J. Arthur MacNumpty

A fourth birthday

2009-11-22T19:06:00.002Z

I should, in a way, be celebrating: this blog has reached its fourth anniversary. I'm proud of that: I've blogged the election of David Cameron; the resignation of Charles Kennedy and the election of Ming Campbell; his own resignation and his replacement with Nick Clegg, to say nothing of the coronation of Gordon Brown. I've posted on the fall of Jack McConnell, the demise of Wendy Alexander and the elevation of Iain Gray; the end of Nicol Stephen's leadership and the beginning of Tavish Scott's; I've written about Robin Harper standing down and Patrick Harvie taking his place.

I've seen a Holyrood election; a European election; a General Election that failed to materialise; the Dunfermline & West Fife By-Election, where the LibDems snatched the seat from under Labour's nose; Moray, where the SNP got back on the front foot; Glasgow East, where the SNP pulled off a sensational victory; and Glenrothes and Glasgow North East, where it didn't.

I've found time to write about the first SNP Government, the first Budget to fall, and the passing of the first Asian MSP. And I'm satisfied with most of what I've written.

Who knows what's around the corner?

I have to say, I'm going into the fifth year of this blog in a far warier state than previous years.

Firstly, there's the demise of Wardog's blog. I'll be the first to admit that I was wary of it when it was in operation: I think I'm right in saying that Wardog migrated to the blogosphere from the scotsman.com comments section. And like a lot of bloggers, I have never been a fan of that part of the website - there always seems to be too much venom, too much bile, too much spite. And those that made the crossing brought their baggage with them - particularly Scottish Unionist, an intelligent, thoughtful writer whose blog's demise I did not mark, as he tried to bill himself as supporting the Union but then fell back on attacking Nationalism, then on attacking Nationalists (so if I were to sum up his blog in two words, I'd say "wasted potential").

So I've always held Wardog's blog at arm's length. And I suspect I wasn't the only one to see his blog and those of others from the Scotsman site in that way, to the extent that he did leave a comment praising a recent Scottish Roundup, where he hailed that week's edition as: "At last a comprehensive Scottish blog selection rather than just the usual clique."

You can sense the frustration there and I totally accept and admit to my part in creating that frustration. I'll own up now to looking at the scotsman.com commenters' blogs with the same intellectual snobbery found in the MSM when discussing the blogosphere. Frankly, that section of the blogosphere doesn't appeal to me and my instincts are to keep away from it in the main. As you'd expect from someone blogging on Scottish politics from a distance away, I often have no more than my instincts to follow and I trust them. So I've missed a lot of Wardog's offerings.

But this week, I feel for him: clearly his posts cut close to the bone on a couple of occasions but the MSM tracked down his identity and decided to do a hatchet job on him, to the extent that his job was put at risk and Wardog wisely came to the conclusion that it might be best to call it a day for now. I don't see what else he could have done. But the idea that the identity of any of us is somehow worth the time of journalists is laughable. And the prospect that a job might be put at risk for what he wrote is just plain horrifying. Frankly, I thought we lived in a country where you were allowed to have strong opinions and a job. Apparently, that's no longer the case. Shame on the Scotsman for going to town on this, and shame on Wardog's employers for deciding that expressing strong opinions beyond the work environment should call his positions into question.

And as a result of this intimidation - for that's what it is - the blogosphere has lost yet another member.

But others are going, and they're going right now.

Bucket of Tongues has gone just this week. Malc suspended operations a fortnight ago. And that's not counting the others that, in recent weeks and months, have just fizzled out. Now, that's a part of life, but there's something more troubling going on, as bloggers are now starting to openly question if the medium has a future. Jeff is beginning to talk about the death of blogging. Even Duncan, one of the Scottish blogosphere's godfathers, notes there's something of a change, citing the rise of Twitter.

Now, I tweet, but I prefer the blogosphere. Mainly as - and this post is the proof - 140 characters just aren't enough for me.

And I think that's what will keep the blogosphere going. If you want to really get your teeth into something, this is the place to do it. Blogs will come, blogs will go - we'll see another spike next Spring in time for the Election, only for all the new blogs to fall away by the autumn. The same thing will happen in 2011. Look out for a lot of blogs on local Council issues popping up - then popping down again - in 2012. The blogosphere is constantly changing, adapting to new situations, as new people come into it for all sorts of different purposes, and others leave for their own reasons. While this makes the online medium vibrant, and exciting to follow - you don't know what's round the next corner - it means that there are few constants, there are few anchors or points of reference. The blogosphere doesn't have many things to hold onto.

Which is why I have to be honest: this blog is not one of them.

A number of people mentioned as the Total Politics awards were being discussed that they'd have given me a higher ranking if I posted more often. But as I've always said, I don't subscribe to the Iain Dale approach of blogging for the sake of it, every day. In a choice between speaking because I have something to say, and speaking because I have to say something, I go for the first option on most occasions. And today has been one of the rare occasions recently where I've had a lot to chew on and plenty of time to do so.

Firstly, real life is getting in the way: this blog started when I was on the Dole, and needed something to do with all the spare time I had. Then, when I finally got a job, this blog represented a welcome change of scene and pace (and a refuge from a current dragging me into accountancy). Now, to be frank, a change is no longer as good as a rest. I'm just tired.

Secondly, and more importantly, I'm going to 'fess up to something far more troubling. You could almost call it a crisis of confidence. And it was Glasgow North East that put the spotlight on it. Not the result, or the campaign - though as you can see, I was pretty quiet about most of that. No, it was the reaction that brought things into relief. After Glasgow East and Glenrothes, I blogged my reaction at the first available opportunity. After Glasgow North East, it took me around 60 hours from the result to get the post out. That should not be happening.

So what happened? It wasn't that I was too busy, or even too tired that weekend. It wasn't that I didn't know what to make of it. I had all the ideas in my head, but I just couldn't get them into words or onto a computer screen. It was only the fact that I was doing the Sunday Whip that forced me to do that at the same time.

And that's exactly what I produced - a forced post. It wasn't an analysis, it was a box-ticking exercise, getting my reactions on record, taking a look at the main parties. I've never posted simply because I felt I had to before. And I never wish to do it again. If I can't enjoy the writing, I don't know how you can enjoy the reading.

Basically, if the feeling is that there's a paucity of posts on here, I apologise for that, but it's not going to get any better any time soon. This is the first day in a long time that I've been chomping at the bit to get to my keyboard and I don't see another day like this for a while, unless something big happens. At least, not until the General Election.

To put it bluntly, I'm questioning my wish to continue. Do I have the time/energy/creativity/imagination for this at the moment? I'm not sure anymore.

Thankfully, in case I change my mind, I have a reason to press on for now: the Whip posts. These get a surprisingly positive reaction and I do think of them as a useful service, particularly given a minority government where every vote counts and it's worth tracking who actually shows up, and which parties are working with whom on which issues. So it's a project that I'm proud of and is worth pressing on with.

But here's something that's occurred to me: what if, after 2011, there's a Coalition? What if, after that election, someone manages to cobble together a majority? At that point, almost every vote becomes little more than a foregone conclusion, and the Whip is made redundant.

So once that election is out of the way, and all of the dust has settled, that might - might - just be it for MacNumpty.

Thanks to everyone for reading for the last four years. I can be reasonably confident enough to promise you a fifth anniversary, but after that? Hopefully I'll still be able to deliver. But we shall have to see. I only wish I could be far more celebratory.

Back to Jack?

2009-11-22T12:55:00.004Z

The Sunday Herald is reporting that Jack McConnell, former First Minister and one-time prospective High Commissioner to Malawi has come to the conclusion that his future no longer lies in Lilongwe, but at Holyrood, and quotes "an MSP close to Mr. McConnell" as being unhappy with Iain Gray's leadership and reckoning that he could do better himself.

So could Jack be planning a return?

Well, let's look at this in context. This story comes in the wake of Labour asking its MSPs if they were planning to fight the 2011 Election. All but George Foulkes said yes, so if we're to believe this, 45 out of 46 of the Labour MSPs intend to seek re-election in less than 18 months time. This is common Labour practice: it allows the party enough time to get a selection process together where necessary. But it could be blown off course by deselection, events (such as the expenses crisis at Westminster) or a simple change of mind.

Take, for example, Margaret Curran. Given that only George Foulkes has voiced an intention to stand down, this assumes that she is seeking re-election. But she's standing in Glasgow East next year, and her Constituency is being abolished. So unless John Mason beats her again and another constituency is willing to take on a two-time loser, she's not coming back.

Then there's Wendy Alexander. Can she really face another four years on the backbenches after her torrid year at the helm put paid to any further advancement at Holyrood?

And Malcolm Chisholm, blackballed after siding with Kenny MacAskill over Lockerbie.

So can we really believe that 45 out of 46 Labour MSPs will seek re-election? Of course not, so to read anything into this list is madness.

Besides, even if Jack McConnell does seek re-election, does that mean he wants the Leadership back?

I think we're reading too much into this. After all, we've been spoiled by the post-Thatcher tradition of quitting after leaving the top job. Tony Blair took it to extremes by quitting the Commons the day he tendered his resignation as Prime Minister, but John Major stood down at the 2001 Election, having resigned as Tory Leader the day after the 1997 Election defeat. Margaret Thatcher stood down in 1992, having been forced out of office in 1990. At Holyrood, Henry McLeish stood down in 2003, though it was the Officegate scandal that did for him.

Firstly, it wasn't necessarily a given that McConnell would quit as Labour Leader following his election defeat and it took several weeks of pressure (as well as rumours that a number of figures including Wendy Alexander were jockeying for the position even before polling day) and the prospect of a diplomatic job to oust him. There is no real tradition of incumbent Heads of Government leaving the Party Leadership as soon as an election is lost: only John Major has done this in recent years. Jim Callghan remained Labour Leader for 18 months after losing the 1979 Election - something for those with their eye on the UK Labour Leadership to bear in mind. Ted Heath had to be forced out by Margaret Thatcher's Leadership challenge in 1975. Harold Wilson went on to fight - and win - the 1974 elections. Alec Douglas-Home lasted nine months, using that time to put in place rules for choosing a new Tory leader. Clement Attlee fought one more Election before retiring. Winston Churchill fought two, winning the second. In short, only one Head of Government has seen defeat as an instant trigger for resignation.

Secondly, the tradition of ex-Heads of Government (or in McConnell's case, Executive) standing down ASAP goes back only as far as Margaret Thatcher. Jim Callaghan stood down in 1987. Harold Wilson stood down in 1983, suggesting that Jack McConnell could stay at Holyrood until 2015. Ted Heath lost office in 1974 and the Leadership in 1975, but remained in the Commons until 2001, a precedent that would see McConnell representing Motherwell & Wishaw until 2031! Alec Douglas-Home remained in the Commons for ten years after losing office, and was even Heath's Foreign Secretary. Before Thatcher began the recent tradition, you have to go back to Harold MacMillan to find a PM who stood down at the first election following their departure from Downing Street. Why, therefore, it was a given that McConnell would quit Holyrood four years after leaving Bute House is beyond me, particularly now that his role as Our Man in Malawi is pretty much off the table.

So for once, I don't see anything more to this one than meets the eye. I see a newspaper trying to add two and two, but getting five, and I see a man who, no longer seeing the prospect of a better job round the corner, merely wishes to keep the one he has.

The Sunday Whip

2009-11-22T11:48:00.002Z

A quiet, mostly consensual week, which was legislation-heavy, and generally successful for the Government - though there was one major missed opportunity on the opposition's part.

On Wednesday, the Business Motions were waved through, as were the Arbitration (Scotland) Bill (all its amendments having been passed earlier on in the afternoon) and the Water Environment (Groundwater and Priority Substances) (Scotland) Regulations 2009.

On Thursday, it was much the same, though a Labour Party motion on tackling Clostridium Difficile did bring some divergence. There were eight absentees: LibDem Justice Spokesman Robert Brown (Glasgow), Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead (Moray), Margo MacDonald (Ind, Lothians), Michael Matheson (SNP, Falkirk West), Tom McCabe (Lab, Hamilton South), Peter Peacock (Lab, Highlands & Islands), Shadow Climate Change Minister Cathy Peattie (Falkirk East) and LibDem Culture Spokesman Iain Smith (North East Fife). They missed the LibDem amendment to the SNP's amendment fall by 61 (SNP/Tory) votes to 59 (Lab/LD/Greens - had Labour and the LibDems mustered everyone, this amendment would have passed) and the SNP amendment itself, along with the amended motion pass by 77 (everyone but Labour) votes to 43:

That the Parliament agrees that tackling Healthcare Associated Infection (HAI) must continue to be a top priority for the Scottish Government; notes the range of actions that are now in place to drive down infections, backed by an investment in excess of £50 million; welcomes the establishment of an independent Healthcare Environment Inspectorate that has begun its programme of announced and unannounced visits to all acute hospitals over the next three years; acknowledges that the establishment of a public inquiry into the events at the Vale of Leven Hospital last year will ensure that any additional actions are identified to help prevent such a tragedy happening again; further acknowledges that the HAI Taskforce has fully considered the Labour Party 15-point action plan and has agreed to further consider those measures not already included in its current three-year work programme; recognises the progress that has been made on a national staff uniform for NHS Scotland; further notes that the Scottish Government has agreed to pilot approaches to electronic bed management and tracking infections and will fully evaluate these pilots and take whatever action is appropriate, and further notes that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing will continue to ensure that systems and processes for the notification and management of outbreaks are improved in light of experience.

Following that, the Schools Consultation (Scotland) Bill passed unanimously. Earlier in the day, the amendments had been considered: Amendments 1 to 12 passed without dissent, while Amendment 13 was not moved and Amendment 13A fell.

Finally, another minor Committee reshuffle was agreed to.

So all in all, another quiet week. Next week sees a motion entitled "Learning about Scotland and its History", an LCM on the Child Poverty Bill, and Stage 1 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Bill. Let's see what comes of those.

Sod Eton, Floreat Winstanley!

2009-11-20T20:05:00.003Z

I have very little to say regarding the proposal of Herman van Rompuy as President of the European Council, primarily as I know very little of him, save that he is Prime Minister du jour of Belgium, a country whose fragile coalitions might appear to serve as a poster for opponents of PR, but in reality serve as a poster for opponents of multinational states.

But I am very excited at the proposal of Catherine Ashton, or Baroness Ashton of Upholland, as High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Mainly, I'm thrilled for Upholland. My bus to College would, on occasion, pass through the place. Mostly (particularly when we had the old, clapped out bus that couldn't negotiate a particularly steep hill), we'd go from Coppull through Shevington, Gathurst and passing St. Joh Rigby (the Catholic 6th Form College) Orrell, before arriving in Billinge and dropping us off at Winstanley College. But if we had a newer bus that could handle steeper inclines without dying (the old bus even struggled through Gathurst), we'd go through Appley Bridge, Roby Mill and Upholland, then through Tontine and reaching Billinge. The route was longer, but there was less traffic. So I have vague memories of Upholland - or at least, one ugly, ugly junction, where the road effectively turned back on itself, and we would have to make the turnoff on that particularly sharp bend.

So despite a slightly barmy road layout, Upholland has reason to be chuffed. And so do I.

For you see, young Cathy attended Upholland Grammar back in her day. But by then, the school wasn't in Upholland, but in Billinge - on Winstanley Road. It eventually stopped taking pre-16 pupils and evolved into Winstanley College - the same College I got the bus to every day!

It remains to be seen how well she will do in her job. She hasn't made any major muckups as EU Trade Commissioner, but she's only been in that post for a year and her domestic ministerial career involved nothing to do with foreign policy.

Nevertheless, to see her attain such an important post is, however she performs, an inspiring sight for all Winstanley alumni.

If she succeeds in her new role, then we can argue that we can all succeed in this or any field.

If she performs badly, then another alumnus has the potential to be the first former Winstanley College student to do well.

So stuff Eton, sod Fettes and Loretto - as of now, Winstanley College is where it's at!

Glasgow North East: The aftermath

2009-11-15T11:23:00.004Z

Well, we've had a few days to ponder the result. Congratulations are due to Willie Bain; clearly Labour have a lot to celebrate, and the SNP a lot to be disappointed about. One thing I would suggest though is that despite it being nigh-on-impossible to talk about swings and trends given the particular nature of this By-Election, and the sheer number of candidates, this is probably broadly in line with what you might expect in a General Election for a seat with Glasgow North East's history, twelve years into a Labour Government, so I don't envisage the result here next year being overly divergent from the result we've just seen.

Of course, the turnout is nothing short of appalling: less than one third of voters bothered to show up, a record low in Scotland for a Westminster By-Election, and the largest dip in turnout in four years. But should we be overly surprised? Firstly, Glasgow North East is not an area in which voters head to the polls in their droves so it's a bit rich for politicians of all hues to muse about voter engagement in places like this now: this is a long-standing problem and it says volumes about how places like Glasgow North East are viewed if they've only just noticed it. Besides, recent By-Elections - Glasgow East and Glenrothes - saw massive levels of interest and only very small reductions in turnout. But By-Elections before that - Dunfermline & West Fife, Livingston and the Glasgow Cathcart By-Election for Holyrood - saw double-digit drops in turnout. What we're seeing, therefore, is a reversion to type. Sadly, it's come in a place where voter interest is already low.

Then there's Labour: clearly their campaign hit all the right buttons. Remember Dunfermline & West Fife, when Labour dismissed the loss as a reflection of local issues? They've learned from that, finally. It's always about local issues and after their success in Glenrothes, Labour have learned to tap into that. The campaign may have been somewhat unsavoury, but it was successful, and to obtain a majority of votes - however few votes may have been cast - does represent a good result. It shows that in places like this, Labour still have a core vote that they can motivate to get out. Predictions that they can use this as a way of turning back the blue tide next year and win a fourth term do seem wide of the mark, and I would expect Labour to be toast in many of their key marginals. Nevertheless, their core supporters are still happy to show up, so a Labour apocalypse is not necessarily on the cards - something that may well worry the LibDems, who are hoping to make gains from Labour in the North of England.

And what of the SNP? Clearly the post-mortem is ongoing but for now, that 20-seat hope is receding into the distance: turnout was low and it's clear that many people saw a reason not to vote Labour, but the SNP did not offer sufficient reasons for those disaffected voters to back them, or indeed, anyone. This is why I disagree fundamentally with Gordon Wilson's analysis: going nasty won't serve any purpose and won't attract anyone. People who live in areas that seem to have been let down by their politicians already know the problems. They know the stats, because they live them. They know that 74 years of representation hasn't turned Springburn into a land of milk and honey. What they want to hear is, "What are we going to do about it?" That didn't come through. Gordon Wilson's idea of street-fighting Labour won't work as people aren't daft: they'll see the world around them and if they're still willing to vote Labour, slagging them off to high heaven won't change their minds. Nor will it attract those who are not: they already know that Labour hasn't delivered, but telling them what they already know won't work. The opposite of his suggestion is the right path: the SNP need to be relentlessly positive. The message in Glasgow East was bright: "Your vote will count!", "When the SNP wins, you win!", "Winning for Glasgow!" and so on. Labour responded with venomous attack after attack. Who won, Gordon? The party with the bright, positive message. Draw your own conclusions.

Then there's the Tories. They can be relieved to keep their deposit, but the message coming from a party that aspires to govern the whole UK has been horrifying: Scottish Tories saying that there just aren't that many Conservatives. What happened to reaching out to other people? George Osborne saying that this contest - and this seat - isn't relevant. What a disgusting message! That throwaway comment is probably the biggest recruiting sergeant that Scottish Labour could have hoped for. Still, despite the Leadership once again showing itself to be the biggest bunch of tosspots in politics, Ruth Davidson came out of this election with a great deal of credit, and should, if she wishes, be destined for progress. Bill Aitken may well have one or two more terms in him, but in the short term, the neighbouring regions to Glasgow might make an attractive prospect for an upwardly mobile, young candidate such as her: with the redrawn Eastwood notionally Tory, and the party only just missing out on a third regional seat this time, it's not beyond the realms of possibility that a third Western Tory seat is still on the cards for 2011, and that she could pick it up. Nor is it overly fanciful to suggest that Davidson could feasibly displace Margaret Mitchell in East Central Scotland. She is the positive of their campaign.

As for the BNP, remember that they already had a base here, and a sense of grievance to play on, so there's a danger in talking them up, particularly those muttering about a BNP MSP. The swing in Glasgow North East, if replicated in Glasgow region, still has them falling well short of picking up a seat. Of course, that hasn't prevented the usual BNP-related hysteria from springing up - firstly, blame has been heaped on the BBC for inviting Nick Griffin onto Question Time. Again, I think that viewers saw Griffin in the light that they wanted to see him anyway so that's not it. Rather, the BNP came forward with an anti-politician diatribe at a time when politicians are held in low regard. And what we had was both Willie Bain and Ruth Davidson almost apologising for seeking office, and going to all sorts of lengths to say how they weren't politicians. That probably played into the BNP's hands: if politicians are bad, the BNP were the full-fat, red meat option. In any case, talk once again has gone onto how to 'defeat' the BNP. Sadly, I don't think it's that simple: the BNP's message plays well with the darker side of the human psyche and prejudice and discrimination aren't new ideas thought up by the BNP. They've been around with us forever and Nick Griffin's cronies merely exploit them. Trying to 'defeat' human nature will fail: rather, actually doing constructive things for the area is the answer. if people think they've got a bad lot, if they see others who they think are doing better, then obviously parties like the BNP will flourish. Better to, you know, take positive action in areas like Springburn to imporve everyone's lives. Then the whole reason for voting BNP vanishes.

Tommy Sheridan, meanwhile, did surprisingly well, when you consider that he's not quite had the same traction of late and the combined Solidarity/SSP vote was at more or less the same level as the unified SSP vote share in 2005 so the rot may have been stopped for now. Of the leftist parties, it's Socialist Labour who have the least to celebrate, as it hit home just how artificial their performance of 2005 was. Nevertheless, for Sheridan, this is quite a coup: you would have expected the SSP to run him far closer here as his stomping ground was the other side of the city and this was Rosie Kane country once upon a time. So perhaps, just perhaps, reports of Solidarity's demise are, as yet, exaggerated. It all depends on the outcome of his perjury trial.

And what of the LibDems? Well, this was nothing short of a humiliation, and it's telling that once again, they have to rely on SNP-focused Schadenfreude to get them through this one. Of course, I've been through why I find it odd that they'd happily cheer the success of such an illiberal party as Labour over one with which they have so much common ground, but then, it's hard to make sense of spite and after all the crowing we've heard from them I have absolutely no qualms in saying that they deserve to be humiliated for the third By-Election in a row, with the ignominy of not even reaching half the required vote to retain their deposit and coming behind a bunch of swivel-eyed fascists proof positive of how they have nothing relevant to offer anyone. They have kept blaming the media for portraying this as a two-horse race: that didn't stop Ruth Davidson keeping her deposit. They'll blame the attention lavished on the BNP, but Eileen Baxendale was a presence on every major By-Election programme. Doubtless they'll refer to their lack of a candidate in the last Westminster election, overlooking the fact that they fielded candidates in this area in 2007, who kept their deposit. They have no excuses, and when they crow about the SNP's result in Dunfermline & West Fife, where the SNP talked up its chances only to come third, it's worth remembering that in the SNP vote actually went up there, to around 20%, so saying that parties outwith the Top 2 are doomed to humiliation in By-Elections doesn't wash - the LibDems couldn't even manage 3%. Rather than being smug at the SNP's failure to win in that By-Election, they should reflect on the fact that the SNP succeeded in doing something that has eluded the LibDems in every Westminster By-Election after that one: keeping its vote, keeping third place, and keeping its deposit. Granted, Dunfermline & West Fife represents a zenith in LibDem fortunes - they'd better hope for their sake that this was the nadir.

The Greens, meanwhile, should probably be disappointed that they've not manged to make further inroads, particularly after such a strong performance in Glasgow in the European elections. But I've said before and I'll say again that the Greens thrive on middle-class guilt (which can be a powerful motivator for positive changes so that's far from a criticism) and this would appear to be in short supply in Glasgow North East.

So to sum up: a good night for Labour, an OK night for Tommy Sheridan, a credible but not overly credible BNP result, something to hold onto for the Tories as long as they keep George Osborne away from any microphones in the future, nothing much to shout about for the Greens but solid under the circumstances, a disappointing night for the SNP and a humiliation for the LibDems.

One last thing, which I've been sitting on for weeks: John Smeaton was never going to give Labour a kicking. At no point were any Labour activists ablaze and jumping out of a burning jeep. Thank you very much, I'm here all week.

The Sunday Whip

2009-11-15T11:00:00.003Z

A quiet week, mainly as MSPs' minds - and, in many cases, bodies - were elsewhere. Specifically, Glasgow North East.

Anyway, Wednesday was a model of consensus: the Business Motions were waved through, as was a smaller Committee reshuffle and a motion on the Office of the Clerk. The only substantive motion was on Scotland's Historic Environment, moved by the Government, with Tory and LibDem amendments. They were all nodded through:

That the Parliament welcomes the enthusiasm, passion and co-operation shown by all of the participants at the first Summit for the Built and Historic Environment held at the Bute Hall in Glasgow on Tuesday 3 November 2009 and recognises the valuable resource for the Scottish people and economy represented by Scotland's rich and varied heritage; particularly commends recent initiatives to save the nation's buildings at risk, involving bodies such as Historic Scotland, the National Trust for Scotland and the Heritage Lottery Fund; welcomes the continuing and vital involvement in this restoration work of private individuals and the voluntary sector; looks forward to hearing a comprehensive account of the discussions that took place at the summit, and encourages the Scottish Government to work constructively with Historic Scotland and the National Trust for Scotland and to develop relationships with the non-governmental sector to ensure the sustainability of Scotland's built environment and to maintain and improve public access to it.

Thursday saw only one dent in the consensus, which highlighted just how many people were across the M8:

For the SNP, only 21 MSPs were around. They were Brian Adam (Aberdeen North), Schools Minister Keith Brown (Ochil), Parliament Minister Bruce Crawford (Stirling), Environment Minister Roseanna Cunningham (Perth), Nigel Don (North East Scotland), Community Safety Minister Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn & Lochaber), Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland), Rob Gibson (Highlands & Islands), Christine Grahame (South of Scotland), Children's Minister Adam Ingram (South of Scotland), Bill Kidd (Glasgow), Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill (Edinburgh East & Musselburgh), Enterprise Minister Jim Mather (Argyll & Bute), Michael Matheson (Falkirk West), Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland), Ian McKee (Lothians), Christina McKelvie (Central Scotland), Alasdair Morgan (South of Scotland), Housing Minister Alex Neil (Central Scotland), Dave Thompson (Highlands & Islands) and Bill Wilson (West of Scotland). The rest were absent, though Jamie Hepburn was doubtless awaiting the birth of his baby daughter - congrats to him and Julie!

For Labour, only 16 MSPs were about: Shadow Health Secretary Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton), Shadow Justice Secretary Richard Baker (North East Scotland), Shadow Rural Affairs Secretary Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central), Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh North & Leith), George Foulkes (Lothians), Shadow Rural Development Minister Karen Gillon (Clydesdale), Shadow Transport Minister Charlie Gordon (Glasgow Cathcart), James Kelly (Glasgow Rutherglen), Shadow Enterprise Minister Lewis Macdonald (Aberdeen Central), Shadow Sport Minister Frank McAveety (Glasgow Shettleston), Jack McConnell (Motherwell & Wishaw), Shadow Culture Secretary Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin), Shadow Communities Minister Mary Mulligan (Linlithgow), Irene Oldfather (Cunninghame South), Shadow Cabinet Secretary Without Portfolio John Park (Mid Scotland & Fife - he's supposed to be in charge of elections and campaigns, so WTF was he doing at Holyrood?) and Shadow Public Health Minister Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland & Fife). The remaining thirty MSPs were missing.

The Tories had a full compliment, as did the Greens. The LibDems were almost all present and correct, with four absentees: Justice Spokesman Robert Brown (Glasgow), Leader Tavish Scott (Shetland), Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross) and Jim Tolson (Dunfermline West). Margo MacDonald (Ind, Lothians) was absent as well.

They missed a Government motion on the Central Scotland Green Network: the Labour amendment was waved through but the LibDem amendment fell by 54 votes to 13. The LibDems' only other supporter was Labour's Richard Simpson: the remaining MSPs voted against, but the motion passed without dissent:

That the Parliament recognises and supports the significant contribution that the Central Scotland Green Network can make to the quality of life of the three million people living in the central belt, not just through environmental and social benefits, such as improving habitat networks, enhancing landscapes, mitigating climate change, improving health and wellbeing and stimulating educational and cultural activity, outdoor recreation and community involvement, but also through increasing economic benefits, such as business development, urban regeneration and derelict land restoration, and believes that there is a need for cooperation among the Scottish Government, local authorities and agencies and groups working in the area to ensure that maximum opportunities are delivered from the network.

Finally, a Government motion on Community Fire Safety in Scotland and its Tory amendment both passed without dissent:

That the Parliament notes the Scottish Government's commitment to working in partnership with local government and the fire and rescue services to reduce fires and fire deaths in Scotland and that recommendations in the Scotland Together community fire safety study will contribute to a continued partnership approach to fire prevention, and calls on the Scottish fire and rescue authorities to consider the benefits of joint working.

And that was that. Regular service will, I suppose, resume next week.

The Negative-o-meter: 11 November

2009-11-11T20:42:00.002Z

David Kerr

During this by-election I have run a 10k race, dug an allotment, called the bingo, spent an evening with an ambulance crew, taken part in a joinery class, and persuaded two former Labour party officials to vote for the SNP.

That's just a light hearted sample of the amazing time I've had over the last 5 months and the experiences I hope will continue if voters in Glasgow North East give me the honour of representing them at Westminster.

More importantly I've met hundreds of people who are actively working to improve lives in this constituency, to bring jobs to this constituency and to create opportunities in this constituency and I've met thousands of people who are ready to vote for a fresh start for Glasgow North East. I hope to be their MP on Thursday night.

With 24 hours to go before polls open I've set myself one last challenge, to speak to another 1000 voters on the doorsteps, in the streets, at the stations and on their way to and from work. If elected that's the kind of challenge I will always live by - to be open, accessible and available to the people of this constituency.

Ruth Davidson

I’ve been out today on the campaign trail with Michael Gove MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Children, Schools & Families visiting the campus at North Glasgow College, in Springburn.

I feel that I know the College very well by now, it has played host to several events during the campaign, and it was great to be able to be able to show Michael around.

Earlier this week I wrote about Conservative plans to get Glasgow, and Britain, working again. However, there is no point in creating new jobs if we don’t give people the skills to do the jobs well.

What is really sad is that many schools force kids who are not academic, to study subjects they don’t enjoy and which they don't do very well in. They then leave school without the skills that they need to get a job and to succeed. Because of that they end up unable to get a job, and get trapped in a cycle of poverty.

Labour have done nothing about this. During the last 12 years they have created a benefits system which punishes people who want to work – with marginal tax rates of above 90%.

Labour’s failed system therefore discourages kids at school from learning the skills that they need, and then once they are adults they are discouraged from coming off benefits. And Labour claim that the Tories are the party who don’t care about poverty.

It can’t be said enough times, the best route out of poverty for people is through work. By getting a job people obviously get extra money. But working also builds up self-respect, a sense of community, and an involvement in the wider world which just doesn’t happen if you are unemployed.

That's why the Scottish Conservatives have talked about introducing more vocational training into schools in Scotland. And it is why places like North Glasgow College play such an important role in giving people the vocational skills they need to get jobs.

Michael said afterwards what a pleasure it was to visit the College. Both of us were very impressed with the staff and students who are working hard to acquire the skills needed for the world of work. We need to encourage more people to come here and learn these skills. That means dealing with Labour’s pernicious benefits system, and it means creating jobs. Only the Conservatives have the policies and ideas that can make that happen.

Willie Bain

It is not every day that a famous comedian drops into my campaign centre to lend support to the by-election battle, and so it was a great pleasure to welcome Eddie Izzard to Springburn this morning.

We are all familiar I am sure with Eddie Izzard on stage, but it is great to meet the man behind the jokes. As tempting as it was to share the odd joke, we thought we'd give him a break before his show tonight.

Funnily enough, it is not the first time I have met Eddie Izzard. We met by chance when he, quite literally, ran past me on Springburn Road back in September while he was taking part in his charity marathons.

When I heard he was in Glasgow today I asked him to pop by to speak to the campaign team and was delighted he said yes. Staff and volunteers showed him around the campaign centre and chatted to him about what we have been doing over the past few months. He was also genuinely interested to hear what my campaign is all about.

I have had great support throughout the campaign and I will fight to the last minute to convince people to choose me tomorrow. I've been out knocking on doors with Iain Gray, Douglas Alexander - and later I'll be with Jim Murphy.

Willie Bain
Labour's by-election candidate

Eileen Baxendale

Another day in the by-election campaign and more doom and gloom statistics for the good people of Glasgow North East to contend with.

We should be helping people not drowning them in statistics about unemployment and benefits.

I want to put my 20+ years experience as a social worker and manager to good use.

Tavish Scott and I have met people from all across the constituency, employed, unemployed, at school, college and university, pensioners who have done their bit and many more besides.

They are looking for answers, not headlines and because I'm not a career politician like some of the others I want to be given that chance tomorrow and put my experience from the real world to good use here in Glasgow North East and help them get the answers.

I want to ask the Governments and the Council how the spending in Glasgow is allocated, down to the last penny and is it fair? Is it going to the right people?

I am certain that the Liberal Democrats and I can make a difference and provide the change in Glasgow North East that is so badly needed.

Labour have had 74 years and have failed. The Conservatives are to busy propping up the SNP in Holyrood and not making the right calls in Westminster.

They voted with Labour on the Iraq war when Charles Kennedy and Ming Campbell led the Liberal Democrats opposition to the unjust and illegal war.

The Conservatives got it massively wrong on Europe and the recession when Vince Cable led the way, a long time before the experts.

We can't trust the SNP, just look at the promises they made in 2007, knowing full well they could never keep them all, just to get elected!

It is this legacy of broken promises and bad decisions from both Holyrood and Westminster as well as the issue of MP expenses that are losing politicians respect.

Well I'm a different kind of politician, I'm a real person and I believe working together we can change Glasgow North East, and its time for that change tomorrow.

By voting for the Liberal Democrats let's bring a halt to the nonsense and change Glasgow North East's future for ever.

The polling stations are open from 7am to 10pm and you don't need your polling card to vote.

Eileen Baxendale
Liberal Democrat candidate

There is the outside chance of the one or two extra posts, but that's pretty much it now. Willie Bain has said very little substantive and even his campaign insights are basically name-dropping. That doesn't help Labour defend themselves against George Galloway's accusation that Bain is a 'nobody' - though I have to admit, I quite liked the Labour response: "Willie Bain has never dressed up in a red Lycra suit and pretended to be a cat on national television"! Incidentally, I'm not sure that Galloway basically calling the people of Glasgow North East idiots is the best way forward for him or for Tommy Sheridan, but that's another matter.

We've had a mixed bag of posts from David Kerr, and the last one was a quick campaign diary, which I think said more about him than it did about his endorsers. That's a good thing. I'd have liked a little more sweet policy meat but that was a broadly positive note to end on.

Ruth Davidson continued her attack on Labour, deriding the state Glasgow North East has got in during the last 74 years of Labour representation (overlooking who was actually calling the shots for 45 of those 74 years), and so potentially helping Labour to win by standing on an anti-Labour platform despite not being their primary challengers. Paradoxically, if a Tory objective is to keep Labour out, it might have been more prudent to go on an anti-SNP line and so split that vote (and keep the SNP vote steady) rather than join the crowded anti-Labour marketplace.

Eileen Baxendale went and attacked everyone, an unfortunate position to which she had been steadily building. I'm also slightly exasperated at the 'I'm a real person' line. Say what you like about the other candidates, but I'm quite sure they are also real people: I'll have to double-check the Representation of the People Act but I'm reasonably sure that existence is a pre-requisite to being nominated for election.

David Doherty only contributed one post in the last week, and it painted a grim picture of the present and near future. And he had nothing to say beyond that quasi-apocalyptic agenda. Yes, the problems he raises are serious, but if he can't go beyond that to the next stage of putting forward positive ideas to tackle those problems, then the Greens have to hope that their efforts beyond cyberspace have been far better than those on The Steamie. "Where's the beef?" doesn't seem like an appropriate question to ask the Greens, though, and "Where's the Quorn?" doesn't have the same impact.

So that's that: the Battle of the Steamie is essentially over. It was a great idea, but for the next By-Election, whenever and wherever it will be, candidates will have to work harder at this - the online efforts this week would, I suspect, struggle to get into a Roundup. All we've really learned this time is that the candidates want to knock seven bells out of each other, that no one likes poverty (duh) and that the blogosphere is still not being used effectively by the candidates themselves.

The Negative-o-meter: 9-10 November

2009-11-10T19:45:00.003Z

Willie Bain

I was delighted to learn that Sir Alex Ferguson has decided to endorse my campaign for Glasgow North East.

As a Glasgow man himself, Sir Alex knows how the people of Glasgow think and feel. Despite his success, Sir Alex has always stayed true to his roots.

He knows that people need help now to get through these difficult times.

I think Sir Alex’s endorsement is a real boost my campaign. He is well respected by people here – and he knows a thing or two about running a good campaign.

You can head over to my website to see what he has to say. This is me at Petershill FC last week - in the rain.

Willie Bain
Labour's by-election candidate.

Ruth Davidson

Perhaps the biggest theme of the campaign has been how many people have come to me worried about Labour’s jobs crisis. There are 4,212 people in the constituency who have to claim unemployment benefit. That’s up nearly a thousand (989) in just a year and gives Glasgow North East the highest claimant rate in Scotland. That’s Labour’s legacy to Glasgow, unemployment and a jobs crisis.

Labour’s record in Glasgow shows a worrying complacency. Labour closed one Job Centre in Glasgow North East and replaced much of the face-to-face contact in the other with a mere telephone helpline. That isn’t going to help people get jobs. Labour have claimed in this by-election that they care about getting people back into work – but their actions in government don’t back that up. Broken promises and a broken economy, that’s all we get from Labour.

The Conservatives are different. We want to help people get into work because we realise how important jobs are for people. The Conservatives have the policies to bring new jobs, help the unemployed retrain, and tackle Labour’s debt mountain that threatens to hamper investment.

So we will provide tax breaks for new companies who provide new jobs. We will free up credit to help businesses. And we have a radical welfare plan that will help people who are out of work to get back into employment by providing the individual support they need, as well as providing incentives for providers who can help those in the most difficult circumstances get back into work.

This sounds like a tough message – as if we are forcing people to work. But in reality there is nothing compassionate about the current situation where people are left isolated outside society. We need to integrate people into work, support them, and help them. Most people don’t want to be on benefits, but the current system forces them there and then abandons them. That’s not progressive, and it’s not what the people of Glasgow North East need.

These are the Conservative plans to get Glasgow working again. But the only way that can happen is if you vote for the Conservatives at this by-election, and at the upcoming General Election. Only Labour or the Conservatives can become the next Government, and therefore the choice is between this failing Labour Government, or a fresh government, with real ideas to tackle the jobs crisis and recession, led by David Cameron.

David Kerr

Five months ago when Michael Martin resigned there was a more local issue dominating the news in this constituency. School closures.

Today schools are back on the agenda. The SNP has dug up papers, produced last week by the council showing how many teaching posts Labour have cut over the summer months.

The figures, tucked away in a staffing report show that since June Glasgow's Labour council has let an astonishing 150 teaching posts go.

Even more astonishing, when I looked back at the figures for last September they show that Labour have let over 300 teaching posts go in the last 12 months.

In the summer Glasgow's Labour council shut five local primaries in this constituency over the wishes of the community. Holding off on the by-election, even voting against it in Westminster, might have helped Labour get the issue out of the papers but as I have met parents from those five schools through this campaign it is clear they have not forgotten Labour's betrayal. The loss of 300 teaching posts, that could have been used to cut class sizes - starting in Glasgow North East - is a further sign that Labour's commitment to education in this city is not what it should be.

Labour have no excuses here - Glasgow's Labour council receives more money from the SNP for every resident than any other mainland council, but it spends less of it's money on education than any of Scotland's other 31 councils. Labour cannot escape that fact.

This morning I will join Nicola Sturgeon at the site of one of those schools with local parents. Their concerns have not gone away and nor has their fighting spirit. Their children now have a difficult and dangerous walk to school and this morning those parents will be highlighting those concerns.

My commitment to the parents, children and teachers of this constituency is that if elected on Thursday I will not keep quiet while Labour shut schools, cut teachers and increase class sizes. Labour may not be spending the money Glasgow receives on Glasgow North East's priorities, but the priorities of constituents will be my priorities if I am given the honour of representing this constituency. I will take the fight to the City Chambers and I will stand up for parents when Labour rips them off.

Eileen Baxendale

Yesterday I was joined by Nick Clegg and Tavish Scott on the campaign trail.

We were campaigning at the ASDA in Robroyston where we heard how local people are suffering as a result of Labour’s recession.

It is this issue that has dominated this by-election and it is the concern that people have raised with me most often on the doorsteps.

People in Glasgow North East are looking for something different in this by-election. They are fed-up being overlooked by a tired old Labour party.

People in this area want their new politician to hit the ground running with fresh ideas, working hard to create jobs and put more money back into hard working people's pockets.

Liberal Democrats are the only party that are offering new ideas and new hope for Glasgow North East. We are Scotland's second largest party at Westminster and we are the real alternative for local people.

One of the most worrying aspects of Labour’s recession is that it risks leaving the poisonous legacy of a jobless generation.

Instead of pouring money into the ineffective VAT cut, Liberal Democrats have called for a paid internship scheme for our young people.

We want our young people to not go more than three months without a right of access to a place in work, training or education.

Rather than allowing someone to sit at home on benefits, young people would gain invaluable skills and experience in an actual workplace.

This is a win-win situation for both employers and those looking for work. It means that when we do finally come out of this recession our young people will have gained essential work experience.

Liberal Democrats are the only party with the practical ideas offering hope to people in Glasgow North East who are struggling through Labour’s recession.

Willie Bain

Polling day is just two days away, and my campaign is gearing up for a final push to persuade local people that I will work hard for everyone here if they choose me to represent them.

I will continue to disregard the speculation and bookmakers' predictions about how this by-election will end - it will be a close battle and I am fighting for every vote. The vast majority of people have not yet cast their vote and I want to talk to as many of them as possible.

My focus over the next few days will be to encourage my neighbours and others who live in the constituency to make that trip to the polling station, because I want to see a good turn-out.

What drives me is the chance to make the area where I grew up and still live today a better and fairer place to be. I will fight for jobs and more opportunities for young people, and that is the message I took to John Wheatley College today as I met with staff and students at the fantastic new campus on Haghill Road.

Tackling crime, and in particular knife crime, is also one of my priorities. I welcomed Shadow Justice Secretary Richard Baker to the constituency today and I am pleased that he backs my 'carry a knife, go to jail' campaign. We need a stronger deterrent to stop people carrying a blade and using weapons to attack people.

As polling day gets closer, I hope I have worked hard enough to convince people in my area to put their trust in me - but we are still 48 hours away from polling and there are thousands of people still to speak to.

Willie Bain
Labour's by-election candidate

Polls close, of course, in less than fifty hours. Labour are posting frequently, but saying very little: most of their posts have been anodyne. The SNP has gone in heavily and hit hard at the plan to axe the East Coast services to Glasgow, and the school closures. The other parties, when they criticise anyone, appear to be criticising Labour, and in particular, 'Labour's recession'.

So what we need in the next day is, to my mind, two-fold: we need a Labour post defending itself against the attacks they've been hit with - the SNP responded to criticisms regarding GARL and defended itself against them, remember, so it is fundamentally in Labour's interest to justify its own position (a point left undealt with is a point still standing); by contrast, we need a positive SNP post: we've heard enough reasons not to vote Labour, but the other parties are supplying them as well. Consequently, it is self-defeating to stay on the attack line as there is more than one anti-Labour option, and the vote could be split amongst them, allowing Labour in again.

With the attacks focused on Labour, and no sign as yet of Labour responding to them, the floor is open to David Kerr to supply positive reasons to vote for him: the others aren't attacking him at this time and a positive approach would present something distinctive. It's not enough to simply not be Labour: David Kerr is one of twelve candidates who are not Labour so he needs to move to the stage which completes the argument.

The Negative-o-meter: 7-8 November

2009-11-08T19:22:00.003Z

David Kerr

As the by-election enters its final lap the SNP campaign is really closing the gap on Labour and today's revelations that the Labour Government is to axe rail services between Glasgow and Kings Cross have exposed the hypocrisy of Labour's campaign over the airport rail link.

Reports here, show that the London Labour government is planning to axe services on the east coast between Glasgow Central and London.

After weeks of campaigning over 1 mile of track, Labour are now cutting off a 500 mile service - one of the main routes bringing business, tourists and jobs from London into the city.

This decision shows where their priorities really lie and is yet another example of Labour neglecting Glasgow North East. After 74 years it's time to end this neglect. Only a vote for the SNP can stop London Labour in their tracks and deliver the best services for Glaswegians.

This revelation also shows that it is the SNP that is really investing in rail services for Glasgow with a £1 billion investment package to cut journey times between Glasgow and Edinburgh to 35 minutes, as well as the Glasgow-Paisley improvements, and improvements to Dalmarnock station – while all the time Labour are cutting services.

Labour are treating the people of Glasgow shamefully. They have presided over 74 years of decline in this constituency and I won't, the SNP won't, and certainly the people of Glasgow North-East won't put up with it anymore.

On a lighter note, I was joined by SNP activists, local residents and athletes from Glasgow's international community for a fun run this morning in aid of the Ruchazie Family Centre. It's a great local project that I was pleased to support.

Off to campaign with Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon for the rest of the day. More updates later...

David Kerr

Today is Remembrance Sunday and the SNP campaign will join people across the country as we take time to remember all those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in our name and to stand in solidarity with our veterans and those who currently serve in our armed forces.

I have spoken to many people in this campaign who have served themselves or whose children are serving at the present time in Afghanistan.

It will be a particularly poignant day for our service men and women on the frontline and the members of the Black Watch who yesterday returned to Scotland and to their families. I will be attending the service at Colston Milton Parish Church to pay my respects and my thoughts today will be with our brave forces and with those who went before them.

Willie Bain

Today is a sobering and important day as we remember those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country.

The service, dedication and professionalism of our armed forces should stop us in our tracks every day, not just once a year.

My thoughts and prayers are with all our brave soldiers serving around the world, their families at home, and all those who remember their loved ones.

As a mark of respect to those who have fallen, we suspended our campaigning for this morning, and will do so again at on Wednesday, at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day.

Willie Bain
Labour's candidate in Glasgow North East

So, three posts, two of which are Remembrance Sunday based and handled in a neutral, dignified way by both candidates. The David Kerr post on transport, however, goes on the attack - possibly a chance to go on the offensive after being having to respond to the GARL issue for so long. There is some analysis of positive SNP proposals, but the aim of the post is to attack. On the one hand, Labour had this coming given their campaign strategy and the timing of this news, but on the other hand, it's still negative and as such, it's still rather exasperating: it may be difficult to put the contents of this post in a positive tone but I don't think it's altogether impossible.

One wider point: on GARL, SNP supporters and representatives weren't slow to defend and justify the decision to put the Glasgow Airport Rail Link on hold. But on the plan to cut the East Coast Main Line services to Glasgow, the only comments have been from the press, Passenger Focus and from the SNP. Needless to say, it's all been negative. I'm not seeking to slag Labour off here, I merely think that it would be in their interest for Willie Bain to put his head above the parapet on this issue and tell us what he thinks about the proposal. Let's see if he does, and what he says. I look forward to colouring that post!

The Sunday Whip

2009-11-08T11:35:00.004Z

This was something of a busy week, and not great for the Government, but they've had far worse.

On Wednesday, there were a lot of absences (perhaps the Parliament should just have moved lock, stock and barrel to Glasgow North East) - 26 in all:

Wendy Alexander (Lab, Paisley North), Shadow Health Secretary Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton), Rhona Brankin (Lab, Midlothian), Willie Coffey (SNP, Kilmarnock & Loudoun), Angela Constance (SNP, Livingston), Cathie Craigie (Lab, Cumbernauld & Kilsyth), Nigel Don (SNP, North East Scotland), Bob Doris (SNP, Glasgow), Helen Eadie (Lab, Dunfermline East), LibDem Health Spokesman Ross Finnie (West of Scotland), Joe FitzPatrick (SNP, Dundee West), George Foulkes (Lab, Lothians), Kenneth Gibson (SNP, Cunninghame North), Jamie Hepburn (SNP, Central Scotland, on paternity leave), Shadow Housing Secretary Cathy Jamieson (Carrick, Cumnock & Doon Valley), Bill Kidd (SNP, Glasgow), Marilyn Livingstone (Lab, Kirkcaldy), Margo MacDonald (Ind, Lothians), Shadow Schools Minister Ken Macintosh (Eastwood), Stewart Maxwell, (SNP, West of Scotland), Anne McLaughlin (SNP, Glasgow), Duncan McNeil (Lab, Greenock & Inverclyde), Shadow Culture Minister Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin), Margaret Mitchell (Con, Central Scotland), Hugh O'Donnell (LD, Central Scotland), Irene Oldfather (Lab, Cunninghame South) and Transport Minister Stewart Stevenson (Banff & Buchan).

Whew! Anyway, aside from the nodding through of the Business Motions, they missed the Government motion on Scotland's National Parks. The Labour amendment was waved through, but the Tory amendment saw a tied vote, at 51 (SNP/Tory) to 51 (Lab/LD/Green). As always, the Presiding Officer used his casting vote against the amendment - the convention has it that the PO votes in favour of the status quo, which, in practice, means voting against everything. The LibDem amendment, however, passed by 65 (SNP/Tory/LD) votes to 37 (Labour/Green), and the amended moton was nodded through:

That the Parliament commends the contribution that Scotland's two national parks make to sustainable social and economic development and to delivering the Greener Scotland agenda; notes the outcome of the National Parks Strategic Review, and welcomes the proposal to set up a National Parks Strategy group; believes that it should explore the potential for establishing new national parks, including in marine and coastal areas; celebrates the success of the boards of the National Parks in giving a voice to local people in managing their own environment, and calls for early consideration to be given to increasing the directly elected presence on boards.

Following that, the Public Appointments and Public Bodies etc. (Scotland) Act 2003 (Amendment of Specified Authorities) Order 2009 was passed without dissent.

Thursday, meanwhile, was far busier, but there were still 25 absences:

Wendy Alexander, Shadow Further & Higher Education Minister Claire Baker (Mid Scotland & Fife), Malcolm Chisholm (Lab, Edinburgh North & Leith), Cathie Craigie, Bob Doris, Patricia Ferguson (Lab, Glasgow Maryhill), Joe FitzPatrick, Hugh Henry (Lab, Paisley South), Jamie Hepburn, Cathy Jamieson, Alex Johnstone (Con, North East Scotland), Shadow Finance Secretary Andy Kerr (East Kilbride), Labour Deputy Leader Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok), Marilyn Livingstone, Shadow Enterprise Minister Lewis Macdonald (Aberdeen Central), Anne McLaughlin, Shadow Local Government Secretary Michael McMahon (Hamilton North & Bellshill), Stuart McMillan (SNP, West of Scotland), Duncan McNeil, Pauline McNeill, Hugh O'Donnell, Mike Pringle (LD, Edinburgh South), LibDem Chief Whip Mike Rumbles (Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine), Shadow Childrens' Minister Karen Whitefield (Airdrie & Shotts) and Shadow Finance Minister David Whitton (Strathkelvin & Bearsden).

First came the votes on the Tory Supporting Families motion. The SNP amendment was amended without dissent by Labour and the LibDems, but the amended amendment, and the motion itself, passed by 87 (SNP/Labour/LD/Greens) to 15 (Tories) with one abstention (yup, Margo was back):

That the Parliament considers that the family is the natural building block of our society; notes the significant pressures facing families in Scotland today arising from relationship breakdown, poverty, unemployment and substance abuse; believes that the Scottish Government should focus on addressing the impact of the recession and take steps to ease the burden on families; recognises that long-term relationships provide stability in many families and acknowledges the status of marriage in society; believes that the needs and best interests of the child should always be at the centre of policies to support and promote stable families and reflect the reality of family life in Scotland; urges the Scottish Government to prioritise support for parents and extended families, ensuring that evaluation of these services is geared towards improving the quality and range of support that can be offered, and notes the valuable role of the voluntary sector in the delivery of services to children, parents and families, particularly those in vulnerable or disadvantaged circumstances.

Then came the Minimum Pricing on Alcohol motion, again by the Tories. The SNP amendment fell by 58 (Lab/Con/LD) votes to 45 (SNP/Greens/Margo). The Labour amendment fell by 70 (SNP/Con/LD) to 33 (Labour/Greens/Margo). The LibDem amendment fell by 74 votes (SNP/Labour/Greens) to 29 (Con/LD/Margo) and the motion fell by 74 (SNP/Labour/Greens) to 28 (Con/LD) with one Margo-shaped abstention. Accordingly, no position was taken on the matter.

Then came the Autumn Fisheries negotiation motion put forward by the Government. Labour and Tory amendments were waved through, but a LibDem amendment fell by 87 (SNP/Labour/Tory) votes to 14 (LD/Margo) with two Green abstentions. The amended motion passed by 100 (the Big 4) to one (Margo) with the Greens abstaining:

That the Parliament notes the Scottish Government's commitment to secure a fair deal at the forthcoming EU fisheries negotiations and to continue seeking radical and urgent changes to EU regulations to help cut discards and improve fisheries conservation and the industry's profitability; calls for Scotland's fishermen's growing reputation for innovative fisheries conservation to be given due recognition, and notes the European Commission Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, which recognises the failures of the Common Fisheries Policy; welcomes the meeting of Inter Regional Advisory Council members, stakeholders and fisheries ministers from across the United Kingdom in Edinburgh this week; notes the growing support for ecosystem-based regional fisheries management amongst fisheries experts and interests, and agrees that the Scottish Government should put in place effective measures to support Scottish fishing communities in light of the outcomes of last year's fisheries negotiations and the ongoing recession, and believes that, in that context, a more regionally responsible approach to fisheries management is required and that, in order to achieve this, the Scottish Government and HM Government must work together in the interests of a sustainable Scottish fishing industry.

Following that, various Committee reshuffles were nodded through. What a week! And what a week for everyone to be out on the stump. Next week, the five MSPs who'll be present will discuss Government motions on Scotland's Historic Environment, the Central Scotland Green Network and Community Fire Safety. But really, we all know that the heat will be on in Glasgow North East...

It's only bad if someone else does it, Part 5,904

2009-11-07T10:18:00.003Z

From today's Herald:

Direct train services between Glasgow and London on the troubled East Coast Main Line are to be axed under a major recasting of the route’s timetable being discussed by the Government and rail industry, The Herald can reveal.

The changes on the arterial route, one of two connecting Scotland to England, will see trains that currently run from King’s Cross up the east coast to Glasgow stop at Edinburgh from December 2010.

Passenger Focus, the statutory watchdog, said yesterday it was “seeking reassurances” that another operator would step in to deliver direct services from Glasgow to the north of England, warning that key routes to destinations such as Newcastle, York and Doncaster could be affected.

There were unconfirmed suggestions Arriva Cross Country could take up the slack under the new timetable by extending the service it operated from Glasgow along part of the East Coast Main Line as far as York. That would only leave destinations in the south-east of England without a direct connection to Glasgow.

John Mason, the SNP MP for Glasgow East, said the changes revealed Labour’s “hypocrisy” on rail following criticism this week of the SNP’s decision to scrap the Glasgow Airport Rail Link. He added: “These plans, which have been made without any consultation, are a serious mistake and must be stopped in their tracks.”

James King, Scottish board member of Passenger Focus, said: “Withdrawing these services is only acceptable if another operator can be found to provide connectivity between Glasgow and the north-east of England as far as York. We would want to be reassured that another operator can pick up the slack.”

I'm not going to add to John Mason's point of the double standards at work here (and at least the SNP have merely put on hold a plan that was yet to come be implemented, whilst Labour are considering going so far as to axe existing services), save to note that the final decision rests with Lord Adonis, who has been on the campaign trail this week. I bet he waits until after Thursday to make his choice.

The Negative-o-meter: 5-6 November

2009-11-06T19:27:00.006Z

In the week running up to the Glasgow By-Election, and to analyse in greater detail accusations of negativity, I thought I'd look at the candidates' pieces for The Steamie, and flag up the positive and negative comments. The positive shall be marked in green, and the negative in red. Relatively neutral comments (or ambiguous points which could be positive or negative depending on how you look at it), agenda points and party-based fluff will be left alone. I like to think my readers are a pretty sharp bunch: you can interpret the situation as you wish.

Willie Bain

I'm pleased to be taking part in this great idea by The Steamie to get people engaged with this by-election online.

Although I know not everyone uses the internet to access their news - I know lots of Glaswegians who are increasingly using it to find out what's going on and keep in touch with friends and family. I hope that by writing on here that I can help some of them understand more about me and my plans.

Despite a late night in the Newsnight studio I'm keen to hit the ground running this morning - talking to voters and hearing their concerns. I've lived in this area all my life - I think I'm the only candidate that can (honestly!) say that. I'm not a politician and I've never stood for election before but I'm proud of this area and I want to do my best for it.

The issue that people constantly raise with me on the door is their anger at the way the SNP is ripping off our city. Despite the SNP's budget going up by £600m this year they are giving extra money to some projects - but shortchanging Glasgow. It's amazing how many times people raise this when you speak to them. So I'm going out and about in the constituency today - knocking of people's doors and letting them know who I am and what I believe in.

I'm also meeeting with Andrew Adonis to tell him about the importance of good transport links to the Glasgow economy and the shockingly short-sighted decision of the SNP to cancel the airport rail link at a cost of 1000 jobs.

The other issue that people keep raising with me is about the SNP candidate fibbing about where he was born. Look, at the end of the day the real issue in this story is about trust. People's trust in politics is at an all time low. We have to start trying to restore that trust and that starts with people being able to believe the people that seek to represent them.

I've been clear with people what my top priorities are:

* stopping the SNP ripping off Galsgow [sic] and dishing out the money elsewhere
* cracking down on crime and anti-social behaviour - I've been running a carry a knife go to jail petition to get automatic jail sentences for knife criminals
* helping glasgow pensioners through tough times and fighting to protect jobs
* campaigning for better shops, better homes, and better buses

Thanks to everyone who is supporting me in this campaign. If you want to get in touch with me then you can email me at willie@williebain.com.

Best wishes

Willie Bain
Labour's candidate for Glasgow North East

Ruth Davidson

Well done the Steamie for coming up with this idea. I’ve been blogging on this campaign for sometime and I’m glad now the other candidates won’t be able to run away when I ask them a question!

During the five months that this campaign has been running it has become clear that the issues in Glasgow North East are not that different from those across Britain. People are worried about their jobs, worried about Labour's recession, worried about public services, and worried about crime.

MP's from all parties have betrayed the trust that the public had placed in them. That is why David Cameron apologised as soon as the details of MP's expenses claims came out, because it was wrong and the people of Britain deserved an apology. It was then that he said he wanted a new type of politics - which was when I decided I should put myself forward as a candidate. I am not a career politician, but I do believe that politics needs new people to get involved, get stuck in, and try and change things for the better. As candidates we all need to work to restore the public’s trust in politics.

That is why the very first thing I did following selection was to promise to run a clean campaign - which I invited all the other candidates to join. I have kept to that - the Conservatives won’t use personal attacks in order to get votes. That is why I have pledged to be open about my expenses if elected. Simple things, not exploiting expenses, discussing the issues not the personalities, but I think that they help people to believe I will keep my word if elected.

David Cameron and the Conservative Party believe the same thing. That is why we have been honest about the problems with the public finances. Instead of pretending nothing needed done, the Conservatives have told the truth that there will have to be savings in Government spending. We don't want to reduce spending, but we have to be realistic and tell people the harsh truth that Labour have spent all the money – and it is up to the next Government to repair the damage.

That’s why in the Scottish Parliament we have identified ¼ billion pounds worth of savings. Take Scottish Water out of public ownership, stop this nonsense of free prescriptions and free school meals for people who can afford to pay. Some things in life are not free – we have to accept that, especially in this current climate.

This election is about which party can bring the change that is needed to Glasgow North East, and to Britain. The Conservatives have the policies that will create jobs, repair the public finances, and help to fix our broken society. Most of all, we are the party that will be open and honest with the public – that’s what is needed to help rebuild trust in politics.

David Kerr

Welcome to the Steamie's by-election coverage. It's great to be taking part in this new way of covering a by-election, putting my campaign direct to you the voters.

In the next few days I’ll use this blog to tell you about some of the amazing people and inspiring projects I have met and seen in the constituency and the kind of MP I will be if the people in Glasgow North East vote for me.

Five months after Michael Martin resigned we are now into the last seven days of the campaign and it's turning out to be closer than many people thought. Despite the lengthy delay voters haven’t forgotten the expenses scandal that caused the by-election or the five school closures in the constituency that left Labour so scared the vote was delayed for five months.

Those issues have many people, who had always voted Labour, questioning the party they have supported and looking toward the SNP.

I'll be out campaigning today with John Mason MP, in Carntyne where Glasgow East meets Glasgow North East.

John's political earthquake demonstrates the difference an SNP MP can make. When it came to school closures – Labour didn’t dare put forward any closures in John’s constituency but they took people in Glasgow North East for granted.

Residents of Glasgow East had been let down by their MP - with no constituency office and no one to vote for their interests. John has set a new standard for Glasgow MPs - accessible, available and putting his constituents first.

In Glasgow North East constituents have been in the same position - with no office for the local MP in the constituency and decades of being taken for granted by Labour in Westminster and in the City Chambers.

People in Glasgow North East deserve the same level of representation their fellow East Enders have in the neighbouring constituency. This constituency deserves an MP whose priorities will be constituents priorities and that’s what I will deliver if elected next week.

Eileen Baxendale

I think this is a great idea from the Steamie. I would love to see more newspapers and media outlets adopt innovative approaches to help get more people engaged in politics.

I want to say right from the start that I think it was simply outrageous that the Labour party have allowed the people in Glasgow North East to go without an MP for so long, well over 125 days now. This just shows that the Labour Government has lost touch with the people it serves.

Since this campaign kicked off all those weeks ago, I have been working hard, knocking on doors and listening to people right across the constituency.

The message that I am getting again and again is that people are fed up being overlooked and ignored and that they want change. They want their politician’s focus to be on sorting the economy, creating more local jobs and tackling local crime.

I believe that it is Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats that have the policies and ideas to make a real difference on these issues.

To really tackle these problems we need more than just sensationalist, headline grabbing soundbites. We need a new approach.

On the economy and banking, it is Vince Cable that has been the voice of reasoned authority over recent months. It was he who first warned about the impending economic collapse. Labour were too slow to act and the Tories were simply nowhere on sorting out the economy.

On tackling crime and creating jobs, Liberal Democrats believe that this is best done at a local level. We are committed to putting the heart back into our communities and giving local people a greater say over their own affairs.

Locking everyone up and sending our young people to prison is not the best way to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour. We need more community based initiatives that tackle the root causes of why young people in our society get involved in crime in the fist place.

Labour’s recession has led to tough times for all of us. The Liberal Democrats want to sort out the tax system to give a boost to those on low and middle incomes. We want to raise the income tax threshold so those on less than £10,000 a year don’t pay tax. This would put around £700 a year back into the pockets of those on low and middle incomes.

It is the Liberal Democrats who are the only party offering real progressive change to our society. Unlike the SNP it is the Liberal Democrats who can make a real difference at Westminster and stand up for the people of Glasgow North East.

Willie Bain

Just back from the STV studios where the four main candidates cross–examined ourselves in heated spirits.

In a slightly peculiar manoeuvre, the SNP man decided to throw a two-pound coin at me. I was thinking a question might be more likely, but there you go.

Amazingly, he vigorously defended the decision to scrap the airport rail link and the loss of up to 1,300 jobs. I thought he’d want to stand up for Glasgow, but he seems he wants to be Salmond’s man in Springburn.

Earlier, I met with Andrew Adonis, the Secretary of State for Transport, to discuss the importance of good transport links to and from Glasgow. He got the train from the centre of town up to Springburn.

Like me, he was angered by the SNP’s decision to cancel the rail link. If elected I will do all I can to fight the SNP’s decision and stop them ripping of Glasgow in the future. I oppose the cuts in housing and regeneration in the SNP’s draft budget for next year and I believe that Glasgow should get a metropolitan supplement, as Edinburgh does and is proposed for Aberdeen. The SNP cannot continue to rip off Glasgow. It isn’t a by-election slogan as the SNP try to brush it off: it is a tragedy for our city.

Harriet Harman also joined the campaign this evening and was out knocking on doors with me – first with the cameras, and then just the two of us later on. We stopped for a quick coffee in Dennistoun.

It really was all hands on deck today. Tomorrow I’ll be out and about again from first thing to late.

David Kerr

Less than a week to go and the SNP campaign is in full swing.

SNP activists are out across the constituency - with more coming to join the campaign this weekend - including a visit from the Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon.

Today I'll be joined on the campaign trail by Education Secretary Fiona Hyslop to meet some of the young people that are benefiting from the SNP's investment in education in this constituency.

A few weeks ago we visited Glasgow North College and today we'll be heading to John Wheatley's campus. These colleges have received record levels of investment from the SNP and with help from the Scottish Government are providing extra places to support people during the recession.

That's the kind of investment we need to bring opportunities to this constituency, to ensure a bright future for our young people.

There's another sign of the SNP's commitment to Glasgow today. In the face of serious budget cuts from Labour in London the SNP has had to take some tough decisions over how we allocate Scotland's budget. I'm proud of the fact that the SNP's priorities are health, education and making our communities safer.

Today Nicola Sturgeon will announce the next step toward a new £840 million Southern General - built entirely with public funds - as the contracts are signed. Alongside it will be a new children's hospital for Glasgow.

That's the kind of investment I want to see across the city - and that's the kind of investment the SNP will continue to put into Glasgow.

David Doherty

Over the last few years, Glasgow has become one of the Greenest parts of Scotland, and Glasgow North East is no exception.

Glaswegians are represented at Holyrood by Patrick Harvie MSP, and the city has returned five Green Councillors, one of whom, my colleague Kieran Wild, represents Canal Ward here in Glasgow North East.

In the Euro-elections Greens came third in Glasgow North East, ahead of the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, although it'd be dishonest to put out a leaflet saying "only Greens can win here".

It's not hard to see why Glasgow's increasingly backing the Greens. Our major campaign at Holyrood over the last year has been to try and insulate all of Scotland's homes, cutting bills, boosting jobs, tackling fuel poverty and beating climate change all in one go. As a volunteer I'm on the board of a building renovation charity, and I'm only too aware of the problems in this area across the city. The parties who've governed Glasgow, locally and nationally, should be ashamed of themselves for letting people continue to suffer in damp, unhealthy and expensive homes.

What's more, Labour and the SNP may be bickering about GARL, but only the Greens have consistently opposed the M74 currently being bulldozed through the South East of the City. We could have had Crossrail built by now for a fraction of the cost of this motorway, but sadly only Greens continue to make that case.

Finally, Glasgow's economy has taken a serious blow from the credit crunch and the recession, and people are understandably reluctant to back any of the parties who celebrated the risk-takers, backed the deregulators and handed over vast amounts of our money to the bankers. Pretending it all never happened isn't a long-term response to this crisis, nor is it a sustainable one.

So, let me be the first candidate to admit this election isn't in the bag for us, but we are part of the world's fastest-growing political movement, and we have confounded the naysayers who said we couldn't get MSPs, MEPs or Councillors elected. Sometime soon I'm confident we'll make that Westminster breakthrough, and people in Glasgow North East can be the first to deliver that radical change.

Willie Bain

I was delighted to welcome the Prime Minister to the constituency this afternoon.

Gordon and I visited North Glasgow College – a shining example of what Labour has achieved in the area. I’m proud that Gordon was so impressed with the building, and the opportunities that the college provides for people in my area.

It’s sad that some people want to talk down our community, but I think the college is a great example of the changes I have seen in my life here.

I’ve put some more information up on my website. The man in the photo with the Prime Minister is my dad (also Willie). He was really proud to meet the Prime Minister.

It was taken inside our campaign centre, which is in the old college building over the road from the new one. The building was opened by a former in 1909 by Earl Rosebery who was Prime Minister in the 1890s. The foyer contains a moving and sobering war memorial to the college students who died in the First World War.

So, after Days 1 and 2 of this endeavour, that's where we are:

Three posts by Willie Bain, one of which laden with ambiguous comments and innuendo which I can't properly brand as either positive or negative, one of which was basically a hatchet job, and the third fairly anodyne;

Two posts by David Kerr, one of which offering a point/counterpoint format - a negative point balanced by a contrasting positive one - followed by one that was mostly good news;

One post by Ruth Davidson, which was generally positive with the occasional dig;

One post by Eileen Baxendale, which was broadly positive with slightly more frequent digs;

And one rather bleak post by David Doherty, which seemed to identify a number of key problems but, to me, looked light on actual solutions.

Let's now see what the weekend brings...

MacNumpty on your Mobile

2009-11-03T20:50:00.002Z

Don't worry, I'm not hacking into your bluetooth, I've just registered with this new fad, so as to make it easier to read the blog on a phone.

Simply go here:

http://macnumpty.mofuse.mobi/

Of course, seeing as most of my posts are - how to put this? - rather comprehensive affairs, it'll still take a while to load, but comes with a lovely quick index of recent posts, and without all the bells and whistles that trying to load the web page comes with. So a rather nifty thing, I think.

The Sunday Whip

2009-11-01T16:33:00.002Z

The return to business at Holyrood was relatively quiet and broadly successful for the Government - doubtless energies are being conserved for the more severe battles to come. On Wednesday, the only matter to be decided save the Business Motions was the Teaching Council (Scotland) Act 1965 Modification Order 2009. This, like the Business Motions, was waved through.

Thursday saw a little more meat and quite a few absences: Labour's Shadow Climate Change Minister Cathie Craigie (Falkirk East), Helen Eadie (Lab, Dunfermline East), Patricia Ferguson (Lab, Glasgow Maryhill), Labour's Shadow Rural Development Minister Karen Gillon (Clydesdale), Hugh Henry (Lab, Paisley South), Labour's Shadow Housing Secretary Cathy Jamieson (Carrick, Cumnock & Doon Valley), Nanette Milne (Con, North East Scotland), Hugh O'Donnell (LD, Central Scotland), Labour's Shadow Public Health Minister Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland & Fife), Elaine Smith (Lab, Coatbridge & Chryston), and Labour's Shadow Finance Minister David Whitton (Strathkelvin & Bearsden).

They missed the waving through of the Marine (Scotland) Bill and its Financial Resolution. The only votes came on the SNP motion on the Scottish economy.

First came a Labour amendment, which fell by 67 votes to 48 with two abstentions. Voting against were the SNP, Tories, Margo, and four of the LibDems: Health Spokesman Ross Finnie (West of Scotland), Environment Spokesman Liam McArthur (Orkney), Finance Spokesman Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick & Lauderdale) and Culture Spokesman Iain Smith (North East Fife). The remaining LibDems voted in favour along with Labour, and the Greens abstained. I'm afraid I do not know whether the LibDem position on this vote was simply miscommunicated or whether a free vote was allowed, but the sight of the Finance Spokesman facing away from the Leader (and the majority of the Group) on an economic issue doesn't bode well. Similarly, the majority of Group members voting for an amendment that would render their own amendment incompetent is - well, it's a rather unorthodox tactic, let's just put it like that. I've slagged the LibDems off enough for one day.

Anyway. Next came the Tory amendment, which passed by 64 (SNP/Tory/Green) votes to 52 (Labour/LD) with one abstention (Margo). The LibDem amendment may as well have been struck off as it fell by 99 (SNP/Labour/Tory) votes to 18 (LD/Green/Margo), but was still less unsuccessful than the Green amendment, which fell by 114 (SNP/Labour/Tory/LD) votes to 3 (Green/Margo). The amended motion passed by 62 (SNP/Tory) votes to 54 (Labour/LD/Green) with one abstention (Guess who!):

That the Parliament recognises the impact of the recession on Scotland and notes the actions that the Scottish Government is taking to support jobs and communities, strengthen education and skills and invest in innovation and industries of the future to ensure that the nation is both protected from the worst of the downturn and well placed to take advantage of any recovery; further recognises the need to support existing and new businesses to create jobs; regrets the historic underperformance of the Scottish economy in new business creation; welcomes the positive and timely impact of the significant business rate reductions for small and medium-sized businesses and the Town Centre Regeneration Fund, and calls on the Scottish Government to work with all other levels of government and with the business community to do more to help raise the level of new business start-ups in Scotland.

So that was that. Next week we've got a debate on National Parks on Wednesday, Tory business on Thursday morning, and a debate on the Autumn Fisheries Negotiations on Thursday afternoon. Let's see what happens...

Has the meaning of 'Democrat' changed?

2009-11-01T10:22:00.003Z

Well, yesterday was, as we know, the super-secret meeting of LibDem High Command. Well, I'm over-dramatising there - it was the Scottish LibDem Conference and like all conferences, the shindig was members-only. So that in and of itself wasn't a big thing. But one of the matters being discussed was the independence referendum. This is what Stephen had to say beforehand:

If we had taken courage in our convictions that Scotland is better with a stronger parliament but within the UK we should have made sure that was asked of the people, either before 2007 or by getting involved with the SNP working on what we agree with and forming the words of their referendum White Paper so that it was not rigged. Giving the people the right to determine their own future is what we stand for.

In my opinion, and sadly many who may vote for us, what 2007 was a betrayal of was our party's constitution and the name Democrat that exists in our title. Calling those of this view a minority of rebels may prove dangerous, it often is a sign that the leadership is actually quite scared that they are losing the argument.

He also quoted the Scottish LibDem Constitution:

We [the Scottish Liberal Democrats] believe that sovereignty rests with the people and that authority in a democracy derives from them. We therefore acknowledge their right to determine the form of government best suited to their needs.

You'll notice - as he himself admits - that this principle jars somewhat with the LibDems' refusal to support a referendum. But, with the party's MEP, a key Parliamentary Candidate and a number of activists and even some MSPs making the call for the party to revise its approach, there was hope that the majority of LibDem supporters who want a referendum might just get their way.

But this is what Stephen had to say this morning:

Actually what came out of yesterday was that that the party was opposed to this particular referendum.

Ah! So self-determination and democracy only carry the day when you approve of the question that's being asked - marvellous!

But this is the problem. Here's the question that the SNP wants to ask:

I agree that the Scottish Government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of the United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state.

Stephen is under the impression that such a question is less than clear. Now the wording is long-winded - that's to prevent the Bill from falling foul of the Scotland Act, I believe - but take another look at the end of it: so that Scotland becomes an independent state. Seems pretty clear to me. It's in the indicative mood, FFS! The full question highlights process - negotiation - and result - an independent Scotland. To suggest that people might not understand what the conclusion of any negotiations would be following a hypothetical 'Yes' vote is akin to accusing the Scottish electorate of being illiterate. Read the question. The meaning is obvious when you do.

But, let's face it, the specific question isn't the issue. No question would be satisfactory, with the possible exception of: Do you honestly think that it would be better for Scotland if it were ripped kicking and screaming away from the rest of the UK, with a Berlin-esque wall erected between the Solway and Firth, TV signals from England blocked, your job and money sent South, and everyone forced to behave like they're on a shortbread tin?

The honest truth is that the LibDem Leadership's primary objection to the question is that people might answer 'Yes' to it.

And again, there's usually something said about the 'timing'. 2010, apparently is the wrong time to have this discussion. But let anyone who thinks that this issue will be re-visited after the next Holyrood election be under absolutely no illusion whatever: 2011 will be the wrong time. 2012 will be the 'wrong time'. So will 2013, 2014 and 2015. Whenever a referendum is proposed, it will be the wrong time for the Leadership.

So let's be realistic: when the LibDems say they don't have an objection to a referendum, the truth is that they will have an objection to any referendum proposed by the SNP. And there'll be no negotiation on the matter: rather from the get-go, Alex Salmond has been sufficiently careful to allow himself wiggle room so that he can negotiate a conclusion. Neither the wording nor the timing need be set in stone and the suggestion has always been made that a third option of extra powers for Holyrood (where the LibDems sit in terms of constitutional policy) could be offered. But no. There's never been any hope of negotiation. It's not 'this' referendum that's the problem at all. Any referendum on the subject will be 'this' referendum.

It was like that in the aftermath of the election. The LibDems wanted the SNP to ditch their key election pledge as a pre-requisite for negotiations - and there was me thinking that you had the negotiations specifically to discuss what policies did and didn't go forward! - then blamed the SNP for the talks not going ahead for not meeting an outrageous, impossible demand.

Then there was the Budget, when the LibDems refused to have any sort of talks about the Budget unless it included a 2% cut in Income Tax. Again, trying to get what they want before negotiations begin, and flouncing out when they couldn't say what budgets they'd cut to pay for it. Then when the Budget fell, they blamed the SNP for not negotiating after they made an impossible demand and refused to budge from that position.

It was the same on LIT, where instead of discussing the situation with the Government, they could have secured the variability they wanted. But instead, they just kept carping from the sidelines then blaming the Government when it was obvious that a Bill just couldn't progress.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the LibDems remind me of that snotty-nosed little brat you knew at Primary School (there's one at every school), who'd grab your arm and move is so that it hit another part of you, all the time whining, "Why are you hitting yourself?", until eventually (in most cases) they did it to the wrong kid and ended up dangling from the school railings by their underpants.

But let's look at a wider point - all of the references to the Bill go along the lines of Alex Salmond's Referendum Bill. Note how it's personalised. But in every reference the LibDems make to the FM or the Governemtn, there's an element of contempt which I just don't get when on so many issues the two parties sing from the same hymn sheet.

They want fairer local taxation. So do the SNP. They hated the idea of tuition fees. So do the SNP. They want a fairer voting system - and the timing is perfect to discuss that element of the constitution, apparently - and so do the SNP. They want the troops to come home from Iraq and Afghanistan. So do the SNP. They want a fairer pension. So do the SNP. They're horrified at the erosion of civil liberties under Labour. So are the SNP. They wanted bridge tolls abolished. So did the SNP. They want a nuclear-free Scotland. So do the SNP.

And yet, for all that, this row over the constitution - which is supposed to be a needless distraction according to the LibDems - is blown up into such a gulf that the Liberal Democrats despise the SNP with a passion bordering on instability to the extent that they'd prefer to work with Labour.

So for all of their so-called principles, they'd rather work with the party of the unfair Council Tax, of tuition fees, of a rigged voting system, of bridge tolls, of PFI, of ID cards and detention without trial, of nuclear power stations and Trident, of Afghanistan and Iraq.

And what did they get? STV in Council Elections (I can just hear householders all over Scotland saying "I'm skinning myself for Council Tax again but at least my vote for my local Councillors actually counts!"); tolls abolished on just the Skye Bridge - it was a legal loophole that saw them abolished on the Erskine Brige - but no movement on the East Coast bridges until the SNP came to power; and a fudge on tuition fees, which saw the payment due date move back and for a lot of people, could have actually seen them pay more than they would have done upfront (for example, my upfront tuition fee bill came to £250 in First Year, £100 in Second Year, and nothing thereafter). Again, it took an SNP Government to abolish them. And when the LibDems had a chance to demand LIT, they didn't bother, yet now they blame the SNP for not implementing it when it couldn't get majority support in the Chamber, and claim they're the only people who genuinely want LIT despite not lifting a finger for it in 1999 or 2003.

There's a pattern emerging: for illiberal, undemocratic Labour, the Liberal Democrats will drop their keks, but they'll nail them to the mast when dealing with the SNP, to the extent that they'll try and find a way of worming out of a policy that even their supporters are calling for. And yet their supporters will swallow it.

So the Liberal Democrats will continue that "betrayal of the party's constitution and the name Democrat" as long as living up to it would mean working constructively with the SNP - no matter how many key figures within the Party they have to slap down.

But I suppose we should be grateful that there have been no expulsions over the matter: Neil Craig knows what happens when you say things the party establishment doesn't find comfortable. So do Martin Ford and Debra Storr.

Booting out people who disagree with the established view, and denying the Scottish people a say on their own future - some Democrats!

I'm sure we could have them under the Trades Descriptions Act...

Labour Reshuffle

2009-10-28T19:58:00.003Z

Whilst struck down with the manflu, I saw that Iain Gray has re-shuffled his team. I confess that at first I thought that it was a hallucination - much like the time I was delirious with food poisoning and ended up thinking I was Gordon Brown, tottering around the house mumbling about how I was going to "sort out that bitch Cherie" - only to find that, no, this was real.

In a way, it resembles the old style Executive in that it has a plethora of senior posts. Though interestingly, the demands I seem to recall for a Minister for Economic Recovery - surely still quite relevant while the UK is still in recession - have translated into the Economy & Skills portfolio actually being absorbed by Andy Kerr's finance role. Perhaps Kerr and his Deputy, David Whitton, were under-occupied. Instead, we have a new Housing and Regeneration portfolio and one is forced to wonder what snappy title it will make way for next year when Labour finally realise that criticising a government for not paying attention to housing issues doesn't work if they're the first government since devolution to, you know, actually build new council houses. But given Labour's care and attention to the (now former) Economy and Skills portfolio, we must be wary of any notion from the Labour frontbench that housing has become a genuine priority, and should - for now - work from the basis that this is just a passing fad for Iain Gray and next year's reshuffle will see a Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Check Shirts appointed in place of this post.

Finance, Economy & Skills

Andy Kerr remains at the top here, with David Whitton as his Number 2, Lewis Macdonald still at Enterprise, Energy and Tourism and Charlie Gordon returning to the frontbench as Shadow Transport Minister, the post from which he resigned at the start of Wendy Alexander's troubles. A harbinger, perhaps?

Education

Charlie Gordon's successor and predecessor at Transport, Des McNulty, replaces Rhona Brankin who is stepping down, though will still be formulating policy. It's a significant promotion for Des, who will be leading the attack on Fiona Hyslop - who the opposition do seem to enjoy attacking and who has been derided as the "worst Education Minister ever" - a somewhat harsh assessment of a Cabinet Secretary who finally got around to abolishing tuition fees and who did not preside over any exam result fiasco unlike Sam Galbraith. Though, interestingly, he's now chosen to blame Hnry McLeish. But I digress. The rest of the support team remains as is: Ken McIntosh at Schools, Claire Baker at Further and Higher Education, Karen Whitefield at Children & Early Years. So with those three and Rhona Brankin still drafting the actual policies, it's not entirely clear what Des McNulty will be doing with his time.

Health & Wellbeing

A return to the front bench for Jackie Baillie, who was sacked when Iain Gray first took over. Richard Simpson remains at Public Health and Frank McAveety at Sport.

Housing and Regeneration

Cathy Jamieson takes over at Labour's primary focus for synthetic outrage over the coming year, in which her first task will be to choose between supporting a Thatcherite policy like Right to Buy, or supporting the SNP Government. Mary Mulligan remains Shadow Minister for Housing, which does muddy the job description waters somewhat.

Justice

Richard Baker stays (does he have dodgy photos of Iain Gray in his desk, or something?). Let me explain why this is a mistake: Kenny MacAskill was faced with the toughest decision a Justice Secretary could ever have faced, was placed in a no-win situation, made a choice which, whatever your feelings on the matter, did lead to a major outcry and almost an international incident, and despite being in a minority Government which was outnumbered and outvoted on this issue in the Chamber, he's still the Justice Secretary. This basically makes Richard Baker the Chris Iwelumo of politics and he too remains in situ. His new Community Safety Spokesman is James Kelly, who moves from the Whips' Office.

Rural Affairs and Environment

Sarah Boyack stays here, with Elaine Murray staying as Shadow Environment Minister, Karen Gillon staying at Rural Development (though with maternity leave and illness keeping her out of the loop for a large part of last year, this is, in effect, a new appointment). A new Climate Change portfolio is added (clearly Gray is not confident in Charlie Gordon speaking on this issue as Des McNulty did) with Cathy Craigie filling the role.

The others

Pauline McNeill stays at Culture and the Constitution, John Park loses his portfolio but remains in the Shadow Cabinet as the party's campaign manager, Michael McMahon becomes Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Local Government - thus creating a set of posts that map on to neither the Cabinet nor the Parliamentary Committee structure - and Paul Martin replaces him as Business Manager. David Stewart remains as Chief Whip, with Rhoda Grant and Cathy Craigie supporting him. And of course, Johann Lamont retains her Deputy Leader position.

So what can we say about this revised front bench? Not a lot. It's larger than ever, and despite that, Iain Gray's warm words for Wendy Alexander weren't matched by a job. This is particularly telling as at this stage in the last Holyrood cycle, John Swinney was brought back onto the SNP front bench as Finance Spokesman after a year as a Committee Convener having brought his Leadership of the Party to a close.

We can't trust the realignment of portfolios as a guide to the party's priorities, as the last 'priority' portfolio has been subsumed into Andy Kerr's post.

And there are few new faces (though it's taken Cathy Peattie and Cathie Craigie ten years to get this far), but that would be hard when the full team consists of more than half of the entire SPLP. That problem is further exacerbated when you look at how other figures are ruled out: there are 25 posts in total - 28 if you count the whips and 29 if you count Tom McCabe as the Labour representative on the SPCB - and a total of 46 Labour MSPs.

Wendy Alexander is apparently still frozen out, as is Jack McConnell. That reduces the pool to 44. Trish Godman as Deputy Presiding Officer is also ruled out. That's 43. Rhona Brankin has just stood down citing family reasons, so that's 42. Hugh Henry and Irene Oldfather are Conveners of key Committees - Public Audit and the European and External Relations Committees respectively, though that doesn't preclude Public Petitions Committee Convener Frank McAveety from being a frontbencher - so that's 40. Malcolm Chisholm has been pretty much blackballed since speaking out in favour of Kenny MacAskill over Lockerbie so that's 39. Margaret Curran wants to go to the House of Commons while George Foulkes is already in the House of Lords so that's 37. Duncan McNeil is Convener of the SPLP so a frontbench portfolio is probably out of the question, even though a Committee Convenership isn't. That's 36. Ill health precludes the possibility of Peter Peacock returning to the front bench, and that's probably true of Elaine Smith as well. That leaves just 34. So I can only imagine that Bill Butler, Helen Eadie, Patricia Ferguson, Marlyn Glen and Marilyn Livingstone are somewhat put out. And even then, at least Patricia Ferguson used to be a Minister and Marilyn Livingsone was the first SPLP Convener. That leaves just three figures - Butler, Eadie and Glen - out in the void.

That's the only thing we can tell: efficiency is supposed to be Labour's big thing but their team is far too large, covering more than half of the Parliamentary group and only a small handful of members with neither a position nor an obvious reason not to have one. It's also ridiculously sized when you realise that the smaller parties cope well enough with their 16 members apiece and the SNP produced a credible alternative government-in-waiting (we know this because it is no longer waiting) with just over half the number of MSPs available to Labour.

It's also particularly barking mad when you realise that the SNP have just one MSP more than Labour, have the 13 Parliamentary Liaison Officer posts to fill in addition to 16 Ministers, three Whips, a DPO, a number of Committee Conveners and a member of the SPCB, have three former Ministers on their benches but have seven MSPs - two more than Labour - on what could be called the waiting list.

The oversized Labour frontbench means that even if Iain Gray wanted to bring in new talent, there isn't any available to him as the people he does have are already in position. Perversely, therefore, he has to cut the number of posts and await the election. And of course, the fact that not all of these people will get something should he get to name a Government means that while he might be trying (and able) to please everyone now, sooner or later, he's going to have to piss someone off and he's leaving it too late. He's just deferring slightly awkward personnel decisions - which begs the question of how he'll handle the more important matters. Perhaps he should keep using the subjunctive to describe how he'd behave if he were FM.

Mev, p'tahk!

2009-10-28T19:06:00.002Z

Well, this has got me off my sick bed: nominations for the Glasgow NE By-Election have closed and we have learned that Mev Brown is on the candidates' list. Here's his political CV up to now:

5 May 2005 - Westminster Election. Tory Candidate in Edinburgh East. He came fourth out of eight, with 4,093 votes (10.31%).

29 September 2005 - Livingston By-Election. Independent candidate. He came eighth out of ten, with 108 votes (0.37%).

10 November 2005 - Murrayfield By-Election (City of Edinburgh Council). UKIP candidate. He came eighth out of eight, behind even the Liberal candidate - and I mean Liberal Party candidate , as they had a candidate besides the LibDem - with just four votes (0.2%)

27 April 2006 - Moray By-Election. NHSFirst candidate. He came fifth out of fifth with a slightly more respectable 493 (1.8%) votes.

3 May 2007 - Holyrood Election. #1 on the NHS First List - having agreed an electoral tie-up with Scottish Voice which saw him drop his plan to stand in Lothian. They came thirteenth out of sixteen, with 1,955 votes (0.69%). He also stood in Airdrie & Shotts, where he came fifth out of five with 970 votes (3.57%).

4 June 2009 - European Election. #3 on the Jury Team List in Scotland. They came thirteenth out of thirteen with 6,257 votes (0.57%).

And that list doesn't convey the alleged attempted hook-up with the SSCUP (they knocked him back), his intervention on the scotsman.com comments section, his presence on policing forums asking for policies, the presence of his party mildly pissing off a genuine health campaigner whose candidacy for Coatbridge had been declared about a year in advance of the election, and two differing biography pages on his websites.

So with the Jury Team backing John Smeaton this time, Mev begins another stage in his quixotic journey through the footnotes of electoral history.

Incidentally, mev is Klingon for 'stop'. I'm not sure whether I want him to or not...

My tupp'orth on the BNP

2009-10-24T21:50:00.006+01:00

Let me begin this post by saying that I rarely watch Question Time. I don't find anything out from it that I can't find out from the blogosphere, which, frankly, tends to put things far better. Spending an hour listening to politicians ignore questions from a studio audience and basically say what they were going to anyway - and have said often enough beforehand - is, quite frankly, some distance down my list of fun ways to spend a Thursday night in. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if the choice were between gouging my own eyes out with a pair of matchsticks and watching QT, I'd ask whether the matchsticks were lit or not. So it was mostly out of morbid curiosity that I tuned in on Thursday night.

I needn't have bothered.

And the reason for that is that we didn't learn anything that we didn't otherwise know. The other parties hate the BNP. We knew this. Were one to analyse Nick Griffin's demeanour and opinions, one would conclude that he is the result of some sort of genetic splicing experiment involving the DNA of Adolf Hitler and Richard Nixon. With maybe some Richard Littlejohn and Jeremy Clarkson thrown in just for the hell of it. Again, nothing new there.

Besides, looking at the reaction, it seems as though everyone saw what they wanted to see. Those already hostile to him saw a fascist bully out of his comfort zone, weakened by his smarter opponents (this was definitely true whenever Bonnie Greer spoke). Those already sympathetic saw a man victimised by the rest of the studio, David Dimbleby et al representing an Establishment bent on suppressing him. Those few undecideds saw a bunch of politicians squabbling and Griffin failing miserably to deal with any question put. Certainly the guys in my local, who you'd think would be the kind of people Griffin would speak to, were not impressed.

But for me, the rest of the panel, in their urge to kick the shit out of Griffin, missed the killer blow. He referred to a poll which suggested that three quarters of the public agree with the BNP's stance on immigration. Bonnie Greer snorted with derision, but no one thought to ask the question that would have felled him:

If so many people agree with you on immigration, why aren't you in Downing Street already?

And of course, none of the answers to that are good for Nick Griffin. Barring any paranoid rants about media suppression, there are three possible responses: first, the poll is bogus; second, there's about 70% of the population who might well agree with the BNP but find the whole party package so repugnant that they won't actually vote for it; third, that many people may well be unhappy about immigration, but to put it bluntly, they don't actually care that much in the grand scheme of things as they have other, more practical, more immediate things to worry about.

Those possibilities need not be mutually exclusive, but I suspect that Griffin himself will probably own up to the third, and possibly, to some degree, the second, given how much time he spent trying to assure us that because of him, the BNP was almost respectable. Of course, respectable parties don't get people frothing at the mouth to the extent that they're willing to riot outside a television station that invites them before the cameras, but that's by the by.

No, the BNP's speciality is going into communities that have been left behind, taken for granted by the other parties and left basically to rot, cut off from the main centres of power and left to feel that any vote is a wasted vote. So when the BNP come in, like the proverbial new broom, of course they're going to get noticed by people who, frankly, haven't been noticed by anyone else in years.

And I should know about that frustration: I spent a large chunk of my childhood on one of those council estates that had basically been left to fall apart. The sort of place where the BNP could very easily sneak in.

Except, at that time certainly, and even today, the BNP couldn't gain much traction as there was no immigrant community to play the locals off against. I must have been seven before I actually met someone who wasn't white.

That was Mr. Singh, who my Dad found a job with at the time. And unlike his previous job - where when the boss finally did get round to paying him, the wages consisted of a chicken breast, three tins of beans and a pair of size 10 boots - Dad actually brought cash money home from it. But he wasn't just treated like he'd joined Mr. Singh's business. No, we were all treated like we'd joined his family. My parents got an invite to his daughter's wedding; when Dad called to see him, I went too, and I'd be invited into the house and play with his younger kids, who were about my age.

So you can give me Mr. Singh's enterprise and hospitality over Griffin's vile scapegoating any day of the year.

But my point is this: the immigrant, ethnic minority population were a lifeline for my family, not a drain. Immigration and ethnic minorities had nothing to do with the grim situation we found ourselves in beforehand - and that's doubtless true of the communities where the BNP have been successful as well: the problems people face will go back decades and will now be shared by the same people that the BNP vilify.

That's the truth that the BNP don't want you to hear. The problems that those potential BNP voters face existed long before any wave of immigration, and they won't be solved by any wave of deportation either. The BNP's core principles won't make anyone's lives any better. And they know it just as well as anyone.

Which is why they concentrate on the broken fences, the burnt-out street lights, the pot holes, the litter and the dog shit. And before you know it, you've actually voted for them not because you're racist or because you fear immigration but because they're the only people who've ever done anything useful for you.

The moral of this post is this: QT didn't legitimise Nick Griffin or his viewpoints. If that's been done at all, it's been done by the thousands of people who have voted BNP. He's spent a week in the media spotlight, facing all sorts of criticism and responding with a melange of evasion and paranoia. He wanted to talk about the issues of the day on television (is racism not an issue of the day?), but even if he had, would his performance have assured people that he and his party could be trusted to sort out the postal strike, or get the economy out of recession. Judging by the fact that he's spent his week in the sun ranting about Churchill and re-writing the history books, I'd say he couldn't get the economy out of a paper bag.

But just as I don't trust him to sort out the problems I see, so those who voted BNP don't trust the other parties to sort out their problems. And that's the real nut to crack. You don't fight fascism by storming television stations that broadcast views you don't agree with (as Orwell might have said, the viewers looked from UAF to the BNP, from the BNP to UAF, and from UAF to the BNP again, but already it was impossible to tell which was which). You don't respond to fascist parties by sending bovver boys to break up their events - if you do that, you've sunk to their level and they have won.

You don't win the argument against them by flouncing off the stage either. As always, it's positive messages that win out, and in this case, real actions. If mainstream parties want to get these people who've voted BNP back, they need to treat them like mainstream communities, and deliver actual, concrete positive change to their lives in the way that they haven't done before.

Blanking the BNP hasn't worked - they've got enough elected officials to prove that. Screaming at them hasn't worked. Debating them can at least stop the rot, and show people that whoever does have the answers, the BNP certainly do not. But if you really want to beat the BNP, you do it by going directly to the people, and taking steps to make their lives better. We can all stand here and preach moral superiority all we want but if we've allowed whole communities to fall by the wayside, then we have no moral high ground at all as our action (or rather, inaction) has caused such suffering and desperation that people now turn to the likes of Nick Griffin.

And the longer we leave it, the longer we spend whinging about the BNP rather than actually tackling the poverty and frustrations of people who've been left on the margins, the harder it'll be to win them over, and the more embedded the BNP will become.

The reality is that the BNP will never offer solutions to people's actual problems. The mainstream parties can, but they have to start doing so. That's how we beat them.

In which Yousuf has a hissy fit

2009-10-19T17:30:00.005+01:00

And I don't ever want to hear people like Will or others complain that Labour are negative when their campaign strategy has no positive reason to vote SNP at all.

Thus spake Yousuf Hamid, Labour activist, general good egg, and usually quite smart. Smarter than this, anyway.

Because here's the thing, as his party colleague Kez Dugdale said this week:

In fact, most of the leaflet is spent defending the SNP Government - talking about their justice and policing policies.

So in his rush for the high horse, Yousuf clearly hasn't been paying attention to what's actually going on around him. And the mad part is this: the SNP have been in Government for two and a half years - a full decade less than Labour - and yet has a record it feels confident that it can stand on. Indeed, the press release unveiling David Kerr is pretty positive in tone. So if Yousuf wants a positive reason to vote SNP, here's one of many: SNP MPs will do whatever they can to prevent any Government of any hue cutting the Scottish Budget and putting those benefits and that progress at risk. Labour - and Tory - MPs will spend this Parliament and the next one attempting to explain why their ham-fisted economic policies and scramble to defend bankers should jeopardise measures designed to ease the lives of ordinary, hard-pressed men, women and children.

But Labour are reduced to defending the indefensible and waving the Tory stick about. My, how Yousuf has grasped it!

Of course, if Labour's record were that good, we'd be hearing all about it, I'm sure. If what Yousuf says about the SNP not offering positive reasons to vote were right, there wouldn't be people in Glasgow North East - like the first voter David Kerr spoke to on the campaign trail - who have decided to vote for the SNP for the first time next month.

Instead, we have that old chestnut: "Vote SNP, Get Tory". It's nothing less than a lie: this is a By-Election and the loss of Glasgow North East will not even cost Gordon Brown his majority, let alone put David Cameron into Downing Street. The only David that could gain from an SNP vote is David Kerr. I assume that Yousuf knows this, but has chosen to peddle the fib anyway.

And of course, this leaflet comes in the week when the SNP announce a plan to reverse one of the Tories' most devastating policies - which Labour did nothing to counter-act - in Right to Buy: a savage embodiment of the "Me first!" culture that Thatcher promoted, in which people who benefited from affordable, social housing have been permitted to snatch that right away from others who might need it, increasing the snobbish stigma around rented properties, making affordable housing for others harder to get, and forcing them to take their chances in the private sector. Getting rid of that disgusting pillar of the Society of the Self is the single most progressive thing to happen in any part of the UK since the creation of the National Health Service. And it's been done by an SNP Government.

So when Yousuf whines that protecting affordable social housing isn't progressive - he's wrong.

When he says that a vote for David Kerr is a vote for David Cameron - he's wrong.

When he says that the SNP offer no positive reason to vote for them - he's wrong.

When he says that it's perfectly all right for Labour (and himself) to mislead people in their campaign of spite and negativity, as opposed to offering a defence of their twelve years in office, or some sort of hope for the future - he's wrong.

And if he thinks that Labour losing votes, losing seats and losing power is the fault of anyone other than the Labour Party, for taking so many people for granted and letting so many people down, people that Labour was founded to look out for - then he is very much wrong!

And with all that misinformation, this high horse that he's found? Well, it turns out it's an ass.

Conference Call: Revved Up and Ready to Go

2009-10-18T19:14:00.004+01:00

Well, that was that. For me, I leave Inverness having handed in a membership form for the Electoral Reform Society and having acquired a Membership Card for the SNP Trade Union Group, so I'd chalk that up as successful on that level, at least.

As regards the Party, I'd say this was the sort of Conference needed around six months before an Election: no rows, no fiascos, just the membership coming together in a positive mood, ready for the campaign ahead.

Indeed, what the Press did attempt to inflate into a row - the debate over the Euro - really didn't justify the hyperbole it got. Think about the Tory discomfort over Lisbon, and the splits that ripped apart the Conservatives in the 1990s. Think about Tony Blair's supposed enthusiasm for the Single Currency being suppressed by Gordon Brown. Think about the 1975 Common Market Referendum, when collective responsibility was set aside and Cabinet members could campaign however they wished on the idea of whether or not the UK should even remain in the EEC.

So, really, the SNP position was pretty harmonious and this weekend, members were broadly happy to support the adoption of the Euro as an independent Scotland's currency. The only question was the 'how' and the 'when'. There again, Conference was generally happy to accept a measure of caution: that conditions have to be right (which makes sense) and that there has to be a referendum on the matter (which is also wise as the SNP wants a referendum on independence and wanted one on Lisbon, so to suddenly adopt the Euro without so much as a by-your-leave would, frankly, make not one jot of sense and I can envisage Labour press releases declaring that the Party that wants an independence vote wants to drag Scotland kicking and screaming into the Euro).

All in all, then, tails are up. There's no complacency, no dejection or desperation, just excitement and drive. Most of the people in the hall are straining at the leash for the campaign to come. If that energy can be sustained all the way through to next Spring, the SNP are on track to do very, very well indeed.

A Green Gain

2009-10-14T09:47:00.003+01:00

As of yesterday, Councillor Debra Storr (one of the Aberdeenshire Four) followed in Martin Ford's footsteps and joined the Greens, though she'll remain in the Democratic Independent Group on the Council. Even so, that gives Aberdeenshire two Green Councillors out of ten nationwide, making Aberdeenshire something of a Green growth area, even if the new officials are coming from defections.

The thing that the LibDems need to be worried about is this: while it is obviously the Trump affair - and the LibDem group's handling of internal dissent surrounding the future of the Menie Estate (which is why they have only themselves to blame for this) - that triggered the move, this may well alert present LibDem supporters to the possibility that the party is less in tune with their values than they thought, and that the Greens are a more logical destination. Certainly as the LibDems professionalise and try to look more like a mainstream party of potential power than a pressure group for - and I apologise for the old stereotype here - beardy sandal-wearers, those who would be more inclined to tell Donald Trump where to stick his golf course, regardless of their facial hair situation or choice of footwear, will have difficulty recognising the LibDems at this time and may feel less than comfortable in the party.

And this is what they want to watch out for: although we can't work out how people might have voted under other circumstances, looking at the swing to the SNP in Dundee East in 2003, where there was neither a strong independent nor an SSP candidate, then looking at the swings against the SNP in the Regional Vote that year, it's not too great a leap to suggest that the SSP under Tommy Sheridan cost John Swinney's SNP about a quarter of the support it could otherwise have got.

If the Greens manage to take a quarter of potential LibDem support in Scotland, the party has a problem next year. For quickness, i've resorted to using Electoral Calculus, but using their present predictions for the Scottish consituencies, and subtracting a quarter of the projected LibDem vote, we see that potential LibDem gain Aberdeen South would stay Labour, while four other seats that the LibDems would hold on the present projection would be lost: West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine and Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk to the Tories, and Gordon and Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey to the SNP. So the defection of two Aberdeenshire Councillors has the potential - and I emphasise that potential is all it is - cost the LibDems their two Aberdeenshire MPs.

Then there's 2011. James is excited at the prospect of the North East once again sending a Green to Holyrood. That might not be the only one. If nothing else were to change, other than a loss of a quarter of the LibDem Regional Vote to the Greens (a Scotland-wide swing of approximately 2.8%), the results for the LibDems would be a major problem.

Firstly, that Green North East MSP would be a reality, at the expense of Alison McInnes, the LibDem North East MSP. But the Greens would end up with one MSP in each region, with differing results:

In East Central Scotland, it would be a straight swap: Hugh O'Donnell out, a Green in.

In Glasgow, the LibDem fall in support would cost Robert Brown his seat, which would be gained by the SNP.

The Greens would cost Labour a seat in the Highlands and Islands, as they did in 2003.

Lothian would, unless the Greens started to field constituency candidates in Edinburgh, be the only region to see no change on the notional figures.

the Greens would cost the Tories an MSP in Mid Scotland & Fife.

Labour would lose a notional Regional MSP in South Scotland.

And the Greens would replace Ross Finnie in West Central Scotland.

What this means is that the LibDems would have no MSPs at either Constituency or Regional level in three of the eight regions: East and West Central, and Glasgow. When you add to that to the gaps created where the LibDems have Constituency MSPs but no Regional ones (the Highlands, Lothian, Mid Scotland & Fife and the North East on this projection), that's a lot of constituencies without LibDem representation: in 54 out of 73 notional Constituencies, a LibDem vote will not result in any kind of LibDem MSP - that's exactly three times the number of Constituencies on the new boundaries that won't have access to a Liberal Democrat at Holyrood. By contrast, the Greens, on this supposition, would achieve Scotland-wide representation with one MSP in every Region, despite winning fewer votes and seats than the LibDems. That must surely be a galling notion for the Liberal Democrats.

What I'm trying to say is that a couple of Aberdeenshire Councillors falling out with the LibDems over Donald Trump might not seem like a big deal, but if the idea that current LibDem supporters have, as Martin Ford and Debra Storr feel, a more comfortable home in the Green Party, then the impact they have on the LibDems (and other parties) certainly is a big deal. And the onus is on the LibDems to find a way of keeping the supporters they currently have - before they too are lost.

UPDATE The above figures were worked out on a straight LD-Green swing of 2.8%. Ironically, one quarter of the present LibDem support in each individual region would be better for them, even though some of the swings would be far heavier. On a more localised analysis, Messrs, O'Donnell, Brown and Finnie would retain their seats, and the Greens would not gain an MSP in those regions, but they would cost Labour an MSP in both the Highlands and South Scotland, the Tories an MSP in Mid Scotland & Fife and would eject Alison McInnes. So the biggest casualties of a Green resurgence from LibDem votes could end up being Labour. But the threat to the LibDems is still very real, especially in the upcoming FPP election, even if the Greens aren't the winners from that!

Patrick Hannan RIP

2009-10-12T11:12:00.002+01:00

A few months ago, I received a copy of Patrick Hannan's latest book, A Useful Fiction: Adventures in British Democracy. I wasn't entirely sure what to make of it, but was quite sure that a second edition wouldn't be far behind.

Unfortunately, BBC Wales reports that the work will be his last: he has died at the age of 68, after a short illness. At a time when Welsh politics is in a state of flux, with a new First Minister in the way, with a One Wales Coalition, and uncertainty over what precisely the future holds for the constitutional status of Wales, this is one bad, bad time to lose one of the country's most authoritative voices. But that is what Welsh journalists and Welsh audiences must now face up to - when politics is at its most chaotic, they're missing someone who could help them make sense of it all. Try and imagine a Scotland without Brian Taylor, and I think that's the broad equivalent of where Welsh political reporting is today.

Condolences to his family, friends and colleagues.

Vote Labour, Get Tory Policies

2009-10-12T09:53:00.003+01:00

Jeff has flagged up the new Labour campaign: 'Vote SNP, Get Tory'. I've already taken a look at whether or not that's actually possible without Labour's own failing taking a share of the blame, and mentioned the obvious implication that Tories are bad.

Which is why it's a little bit rich coming from a Labour party that has spent twelve and a half years emulating Tory governments.

Labour abolished the fifty-year-long principle of free education by introducing tuition fees, then introduced variability to the fees a few years later.

They propagated the idea of a two-tier NHS with the Foundation hospital model and maintained the idea of the internal market using the buzzword 'choice' - which seemed to involve cutting services.

Their spin doctors used 9/11 as a 'take out the trash day', then a row between spin doctors ended up overshadowing a royal funeral.

They celebrated the relentless march of easy credit and unsustainable growth, which led to the Credit Crunch and saw entire banks fail.

They privatised the Air Traffic Control System, and waited for several fatal train crashes before doing anything about the Tories' botched privatisation of the rail network.

Even now, they're still looking for family silver to sell and the Channel Tunnel and the Tote are next for the clearout. Even student loans are getting sold off.

They made fraudulent expense claims - like Elliot Morley getting money for a mortgage he'd paid off ages ago - and only bothered to put right any of the damage when they got caught - a hallmark of the latter years of the Tory Government (say what you like about Alex Salmond's food bill... at least he bought the food in the first place!)

We had the image of John Prescott cavorting around his grace and favour home, and David Blunkett's indiscretion.

We had Anne McGuire presiding over the running down of Remploy, closing 28 sheltered employment sites at a cost of 2,000 jobs for disabled workers. That's not protecting vulnerable people, that's hitting those who can't fight back, and not even Thatcher stooped so low as to twist the knife there.

Then last but not least, they dragged us into the mess that was Iraq - and even fabricated a pretext for a naked war of aggression!

So Labour can crow all they want about the Tories, but their Government has been a carbon copy of a Tory Government. Voting Labour might not get you a Government run by the Tory Party, but since 1997, it's got you one practising Tory policies.

The Old Firm and the SPL

2009-10-11T21:40:00.003+01:00

As my old friend Rob has noted, that old chestnut of the Old Firm heading for the English setup is back. Again. Now, in many ways this fact is probably the biggest argument in favour of letting Rangers and Celtic move as it means that the back pages of Scottish newspapers need never again be filled with such tedious handwringing. But on a more serious level, I'm not sure it's all it's cracked up to be:

Firstly, there's the idea of stadium capacity. Celtic can fit 60,000 into their ground and Rangers more than 50,000 but Newcastle United had the third-largest stadium capacity in last year's Premiership. They now have the largest ground in the Championship, so the lesson we can draw from Newcastle (and the lesson that the Glasgow teams would do well to remember) is that gate receipts don't determine the league table.

Plus which, the main rationale for the OF heading for England would be to compete better in Europe. Now, let's see: the English Premiership is dominated by the Big 4 - Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool - with Man City using their new found wealth to break into that rather cosy cartel. It's rather similar to the Old Firm's dominance of the SPL, except no one is as yet seriously advocating that the major teams up sticks and move to a European SuperLeague where they don't have to slum it at places like the Reebok Stadium. Anyway, the English League is allocated four Champions' League places and three Europa League places - so that's five of the seven European spots - including all the CL spots - filled before the Old Firm even get a sniff. That's just two left and the OF will face tough competition for them from Spurs, Aston Villa and even Everton in a good year. And if you think that the Old Firm have a snowball's chance in Hell against the Big 4/5 in a competitive environment, just bear in mind what happened to Celtic against Arsenal: they found themselves in the position that Wigan usually end up in against the major teams - with the notable exception of the Latics' 3-1 victory over Chelsea last month, of course. Now, the Wigan model is fine for clubs like, well, Wigan. Or Reading. Or Hull before Phil Brown's canoe plunged over the edge of Lunacy Falls. Or Burnley. It should not be a consideration for the Old Firm. Ever. A move South wouldn't be a ticket to a better Champions' League performance, but a passport to mid-table obscurity and a season that has fizzled out by March.

Then there's the effect on the other 10 SPL teams. With money tight - so tight that Aberdeen couldn't sign anyone of note this Summer - every penny counts and it's a question of bums on seats.

Pittodrie's highest attendance last season was against Rangers - 20,441 and more than 7,000 higher than the average. Tannadice's highest gate was the Helicopter Sunday title decider against Rangers: 14,077 and 5,000 greater than average. Rugby Park saw almost double the average gate turn up to see them play Rangers. The closest thing to a capacity crowd that the Falkirk Stadium saw last season was against Rangers. 4,000 greater than the average gate turned up at Fir Park when Rangers were away to Motherwell. Inverness CT's highest gate came against Celtic. And the closest thing to full that New Douglas Park got was the Rangers game. So out of ten non-OF clubs, seven saw their highest gates come against the Old Firm. Of the other three, two grounds saw their highest gates for the Edinburgh derby, while St. Mirren Park got its highest gate for the new stadium's official opening.

But the clubs can't open a new stadium every week, so with the exception of the Edinburgh derby, the implication is clear: Old Firm games = ticket sales. That's part of the reason that the SPL insists on teams playing each other at least three occasions. That means extra visits from the big boys, and extra gate receipts. That's something the other clubs might want to bear in mind before they start muttering 'Good riddance'. And that's before you ask just how easy it would be to market an Old Firm-free SPL for TV rights. You think the Sky/ESPN deal was crap? Enjoy your slot on BBC Alba, kicking off at 3:15 on a Sunday, with the second half clashing with the main Super Sunday fixture on Sky.

Then there's the old chestnut that the Old Firm hoover up the talent from the other clubs, particularly Hearts and Hibs. Except that since the 2008 Summer transfer window, only two players have gone to Glasgow from another SPL club: Willo Flood - who was on loan to Dundee United from Cardiff anyway - and Lukasz Zaluska. Hibs lost as many players to Berwick Rangers in the last transfer window alone as the entire SPL-10 did to Celtic and Rangers in the last two combined. Right now, the Championship is the main destination for players - if they're lucky - and that'll still be the case wherever the Old Firm play.

And as for the Old Firm? Well, as Rob points out, they wouldn't be wise to buy the likes of Novo or Flood and would have to set their sights a little higher. Unfortunately, such players are the best they can afford. Celtic are treading water and Rangers are still in debt, and while they'd get more TV money in the Premiership, that would be offset by the loss of European income in the time it took to assemble a squad that could compete for a European place, and even then, they'd still be outgunned by the Big 5. There'd be a gulf between what they needed and what they could get, and their only hope would be to emulate Steve Bruce's scouting network and poach someone from Peru or El Salvador.

Then there's the famous 'Welsh Precedent' or 'Liechtenstein Principle'. What the latter overlooks is that Lichtenstein doesn't even have a league of its own - only a cup, which is nearly always won by FC Vaduz, who got relegated from the Swiss top flight last season. Even the Welsh Precedent overlooks the fact that the modern Welsh setup was put in place a century after its English counterpart, so UEFA hasn't as yet had to deal with a club quitting their existing national set up for someone else's - usually, the reverse is true. But with the Welsh Premier League now running, how has playing in England been for those who stayed behind?

Cardiff and Swansea have done OK out of things: the former is well established in the Championship - and can poach a number of SPL players - but the Premiership remains just tantalisingly out of reach. Swansea are in the Championship and are doing OK for themselves, albeit missing Roberto Martinez. As for the others, Wrexham are now in the Conference, and are lucky to remain in existence after a turbulent couple of years off the pitch. Newport County are plying their trade in the Conference South, Colwyn Bay have eschewed the Welsh League for the glitz and glamour of ties against the likes of Chorley, Bamber Bridge and Leigh Genesis in the footballing hothouse that is the Unibond First Division North. Merthyr Tydfil, meanwhile, are rooted to the bottom of the Southern Premier League, and have been in administration for the last four months. The Old Firm are likely to do better than even Cardiff and Swansea, but should remember that England is not necessarily the land of milk and honey.

Then the Welsh teams who formed the Premier League haven't had life easy in Europe either. In fact, in the last five years, only three teams have ever made it beyond their first tie and no team has played more than two. Scottish teams take note: even if UEFA lets Scotland keep the co-efficient points that the Old Firm have accumulated on the others' behalf - despite Rangers losing to Kaunas and Celtic to Artmedia Bratislava - a slide down the rankings is surely inevitable. After all, only one non-Old Firm team has played more than one tie this season: Motherwell (who, funnily enough, beat Llanelli) - and they only got in because of the Fair Play rules, and benefited from being placed in the First Qualifying Round against teams primarily from leagues of - how can I put this? - a weaker reputation in European football. Imagine Hearts filling Rangers' place in the Champions' League Group stage - in Pot 4, probably against Man United, CSKA Moscow and Besiktas (based on Olympiakos replacing Rangers in Pot 2, and Wolfsburg replacing them in Pot 3). Imagine Aberdeen's Champions' League Qualifier against Panathinaikos. Even if they beat them, can you imagine Aberdeen up against Arsenal? Even if Dundee United and Hibs got something together - and Hibs' record in the old Intertoto Cup was less than stellar, remember - the likelihood is that Scotland would be sliding down the UEFA Club Rankings faster than you could say "national disgrace".

And of course, that's predicated on the Old Firm's points staying in Scotland. As things stand,
for the next two seasons, Scotland will have two teams in the Champions' League Third Qualifying Round, then three teams in the Europa League qualifiers, coming in in the Second, Third and Fourth Rounds. Without the Old Firm's points, Scotland's entitlement dwindles to a team in the Second Qualifying Round of the Champions' League, and three teams in the Europa League: one definitely in the Second Qualifying Round (where Falkirk got knocked out), one definitely in the First, and one in either depending on whether or not UEFA had to award a special place in the Group Stage to the winner of the previous season's Europa League. While comparisons with the League of Ireland may seem unfounded when you look at the health and attendance of clubs there, that's exactly the same position that the Irish were in this year when it comes to European football.

Basically, for European football, the Old Firm and the SPL need each other. Full stop. Without one, the other can't make real inroads into Europe.

And even if you disregard the absence of European cash, the change to the Old Firm's balance sheets by defecting to the Premiership wouldn't translate into anything useful, and the loss of the Old Firm would do massive financial harm to a League that needs every revenue stream it could currently get.

The Old Firm still wouldn't get players of the required calibre, and their departure wouldn't stem the flow of players out of the other clubs. Right now, the Old Firm benefit from being big fish in a small-ish pond. Certainly they benefit more from that than they would from competing for ninth place with the likes of Fulham, Sunderland and Wigan.

Even in England, 18 Premiership teams might benefit from extra gate receipts when the Old Firm come to town, but to make way for Rangers and Celtic, Premiership status would have to be withheld to others - possibly one extra team relegated and one fewer team promoted from the Championship. Can you imagine being in 17th place in the Premiership that year, booted out of the League solely to make way for a pair of Glaswegian cash cows? Can you imagine being second in the Championship, and losing a play-off you wouldn't even have to play under normal circumstances, or being sixth and being denied a play-off place that would, ordinarily, be yours? And then there'd be the ripple effect down the English pyramid, as clubs had to make way for others knocked down because of changes at the top? Imagine supporting a team who would lose League status because of this. Even if you implemented Phil Gartside's proposed Premiership 2, that would have the same impact as the SPL 2 proposed for Scotland. It would still be a side-show, and miss the point of why the top flight teams broke away in the first place.

No. This would represent a bit of extra cash for the Old Firm that wouldn't do much good in the Premiership transfer market so would be counter-productive in terms of European ambition, and a few extra gate receipts for the lucky teams. But the damage it would do to so many clubs, in Scotland and in England, would be immense. It's not worth it.

The Old Firm have to stay. For now, at least. Even if that means a few more years of those turgid newspaper headlines.

The Sunday Whip

2009-10-11T17:51:00.003+01:00

Parliament has now gentle eased into recess, with a broadly consensual approach, save for the now regular education policy bunfight.

Anyway. Wednesday was quiet: the only substantive business was a report by the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee on rural housing, called, imaginatively enough, Rural Housing. Once this was noted, MSPs waved through a decision to put the Local Government & Communities Committee in charge of the Home Owner and Debtor Protection (Scotland) Bill and agreed the Summer recess dates for next year.

Thursday was, of course, different, and seven MSPs were absent: Tory Finance Spokesman Derek Brownlee (South of Scotland), Labour's Shadow Finance Secretary Andy Kerr (East Kilbride - and should the Government be worried that two Opposition finance spokespeople were absent at the same time?), Marilyn Livingstone (Lab, Kirkcaldy), Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead (Moray), Margo MacDonald (Ind, Lothians), Hugh O'Donnell (LD, Central Scotland) and Elizabeth Smith (Con, Mid Scotland & Fife).

First came the Labour motion on School Buildings. The SNP amendment fell by 75 (everyone but the SNP) to 46, the Tory amendment passed by 104 (SNP/Lab/Con) to 17 (LD/Green) and the LibDem amendment fell by 62 (SNP/Con/Green) to 59 (Lab/LD). The amended motion passed by 58 (Lab/Con) votes to 48 (SNP/Green) with 15 LibDem abstentions:

That the Parliament notes with concern that the Scottish Futures Trust has yet to fund a single new school building in Scotland despite the 2009 School Estates Statistics revealing that around 150,000 pupils remain in schools classified as being in poor or bad condition; is dismayed that, after more than two years, the SNP government has identified only 14 schools to be built under its first school building programme, that none of these 14 schools will be open to pupils in this parliamentary term and only 55 will be built in total by 2018; further believes that the SNP government's claims on the number of schools that it has commissioned are unsustainable given that its own School Estates Statistics reveal that a majority of schools built or substantially refurbished in the last two financial years were legacy PPP projects, and further believes that it is hypocritical for ministers to criticise PPP schools while praising them at their official opening and that the SNP's record in government is falling far short of its 2007 election manifesto pledge to "match the current school building programme brick for brick, and offer an alternative funding mechanism through the Scottish Futures Trust", and believes that the school building programme should be funded so as to deliver best value for money and that all sources of finance, including those in the private sector, should be considered.

Then came the Labour motion on Volunteering. A LibDem amendment fell by 104 (SNP/Lab/Con) to 17, but the motion passed without further quibbling:

That the Parliament recognises and celebrates the role of the voluntary sector and volunteers across Scotland in supporting individuals, families and communities and in shaping and delivering services locally; notes the excellent work of volunteering organisations in encouraging volunteering through offering training and volunteering placements and particularly in reaching out to those who might not otherwise have the chance to volunteer; agrees, given the opportunity that volunteering provides to develop skills and build confidence, that, in this economic recession, volunteering organisations should be given adequate resources to allow them to do that important work, and further agrees that innovative organisations that create structured volunteering placements for young people, such as ProjectScotland, should be recognised and supported by the Scottish Government.

Following that, a Government motion on Civil Justice, along with amendments from Labour and the Tories, passed without dissent:

That the Parliament welcomes the Report of the Scottish Civil Courts Review conducted under the chairmanship of the Lord Justice Clerk and the reports of the Administrative Justice Steering Group conducted under the chairmanship of Lord Philip; looks forward to the report of final appellate jurisdiction in preparation by Professor Neil Walker, and believes that, following a full and wide consultation, the people of Scotland deserve a reformed and modernised civil justice system that is fit for purpose in the 21st century, which is founded on the principle of ensuring access to justice and that reforms must be driven by this as well as by efficiency in the justice system.

Finally, MSPs waved through the Health Board Elections (Scotland) Regulations 2009. And for the record, the regulations state that NHS Fife will have 25 members on its Board: 12 appointed, 12 elected, and one Councillor. Dumfries and Galloway will have 21: 10 appointed, 10 elected and one Councillor.

So there you have it. No more whippage now for a couple of weeks, though I daresay I'll be issuing a couple of missives from Inverness next week.