We were beginning to think you guys might be fed up of our boring election predictor chat, so we asked “The Burd” (aka Kate Higgins) if she’d like to contribute something.  We’re delighted she said yes – so here’s her take on the week’s election campaigning.

If you didnae know there was an election on, well you ken noo. Not content with chopping down forests to swamp us in leaflets, nor disturb our peace by daring to chap at our doors or phone while we’re at our tea, those pesky political types are now hogging the headlines, the airwaves and the ether. No platform is currently safe from folk in search of votes. It will all be over soon enough…

So how are they all doing at the end of the first full week of campaigning?

The SNP:
Ah yes, the shiny happy people. Who want you to vote on their record, and for their team and vision. Except when they’re putting Alex Salmond for First Minister on the regional vote ballot paper. The first leaders’ debate on STV was a cakewalk for the former First Minister who scarcely had to change gears to swat away the opposition. They have a strategy, they have money in the bank, they have a stellar endorsement, they have momentum in the polls, they have catchy themes like Fairness Friday (okay sort of catchy), they are winning the Twitter wars…

Yep, it’s all going swimmingly: what could possibly go wrong?

Well, they’ll have to do something to make that local income tax story go away – expect Labour to make more of the what have they got to hide line in the coming weeks if not. And they definitely have to do something about the Tories courying up to them and playing the funny woman to their straight man. The Scots don’t like the Tories remember?

Labour:
Who would have thunk that we’d be talking about Labour, with its indelible right to govern stamped through Scotland like a stick of rock, as the underdogs? They might be ahead in the polls but it’s now by the slimmest of margins; Iain Gray is struggling to get recognition never mind compete on equal terms with Salmond; their website is safe but dull; all their best policies have been pinched from the SNP, and they just haven’t got the money to compete in the shiny stakes.

But they have invested in their organisation and are doing what they said they would, fighting this election on the doorsteps. Prosaically, they are battling for every vote in every target seat, especially the Liberal Democrat ones. Their theme comes straight from Private Fraser, as portrayed in the just-launched higher taxes ball and chain poster.  And interestingly, for all that the content lacks a tangible, buzzy coherence, it does at least focus on people, unlike the issue-driven approach from the other parties.

They’re not setting the heather alight, but they’re getting on with getting on.

Scottish Conservatives:
This has been a good week for them, and in particular, their leader Annabel Goldie. After a god-awful start with the launch of their campaign overshadowed by candidate wars in Glasgow. While the other parties crowd around the centre ground, they have something distinctive to say, which at least gets them noticed, even if no one intends to vote for them. Or at least are not telling the pollsters they are. They might not have managed to get Annabel tweeting but there’s a slick media operation at work here. The Haguesque theme is clever, trumpeting a common sense approach to issues while emphasising how they have delivered for Scotland in the past.

No wonder their tails are up.

But scratch the surface and there lurks an unhappy party, with trouble in the ranks and leadership contenders circling like sharks. And while the Auntie Bella routine might go down well with the meeja, the Scots ain’t buying it. She may be having fun at Salmond’s expense but it’s a bit of a shortsighted tactic: don’t the Tories need the SNP to win if they want to go on delivering for Scotland?

Liberal Democrats:
Dearie, dearie me. This Scottish election might well mark a watershed in Liberal politics and for all the wrong reasons. Tavish Scott came across as earnest and instantly forgettable in the first debate; their policies are not distinctive enough from the big two to garner interest; the website is a mess. Mixing Westminster “achievements” with Scottish election missives doesn’t work and simply serves to remind the goodly voters why they are girding their loins to give the Lib Dems a kicking.

The Scots have been casting around for a scapegoat for the mess we are in and it looks like the Lib Dems are it. Can they go any lower in the polls? Well, there are still four weeks to go…

Scottish Greens:
This is where big really is beautiful: if two is a crowd, what hope for the fifth party in Scottish politics to make its distinctive voice heard?
Despite the strong message, articulate and punchy leader and effective pitch for the protest vote, the odds just seemed stacked against them in this election. Few of the reasons have anything to do with anything they are doing.

Leapfrogging the Lib Dems in the polls won’t do them any harm but they do need a bigger bang for their buck. They need media coverage and that means turning up the volume on a hot topic like nuclear power. Time too to stop playing at being a national party and go loco and regional – keep Patrick, replace Robin and anything else is a very good night.

My moment of the week?

Has to be Alan Cumming’s endorsement of the SNP – this is an A list celeb at the top of his game whose endorsement was thoughtful and articulate. Unlike others who have gone global, his graft for his achievements is something we still recognise and so, yet to snub him, his opinion will be respected. It made Labour’s wheeling out of Alex Ferguson look tired and formulaic.

Following Jeff’s lead, I’ve taken a more recent poll (the STV poll published 28 March) for my figures for West Scotland.  This means using regional figures of: Lab – 35%, SNP – 35%, Con – 14%, LD – 8% and Green – 5%.  Using these figures rather than the previous ones makes little or no difference to the outcome (the order of seats distributed through the D’Hondt formula is slightly different using these figures).  And apart from the individuals elected (and the fact the region has 10 constituencies rather than the 9 it previously had) there is no difference to the region’s political make-up.  Here’s the analysis:

Clydebank & Milngavie – This is, I think, relatively straightforward.  Notional majority of over 3,000. Lab hold (Des McNulty – returning)

Cunninghame North – The tightest of marginals in 2007 (48 votes won it for Kenny Gibson, with over 1,000 spoilt ballots).  There was talk of a legal challenge from Allan Wilson which, if the overall result hadn’t been so close, might have materialised.  Nevertheless, Kenny Gibson is a tireless campaigner and the legal chat has likely put some folk off Allan Wilson.  Plus the polls are turning the SNP’s way a little (as evidenced by the numbers above).  Likely to still be tight, but I think Kenny Gibson will sneak home… maybe.  If he doesn’t – its a net loss for the Lib Dems, as the SNP should get another list seat out of it – meaning Ross Finnie would lose out. Suppose that’s a tactical tip for Lib Dems – if you want a list seat, make sure the SNP pick up this constituency! SNP hold (Kenny Gibson – returning)

Cunninghame South – Again, notional majority of over 2,000. Lab hold (Irene Oldfather – returning)

Dumbarton – Last time around Jackie Baillie’s majority was slashed from over 6,000 to 1,600.  May be worth watching out for, and I think the SNP might get closer – but this seat stays red, comfortably I think.  Unless the trends towards the SNP continue… Lab hold (Jackie Baillie – returning)

Eastwood – This is a close one, and a straight fight between popular incumbent Ken Macintosh and list MSP (and heir apparent to the Scottish Conservative  leadership!) Jackson Carlaw.  The boundary changes make this notionally Conservative, but the polls have the Tories slightly down on 2007 while Labour are up on their 2007 mark.  That suggests they’ll hang on here, just as well for Ken Macintosh, since he doesn’t appear on the Labour West of Scotland list. Lab (notional) GAIN (Ken Macintosh – returning) UPDATE – I’m likely wrong here – see below.

Greenock & Inverclyde – Notional majority of over 4,000.  Its a tough ask for the SNP, and probably means that current regional MSP Stuart McMillan doesn’t return to Holyrood, since he’s number 6 on the SNP list.  Looks relatively comfortable. Lab hold (Duncan McNeill – returning)

Paisley – This will be interesting – what impact will Wendy Alexander standing down have?  There is a notional majority of 3,800 on the go here, so Labour have a bit to play with – but how much of that was a personal vote for Wendy? It probably won’t matter that much. Lab hold (Evan Williams – new face)

Renfrewshire North & West – What we have here is a genuine 3-way fight!  Labour’s incumbent, Trish Godman, is retiring so in her place the party are standing Stuart Clark against Scottish Conservative Annabel Goldie and the SNP’s (by all accounts, popular) leader of Renfrewshire Council Derek MacKay.  Last time around there was 0.5% between second and third – with neither the Tories nor the SNP managing to paint themselves as the “only” challenger to Labour – and Labour held a majority of 2,000.  This time though, Labour are without an incumbent – how much of a difference will that make?  It might… and given the high profile of both challengers, this is definitely a seat to watch. However, current polling suggests it will be a Lab hold (Stuart Clark – new face). But not by much.

Renfrewshire South – This has become safe as houses – and Hugh Henry had to win a hard selection battle to get the nod for Labour here.  With boundary changes – including  a large chunk of the former Eastwood seat – it was a good selection contest to win. Lab hold (Hugh Henry – returning)

Strathkelvin & Bearsden – Labour won this seat back from Dr Jean Turner in 2007 and now have a notional majority of 3,500.  Looks likely to stay red. Lab hold (David Whitton – returning)

On the constituencies (with no change from 2007) that would make it:

Labour – 9
SNP – 1

Onto the list, and as detailed above, I’ve used the STV poll figures instead of the previous figures we were using (this is more up to date).  Though, as I mentioned before – it doesn’t make any difference overall.

Seat 1: SNP (Stuart Maxwell – returning)
Seat 2: Conservative (Annabel Goldie – returning)
Seat 3: SNP (Derek MacKay – new face [#3 on SNP list but Kenny Gibson elected in constituency])
Seat 4: SNP (Gil Paterson – returning)
Seat 5: Conservative (Jackson Carlaw – returning)
Seat 6: SNP (Fiona McLeod – new face)
Seat 7: Lib Dem (Ross Finnie – returning)

(Seat 8 would be SNP – Stuart McMillan. On my figures, they’d be 1500 or so votes behind the Lib Dems, which, if the Lib Dem vote collapses, could be overturned).

So, expected West Scotland result (2007 in brackets – remember there’s 1 extra seat this time):

Labour – 9 + 0 = 9 (8)
SNP –1 + 4 =5 (5)
Conservative – 0 + 2 = 2 (2)
Lib Dem – 0 + 1 = 1 (1)

4 female to 13 male
13 returning to 4 new faces (2 already known to us as former MPs or MSPs from a previous session)

UPDATE: For some reason (mea culpa again!) I’d been working on the basis that the notional Conservative majority in Eastwood was not as large as the 3,500 it actually is.  So – to provide a fairer analysis, giving Eastwood to the Tories, here’s the numbers:

If Eastwood goes Conservative and the other seats stay the same, constituency make up is: 8 Lab, 1 SNP & 1 Con.  List breakdown is 5 SNP (so Stuart McMillan gets in as the fifth SNP MSP here) 1 LD and 1 CON (only Annabel Goldie, since Jackson Carlaw would win the constituency).  So instead of Labour being compensated on the list for losing the seat, its actually the SNP who would get an extra seat.

If Eastwood goes Conservative AND Renfrewshire North & West goes to either the SNP or the Conservatives, the net outcome is the same as if only Eastwood goes – the only difference would be the faces and whether they were constituency or list MSPs.  In this case, Labour would get a compensatory list seat and totals would be (Lab 8, SNP 6, Con 2, LD 1).

Tactical voting?
As previously mentioned, the Lib Dem position on the list is precarious, and they are unlikely to win any of the constituencies in the region.  This means that tactical voting considerations should come into play if they want to maintain Lib Dem representation for the region – and that means voting for SNP candidates in constituencies where the SNP are the main challengers to Labour.  If the SNP maintain their one constituency seat – assuming the Lib Dem vote stays where it is – then Ross Finnie would be returned.  But if the SNP managed to gain another seat – possibilities (though unlikely, unless heavily tactically targeted) include Renfrewshire North & West, Dumbarton or Greenock & Inverclyde – that would make the Lib Dems seat on the list more secure.  Equally, Lib Dems assisting Jackson Carlaw to win in Eastwood would have the same outcome – securing the Lib Dem seat (but at the same time giving an extra seat to the SNP on the list, with Labour losing out in the constituency).

Do your worst – but please be nice.

It wouldn’t do to get too excited about a single poll, but the Scotsman’s most recent YouGov, showing the Lib Dems falling to 5%, behind the Greens’ 6% on the list, is certainly a first. The Scotsman’s seat projections also show them behind, with just 5 seats.

Isn’t it inconceivable they could fall that low? It’s way below the predictions being made by my esteemed colleagues. After all, the Highlands and Islands returned four Lib Dem MSPs alone last time, including the ultra-safe pair of Northern Isles seats. Edinburgh West, as was, they held by 17% over the SNP – but the Westminster seat they won by just 8% last year. Could North-east Fife go blue again? And on the lists, missing out in Glasgow, Central, and West seems plausible, but beyond that?

Parties, especially old parties like the Liberals, often seem immutable, a fixture. But all things must pass, sooner or later, and there is one particularly eye-catching example – the Aussie Democrats. A green-tinged centrist party, they regularly held the balance of power (“kept the bastards honest”, in the parlance). In 1998 they went into the election campaign against GST, a regressive sales tax akin to VAT, before going in with the right to deliver it. Sound familiar?

Thereafter the decline became terminal, and in 2009, their last elected representative went independent, probably closer to the whimper end for the death of a political party. It hasn’t happened in isolation, of course. At the same time the Australian Greens have grown from strength to strength, and last year not only got their first AV seat in the lower house but won a Senate seat in every state.

So could it happen here? Let’s not be premature, but parties need a base, and they need to be seen to stand for something. The Lib Dems have knocked some of their base out – the anti-war, anti-fees, anti-politics, lower case green and leftish elements. As per Jeff’s recent post, I defy anyone to identify anything they stand for, given the extraordinarily inept deal they struck with the Tories, handing over their red line issues and letting Cameron keep all his.

The strongest peg remaining would appear to be the old rural Liberal vote. Some advice for Tavish: don’t do anything to annoy them.