Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Archive for category Parties

EXCLUSIVE from Pete Wishart MP: Calling all parties to the independence cause

Sep 23

Posted by Guest Blog in Constitution, Parties | 39 Comments

On the eve of the UK Labour party conference, Pete Wishart MP writes exclusively for Better Nation, calling all parties – and Labour in particular – to the independence cause.  Pete is SNP MP for Perth and North Perthshire and is currently the SNP’s Westminster spokesperson for the constitution, home affairs, culture, media and sport and international development. 

What’s the chances of an all party campaign for “Yes to Independence”?  Well practically zilch, if we were to listen to the various spokespeople from the Scottish branches of the UK parties.  It would seem that they have collectively set themselves up in a bizarre contest to be the keenest defenders of the Union, and in that defence they will be steadfast. But why have they allowed themselves to be so entrenched on the Union side of the debate, and is there any prospect whatsoever of them even entertaining the notion of an Independent Scotland?

Let’s forget about the Tories just now, even with the contradictory prospect of an independent Scottish “Tory” party in a dependent Scotland, they will be the principle Union cheer leaders.  And what about the Liberals?  Well, they seem to be almost schizophrenic in their approach to the coming referendum with full home rule one minute then this curious Moore/Alexander “muscular unionism” the next.

No, I think it is to Labour that we must primarily look for some sort of encouragement in a meaningful cross party constitutional debate.

There is absolutely no doubt that many in Labour care passionately about the Union, but as Kenny Farquhason recently correctly pointed out, people don’t sign up to the Labour party to defend the Union! They tend to join for much loftier motives like achieving social justice or progressing equality issues. Surely, from the most unreconstructed old socialist to the most convinced right wing Blairite, it would have to be agreed that these fine intentions could be achieved in an independent Scotland?

There are signs, though, that perhaps a more relaxed perspective on progressive constitutional change is starting to emerge.  Former Labour First Minister, Henry McLeish, now advocates a devo max model of full fiscal autonomy – even George Foulkes made an interesting intervention on the same side a few months ago.  Furthermore, if you rake through the new Labour think-blog, Labour Hame, you can find any number of interesting contributions by some of their more progressive and forward thinkers.  There is a debate emerging in the Labour party and that must be welcomed.

And Labour has a proud tradition on constitutional change. In the 80s, Scottish Labour Action was an excellent example of free thinking on Scotland’s constitutional future. Compare the dynamism of SLA with the poverty of thinking on the Calman Commission and we see what Labour is missing in its internal constitutional debate.

Who knows, there may even be a group within Labour’s constituency that might be prepared to join a cross party campaign for independence?  I know that might sound almost deluded given what their politicians say, but remember in last year’s constitutional referendum (for AV) Labour had for and against campaigns, so why not in this referendum? Certainly a pro-devo max group must now be likely given the contributions from some of Labour’s senior figures.

The alternative is to be lumped in with the Tories, under the leadership of Billy Connolly, or some other Unionist celebrity, in a destructive “no” campaign. Investing so heavily in a doomed “no” campaign would see them increasingly irrelevant in a new, Independent Scotland.  Having a foot in more than one camp would allow the Labour Party to walk away from the referendum result in a much better place.

And what are they arguing against?  What is clear is that the Labour position against Independence has moved on but is still in need of further revision.  The “too wee too poor” arguments seem to have been nuanced recently, having been replaced by a sort of “better together” generality. But other than their intense dislike of us in the SNP, and an almost endearing attachment to the unitary UK state, I genuinely don’t know why Labour are so determined to oppose Independence.

We are in the process of shaping our nation for the century ahead and it deserves a better response than we have had thus far from the Labour Party.  Labour should at least have some sort of meaningful debate about their constitutional options before throwing themselves into a “no” campaign so readily and so enthusiastically.

Tags: , , , , , ,

God help Glasgow

Sep 20

Posted by The Burd in Democracy, Elections, Parties | 12 Comments

Hot on the heels of dissent in the ranks of the SNP come tales of woe from within the ruling Labour party in the City of Glasgow.

There’s a lot at stake. A resurgent SNP has taken the prized political scalp of the City Council as its number one target in next year’s local government elections. It signalled the seriousness of its attempt by appointing Cllr Alison Hunter as the opposition group leader after James Dornan won election to the Scottish Parliament in May.

Yet, there are internal problems over the campaign strategy, essentially over the number of candidates to field. One group advocates a 40 candidate approach while, it has been rumoured, a group backed by Nicola Sturgeon MSP, Depute First Minister (from whose constituency Cllr Hunter hales), want more candidates to stand. It has resulted in bad tempered city association meetings and resignations. For what it’s worth, the Burd reckons the latter strategy – of more than 40 candidates – is the right one. In some wards, a carefully targeted 1 – 2 voting scheme could pay dividends. Labour has managed to get more than one candidate from wards elected in the past. But the way the party is behaving it will be lucky to win any wards at all.

The party is undergoing a purge, removing dead wood in the form of sitting councillors to make way for fresh faces. But newspaper reports suggest the scale of the scalping is causing deep divisions with some who have been dumped threatening court action over claims of procedures not being followed properly. And worst of all, the party might find itself embroiled in financial irregularities with allegations against former Shettleston MSP Frank MacAveety, hoping to return to active politics as an elected member, currently being investigated by police. It might come to nought, but the publicity will be damaging to a party already in the doldrums and still recovering from the resignation of its energetic reformist council leader, Stephen Purcell.

God help Glasgow. For in amongst this morass, the city faces huge economic and social challenges. Even during the boom years, Glasgow featured in all the “worst of” rankings. Lower life expectancy, high levels of poverty, long term economic inactivity, huge social dislocation – these are Glasgow norms. And things are about to get worse. The city council’s budget will be hit hard by cuts coming downstream from Westminster via Holyrood. Services are bound to be affected. And measures like changes to benefits through the welfare reform bill will cause unprecendented strain on families and individuals. If folk who have not worked in 20 years are thrown off the new universal credit after 12 months, where will they turn to prevent themselves and their families becoming destitute and homeless?

The ropey economic recovery will also require careful stewardship to ensure that Glasgow, with its lower skill base and more fragile base, is not impacted disproportionately. Investment means new jobs are still being created but it is hard to tell if it amounts to growth or simply displacement. And in amongst it all is the prospect of the city showpiece of the Commonwealth Games in 2014. Glasgow has a chance to shine on the global stage and the city has to be ready for its big moment.

At a time when the city needs strong and energetic leadership, the two biggest parties, vying for the right to rule, are fighting among themselves. We are less than eight months out from the election, and neither of them have all their candidates in place nor evidence of a campaign strategy in the pipeline. To be sure, the SNP’s problems are fewer than Labour’s and it has the bounce to be expected from an outstanding performance across the city.

Perhaps the internecine troubles over candidates point to an obvious solution, that of allowing city folk to participate in candidate selection through primaries. Seeing as the parties are having a little difficulty working out how many and whom, handing the whole process over to the public might work? There have been others touting the use of primaries for candidate selection for Holyrood, mainly I think from the Labour camp. Not only would such an innovation sort a little local difficulty, it would provide a useful road test of a different way of selecting candidates that might result in quite different candidates being put forward.

And Glasgow might just get the candidates and councillors it deserves, rather than the ones the parties think it does.

Tags: , , ,

What should Labour do?

Sep 14

Posted by Guest Blog in Holyrood, Parties | 72 Comments

Another no-punches-pulled guest post today, this time from Neil Findlay MSP, who was elected to represent the Lothians for Labour in May. This piece first appeared on The Citizen, the current issue of which is worth it for the cover image alone.

Neil Findlay MSPIt is clear from the post-election analysis that Labour lost across all social classes, regions, genders and minority groups and religions. In short, we were “gubbed”. On policy and presentation we were simply out-thought and out-manoeuvred. Put another way, Labour was “out Laboured” on policy and “out New Laboured” on campaigning. The SNP, on the other hand, constructed a narrative as the protectors of Scotland from the Tory Westminster government, all the while presenting itself as all things to all people and the party of “Scottish Social Democracy” (how does this square with the demand for corporation tax cuts?).

But, the election result brought to a head questions of policy, message, ethos and strategy which had been in need of asking for some time. Considering these questions is fundamental to rebuilding the Labour Party. How we do this is vital. Fads and nicknames should be binned and basic tenets of Labour must be brought back: no more ‘New, Old or Blue Labour’, the ‘Real’ Labour Party must be re-discovered, renewed and revived.

The party has to stop abandoning our traditional supporters in pursuit of the so-called “aspirational middle ground”. We could begin by apologising to both our loyal voters and those who deserted us for getting it so badly wrong. I was always taught that when you do wrong you should own up to your errors, be humble and seek forgiveness before rebuilding your friendship, which will in the end become stronger and more long lasting – we should follow this lesson.

Yet, only 15-16 years ago things were so different. Then Labour appealed to a very broad section of society. In the mid to late 90’s people believed Labour offered a credible alternative to the tired and nasty Tory Party. So how did we go from having broad and cross-society appeal to our current position? The legacy of Iraq and Afghanistan (and other foreign adventures), benefit cuts, the 10p tax fiasco, tuition fees, subservience to the markets and the courting of the super-rich (yes including Murdoch), light touch regulation of the banks and the subsequent banking crisis and the expenses scandals all contributed to the electorate falling out with Labour in the UK. In Scotland, this was compounded by bland, uninspiring and sometimes just silly policies and the perceived control of Scottish Labour by London.

Currently, our public services are under all-out ideological attack from the Tories at Westminster. Labour has to be at the forefront, leading a campaign for an alternative and positive agenda – we have to be seen as the defender of public services; the defender of a decent and civilised society and we need to say what we would do differently. We can do this with our partners in civic society, yes with the third sector who are feeling the brunt of the cuts but most importantly with the Trade Union movement – the greatest ally our party has. In carrying forth this vigorous defence of our public services the party can begin its renewal and the revival of ‘Real Labour’.

As can some solid ideas and principles from the Peoples Charter and Better Way Campaign which will undoubtedly resonate with a Scottish electorate who are currently feeling marginalised, under threat and unjustly treated. These could include:

  • Supporting economic stimulus to attack unemployment – the UK party’s position of “our cuts would be less harsh than the Tories cuts” is not good enough.
  • Investment in the economy to create jobs and stimulate growth can and does work – look at history and we can see how investment not cuts rebuilt the economy, created the NHS and the welfare state after 1945.
  • Oppose privatisation, like the SNP/Lib Dems are proposing in Edinburgh, and say how we would run local government better.
  • Develop – genuinely – co-operative models of public service delivery.
  • Create publicly run renewable energy projects. Rather than cede control to big business (as the SNP is currently doing) we should facilitate community schemes where there is a direct financial benefit distributed to local people.
  • If the council tax is to be frozen, let’s have a freeze for those in the smallest, lowest priced properties but create a new charging structure to increase payments for those at the top of the income scale. Or whisper it – we could look at a (genuine) local income tax based on the principle of progressive taxation – ability to pay – I have never understood why it is good nationally but not locally?

Labour should have no fear of promoting fair progressive taxation and a national clampdown on tax evasion – a Scottish, UK and global scandal. If the SNP want new powers for the Parliament then maybe they would have more credibility if they were banging the door of Downing Street asking for powers to deal with tax evasion.

We should oppose the SNP demands for powers over corporation tax – there is no evidence cutting corporation tax would create growth – Germany has 33% corporation tax, Greece has 20% and Ireland 10%. Question: do we want to be like Germany or Ireland? Answers on the back of a postcard to Mr J Swinney.
Labour has to champion and be prepared to implement major reforms of financial institutions including a Robin Hood tax on speculative transactions. This is morally and financially the right thing to do.

Labour has to promote positive polices like the living wage across the public sector and ensure that contractors are included and we should be evangelical about getting the private sector sign up too.

Labour must reform employment legislation to strengthen workers’ rights and remove fear from employees. And we need to rebuild our relationship with our greatest allies in the Trade Unions, making real efforts to re-engage Trade Unionists in our movement and getting the RMT, the FBU and others back into the party (and Ed, let’s stop listening to the metropolitan spinners and show some maturity and get yourself along to events like the fantastic Durham Miners gala day; you did more harm not turning up than you ever will by being there).

And Labour should have an investigation into high wages in the public and private sectors including the bonus culture of the city – it is our lack of challenge on issues like this this that tarnished our reputation as the party of fairness.

And we should support workers who are resisting redundancies, pension cuts and privatisation as we know it is our people (or our former supporters) who will suffer most.

Considering and then introducing these types of policies would demonstrate the substance, resolve and principles of a newly renewed Labour Party. As would our determination to fight the downgrading and downsizing of our public services, and opposition to the private vultures who see our public services as ripe for harvest. We could show imagination and vision by making the case for new models of public ownership, for the public and by the public, which create conduits of public and community participation and involvement and which sees our people and communities benefit directly. It is these types of ideas and this type of vision which will help the people of Scotland re-connect again with the Labour Party.

Why the SNP should run in England

Sep 7

Posted by Guest Blog in Elections, Parties | 89 Comments

Rev. Stuart Campbell is a professional journalist and blogger who writes about politics and other trivial matters for culture journal Wings Over Sealand.

As a Scot who’s made their life in England for the last 20 years, and also as someone on the liberal half of the political spectrum with friends and acquaintances of a predominantly similar persuasion, there’s a sentence I hear more than any other with regard to politics: “I wish we could vote for the SNP too”.

But it’s not just the material things – the free tuition, the free prescriptions, the free care for the elderly (and the abundance of natural resources) – that my dear English chums envy.

Most of them DO envy those things, of course, not out of greed or a sense of entitlement but rather because they appreciate a government that prioritises the things its people want. Conduct a UK-wide survey asking voters whether, for example, they’d rather their taxes were spent on healthcare or on buying useless weapons of global destruction and sending our young men and women to get killed in their hundreds in foreign wars of dubious legality and purpose, and I suspect you’d get a pretty unequivocal answer. But incredibly, there is no electable party south of the border offering those values.

(The Liberal Democrats pretended to stand for some of them, but abandoned their principles with startling and dismaying speed at the first sign of a ministerial car. Not for nothing was the most-tweeted post-election political joke “Why did Nick Clegg cross the road? Because he said he wouldn’t.”)

There is also considerable – and entirely legitimate – anger about the West Lothian Question. Only this weekend I had to explain the WLQ to an English woman (not an avid follower of politics) who didn’t know that Scottish MPs were allowed to vote on UK Parliament matters solely concerning England and Wales, and who was quite justifiably outraged to discover that the tuition fees imposed on English students alone were only made possible by the votes of Scottish Labour MPs whose constituents were exempt.

This double democratic deficit has a simple solution, of course – the end of the Union. Scotland and England could dissolve their increasingly strained and unhappy marriage – in which the partners are held together more by force law than any common interests or goals – and either become fully separate or participants in a federal UK with largely token bonds of unity.

cuthberts

(In respect of the rest of the UK, Northern Ireland already has a very separate way of doing things, with its own distinct political parties and structures, and the Welsh can to all intents and purposes be considered a region of England, comprising mostly 80-minute/roadsign patriots with very little appetite for even fairly trivial levels of devolution when it comes to the crunch at the ballot box.)

The English would be freed of the (real) West Lothian injustice and their (perceived) subsidy of the ungrateful Scots – leaving them, they would believe, the extra billions to make their own universities and prescriptions free and so on – whereas the Scots could elect governments more suited to their different political and social culture without having their wishes invariably trampled by the numerically-superior south.

The problem is that there is no way for English voters to express support for these ideas. All three mainstream parties are fanatically pro-Union (though mostly, if pressed on the issue, for largely nebulous reasons), and the likes of the English Democrats are either nutter-fringe outfits, racists or both. Opinion polls consistently show that roughly as many (and sometimes more) English people support an end to the Union as Scots, yet there is nowhere they can put a cross in a box to say so. Which is why the SNP should put up candidates for English elections.

It’s perhaps important to note at this point that I’m serious. I genuinely believe it’s something the Nationalists should do, rather than an abstract debating point. But obviously there would have to be some qualifications. Firstly, the SNP clearly can’t afford to contest every English seat in a General Election, and nor would there be any point in them doing so. But running in a handful of carefully-chosen by-elections offers huge potential benefits, and not just for the party itself.

Picture the scenario. A formerly strong Liberal Democrat seat, somewhere in the south of England, with low support for Labour. A Lib Dem vote that is very likely hugely disaffected and angry, and looking for somewhere to go. The chances are that they voted Lib Dem in the first place to keep the Tories out (so they’re not likely to defect in that direction), and that they did so either because Labour had little to no chance of success, or because of an equal antipathy to them.

Straight away there’s plenty to play for, then. And while it might seem counter-intuitive for the SNP to stand in the south of England rather than the more left-wing north, that’s precisely why it would be a good idea. It took Scotland a generation to free itself of the reflexive instinct to turn Labour in times of austerity – even when Labour had abandoned most of the principles that bred that instinct – and northern England would be starting from cold.

According to Scottish Vote Compass, the policies of the 2010 Lib Dem manifesto are already far closer to the SNP’s than those of the Tories or Labour. The party is also already familiar and comfortable with the idea of a federal structure – that being the way in which the Liberal Democrat Party itself is organised in terms of the UK- so switching to the SNP would in many senses be the easiest ideological leap for former LD voters to make.

But the SNP would also have another, slightly less palatable, advantage in a by-election in the south. They might well also attract the votes of disgruntled Daily Mail and Express and Telegraph readers who since 2007 have been fed a constant diet of mendacious anti-Scottish propaganda. The messageboards of those publications overflow with angry readers bitterly bemoaning the “subsidy junkie” Scots and urging them to just get on with it and leave. Given the opportunity of a two-for-one protest against both the whingeing Jocks and the mainstream parties at a time when disillusionment with Westminster politics has never been higher, is it such a stretch to imagine them, too, lending the SNP their vote?

Disaffected Lib Dems allied awkwardly to the Little Englander brigade would be a formidable electoral presence. But even if we assume that actually winning the election would be a pipe-dream – and indeed even if the SNP candidate lost their deposit – the mere act of standing would bring the SNP media coverage that money couldn’t buy. The subject of the Unionwould be the hot topic of debate not merely in the wee provinces of the north, but across the national media.

It’s hard to imagine a political operator as savvy as Alex Salmond failing to grasp such a glorious opportunity, and his job would be made easier by the fact that the greater the scrutiny of the relationship between Scotland and England – whether political or economic – the better the outcome tends to be for the SNP. Scotland has the truth on its side when it comes to whether it pays its way in the UK or not, and the Nationalists also command the moral high ground when it comes to the West Lothian Question, with their MPs abstaining on England-only matters in the House Of Commons.

But it’s not only Scotland that would stand to benefit. Salmond’s much-acclaimed appearance on the BBC’s Question Time earlier this year showed that the SNP’s position on subjects like the NHS and PFI carries a lot of traction south of the border too. A more social-democratic agenda being raised and discussed at length could only be good news for those of us down here who currently have no voice in Westminster, if only to remind British people that such voices still exist and such principles are still viable. Systemically-unequal neoliberal free-market capitalism isn’t the only game in town (as nations like those ofScandinavia ably demonstrate).

English voters are currently starved of meaningful democratic choices, being plagued by three parties that are in most important and practical senses indistinguishable from each other. (All support nuclear weapons and power, all want to persecute welfare recipients, all voted for tuition fees, all are a threat to civil liberties, etc.) The SNP has plenty of cash in its war-chest to fight a by-election or two. It’s hard to see what either could have to lose.

Originally posted on Rev S Campbell’s own blog.

ADDENDUM – by Malc

Within this piece there was a reference to Wales as “to all intents and purposes a region of England” which led to a discussion about Welsh and Gaelic languages, which may have offended some readers.

My own clear view is that the suggestion that minority languages are not welcome in the UK is not just wrong, it is ignorant and has a basis in colonialist attitudes.

Better Nation was intended as a vehicle to discuss and debate views which would improve Scotland in the future. I deeply regret that we featured an author whose views are so at odds with the protection of historical and cultural values held by those who hold dear their own language.

Future guest posts will certainly get a closer examination before they go up.

MH

The last Tory in Scotland

Sep 4

Posted by Jeff in Parties | 60 Comments

Who would have thought that David Mundell could have earned himself such a famous place in the history books – the last Tory in Scotland? 

It’s not a tale that will see James McAvoy chomping for the lead role but if Murdo Fraser is elected as leader of the Scottish Conservatives, the first thing he will do is disband the party and start a new right-of-centre group in Scotland. 

Although I strongly suspect that it is a vote-loser and will do little to change Ruth Davidson being favourite in the contest, the policy is not altogether stupid. 

Most people in Scotland are displeased with the direction that Cameron and Osborne are taking the UK and, irrespective of what differences there are in policy between Scots Tories and rUK Tories, candidates north of the border will inevitably suffer by association. Detoxifying the Tory brand in Scotland, still (bizarrely) suffering electorally from Thatcher’s policies, may well involve dumping Cameron.

After all, we have seen recently how unforgiving Scotland can be in such situations, the electorate ruthlessly punishing Scottish Lib Dem MSPs for a UK coalition that was not of their liking, let alone of their choosing.

Don’t be surprised if Rennie dumps Clegg as swiftly as Fraser is trying to dump Cameron if there is simply no way to reconcile the electoral arithmetic.  

The blatant downside of this policy is that it completely undermines Conservative arguments for the continuation of the union. If the Scottish Tories’ solution to Cameron’s direction of travel is independence, then why shouldn’t Scotland’s be the same? You can almost picture Salmond rubbing his hands with glee as he read the papers this morning, just as much as you can picture Cameron banging his head off the kitchen table.

A further boost for the SNP here is that a break up of the UK Tories, even just a suggestion of it, puts pressure on Labour to do likewise. The fraying of the border got a little bit looser this weekend.

Another aspect of this policy that I don’t understand is that the Tories are using electoral misfortune to justify severing links with London. The Scottish Tories however are easily the 3rd largest party in Scotland which is an important position to be in. In order to cement that position they should really be pushing for greater PR rather than a stronger shade of blue on their party’s saltire. Indeed, had the SNP fallen short of its majority there was every chance it was only going to be the Tories that Salmond could have realistically dealt with. I daresay Fraser would not have put forward such a policy in that instance. Indeed, I daresay there wouldn’t even have been a contest and Goldie would be enjoying her last stint as leader with a deservedly elevated profile. 

No, this policy is too impulsive and too short-sighted, it is looking at the right problem and coming up with the wrong solution.

At the end of the day, once the contest is over, Murdo risks being out on a limb here. Politicians shouldn’t be punished for coming up with new ideas but what becomes of a senior party MSP who no longer wants to be in the party?

I suspect we’ll find out soon. Â