political poll results, so we can expect more over the next few days. We may even find the Westminster voting intentions being the next drip from SNP HQ as they have every reason to be pleased with those figures too.
They certainly are getting value for money out of that poll, and the chance to poke some gentle fun in the direction of their opponents at the same time.
Probably worth looking at the SNP website later in the day, but I'm off out now.
Complain about this comment
brownedov
With respect to YouGov polls here is another news article from The Press and Journal.
The following two quotes, from that article, by Wee Eck look interesting!
The Scottish Government would shortly publish a study demonstrating a Scottish oil fund was a “compelling” idea.
“The UK Treasury is raking in a multibillion-pound tax windfall, and Scotland has a budget surplus of at least 4-5billion pounds,” he said.
Complain about this comment
Looks like another by-election looming at Glenrothes .
The [late] incumbent MP John MacDougall has a 28.54% majority. The SNP can take this seat with a 15% swing.
Well within their grasp and another bloody nose for McBroon and NuLabour at Westminster.
Complain about this comment
The Scottish edition of the Independent carries the YouGov poll, but it's not on its online edition.
The Herald was carrying the story last night, but it was pulled. I wonder if that was because they'd heard of the demise of McDougall, and didn't have time to rewrite the article. It should be punchier once they've sussed out whether Labour are going to repeat the quick election of Glasgow East, or whether to find some way of delaying it.
Complain about this comment
#228 oldnat
I dont know how long they can delay the by-election for, but I feel that it would be better for Brown if it happened after the NuLabour conference. A quick loss in his neighboring constituency would not be helpful at that conference.
My question would be - will he hole up in his bunker at No 10, like Crewe and Glasgow East, or will he visit Glenrothes during the by-election?
Time will tell.
Complain about this comment
#226 Roll_On_2010
Yet another little drip - not yet on the SNP website. This could run for weeks, as oldnat suggested. The PM must be thinking it's cruel and unusual punishment - a sort of political waterboarding.
My favourite quote from the Press and Journal article was a Labour MSP saying: "It’s a sign of desperation that the SNP are developing economic policy by opinion poll."
Now that really is desperate clutching at virtual straws.
Complain about this comment
From the Parliamentary website -
Nothing can happen till the UK Parliament resumes on 6 October.No by-election, but an October General Election anybody?
Complain about this comment
#227 & #229 Roll_On_2010
#228 oldnat
Whenever it's held the by-election is almost certain to be another humiliation for the man in brown, and raise serious questions over the safety of his own seat next door. Let's hope he finally realises the game is up and exits, if not gracefully, at least with a shred of compassion for his NuLab minions.
Remember that, just the other side of him, the LibDems needed a swing of nearly 13.7% in Dunfermline & West Fife more than two years ago and exceeded it to the extent that Willie Rennie ended up with a majority of 5.2%.
Barring a NuLab earthquake, a 14.3% swing in Glenrothes should be a given to the extent that it will be an embarrassment to the FM if the SNP don't take it, whenever it's held.
I had a vague recollection that the Westminster Parliament has to be in session for a by-election writ to be called. If so, it won't be until the end of October. Does anyone know the rules on MP deaths during recesses?
Complain about this comment
Brownedov
"Does anyone know the rules on MP deaths during recesses?" See how I anticipate your needs!!
Complain about this comment
I'm just watching the Russia v Georgia beach volleyball game on TV.
You'll understand that my viewing of this is wholly political, and not because I choose to watch scantily clad young ladies!
Complain about this comment
#233 oldnat
Thanks
#234 oldnat
I'll have to add that one to my list of excuses.
Complain about this comment
There's a very interesting comment from doonhamer yesterday evening re The Herald's SNP claims record poll lead over Labour. S/he calculates the Regional List seats as well as the plurality ones based on the YouGov poll info released so far, fairly adjusting the Regional percentages down for the major parties and up for the others.
It gives this table, which should paste into a spreadsheet as CSV:
Party, Regional%, Plurality%, Regional, Plurality, Total
SNP, 42%, 44%, 6, 58, 64
Labour, 23%, 25%, 24, 8, 32
LibDems, 12%, 14%, 9, 6, 15
Tories, 11%, 13%, 12, 1, 13
Others, 12%, 4%, 5, 0, 5
Total, 100%, 100%, 56, 73, 129
Obviously a lot may happen between now and 2011, but with 65 seats needed for an overall majority, a Holyrood where the SNP are one seat away from an overall majority doesn't look far-fetched.
Complain about this comment
Exeunt, followed by a bear market?;-)
ed
Complain about this comment
#237 Ed Iglehart
LOL
Complain about this comment
This website is already discussing what happens next at: Don't expect an early by-election.
It seems that oldnat and I were wrong about it not being possible for the by-election to be before late October, but that's still the best guess.
Complain about this comment
Brownedov.
Ah,HA, The hippo has popped up for some breath,well! it was only a matter of time before you realised that your wrong and wrong and wrong again on most of the current issues.
Big winds coming,get the sail out.........
Complain about this comment
Looks like speculation is growing.
Looking like the by-election will be November!
Looks like Brown has been plotting an autumn recovery plan, which will include a possible Cabinet reshuffle, a morale-boosting speech at the party conference in Manchester and a mini-Budget packed with giveaways.
Yet another re…re…re…re-launch! He just may get his PM launch in before the final curtain in 2010. There again, hopefully, maybe not.
What is interesting is that one MP raised the prospect of the Glenrothes by-election being coupled with another for the Holyrood constituency of Jack McConnell.
The SNP campaign machine has geared up in the area since last October, and it has spent the past few months canvassing 40,000 constituents after taking the corresponding Holyrood seat last year.
If the by-election is in November this will, I feel, produce a low turnout. NuLabour dont perform well at low turnouts.
Things are certainly getting interesting.
Complain about this comment
#241 Roll_On_2010
Agreed, and a surprisingly balanced article from The Scotsman. Even the Grauniad has a pretty fair article with some good audio at MP's death leaves Brown facing new SNP challenge in neighbouring Fife constituency. When the Guardianistas start to desert NuLab's RMS Titanic it really is a given that the iceberg has won.
It's hard to imagine how Brown will survive his party conference with the runes looking so poor, but it's a demonstration of how low he and Bliar dragged the Labour party that there's even the possibility that he might. At least a new leader now might just get a wee honeymoon with the electorate, and, if English, would have the chance to give the Scottish Labour Party some real autonomy.
You'd expect NuLab to want to get the Jack McConnell replacement election over at the same time. With the SNP needing only an 11.4% swing to take Motherwell & Wishaw, you'd think that was a given victory. It may be bad to have two NuLab losses the same day but it would be even worse for them to drag it out over two separate campaigns.
But then idiots are hardly predictable. Interesting times indeed.
Complain about this comment
For those of you interested in the psephology of Fife Fife Council has a pdf map in its Publications (so I can't reference it directly) of the Scottish Parliament Constituencies. The borders of the Glenrothes constituency, are the wards in Central Fife (minus ward 48) plus wards 37, 38, 55, 44, and 45.
Complain about this comment
There is no useful data available from the multi-member wards at the local elections since the "non Central Fife" wards in Glenrothes straddle the constituency boundaries. Hence presumably the pundits talking about the 14% swing since 2005 needed by the SNP. However, since Central Fife (75% of the Glenrothes constituency) could have a slight swing against the SNP since 2007 for Labour to win, I'll go with the bookies.
Instinctively, one feels that those Labour voters who shifted from Labour to SNP in 2007 would have to think their vote shift was wrong for Labour to have any chance, and given other poling data that seems unlikely.
Complain about this comment
#244 oldnat
I'd go along with that view, but even the bookies don't seem to have got going yet.
BTW, please note my apology to The Scotsman on the NR thread.
Complain about this comment
Re- The Tavish Scott interview(BBC newsnight last night)
When asked,what would he bring,thats new to the liberals? (there was a pause) one almost thought,that the ignorant norseman would answer: A THIRD MORTGAGE.....
NO new threads 4 six weeks,great idea,oldnat.....
Complain about this comment
#243 oldnat
You must have been bitten hard over a PDF link. For the holding page of the PDF map, follow fifedirect's Ward Map of Fife.
Complain about this comment
There's a new thread, folks, in case you haven't noticed. Important though it is, can't see it being top of today's political agenda though.
Complain about this comment
PS to my #247
Mini lesson for HTML intermediates: To get the & in the link to work properly, I had to code it as & in just the same way as the amperand above.
Complain about this comment
Brian:
Welcome to leadership, Mr Scott, Mr Finnie or Mr Rumbles.
and also: Did u prepare for the battle...
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS