Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Archive for category Parties

It’s all fun and games until someone gets hurt

Feb 6

Posted by James in Economy, Governance, Holyrood, Parties | 43 Comments

The media pundits and the blogocracy have got their regular metaphor of choice for the Budget. It’s high-stakes poker, and you can see why. John Swinney publishes a draft Budget/deals, then each party decides how to respond/play their hand. Infamously, in 2009 the SNP thought we weren’t committed to the insulation scheme being universal/were bluffing, and when the cards were shown/buttons pressed, it turned out we weren’t. Pocket rockets.

The analogies continue this time, although I can’t work out what the poker equivalent is for the Tories siding early with the SNP and supporting what’s effectively an Osbornomics cuts Budget: suggestions welcome. Equally, by voting against such an ideological Budget at Stage One the Greens have apparently folded early. It doesn’t feel like that to me.

It’s a flawed and misleading metaphor, and its time has passed. Perhaps in previous years, with the overall pot rising, that might have been a justifiable way to see the new minority-Parliament Budget process. But not now.

Now the decision before Parliament is whether or not to sanction about £1.3bn worth of cuts. Even if, like the SNP and the other opposition parties, you’re not prepared to take a serious look at raising revenue (despite the options we’ve already proposed: 1, 2, 3 etc), that’s what a Yes or an Abstain means. There’s a lot of ink spilt about this being a centre-left country, but the reality is that they’re four of a kind on the revenue vs cuts issue.

But it’s not about the men and Margo around the table. As per my comment elsewhere, the parties are not playing a petty game to determine who gets a good headline, or they should not be. It’s a year of Scotland’s public services, services relied on by the vulnerable, the ill, the homeless, the working poor and the unemployed. These are the most crucial set of decisions made in Scottish politics. John’s chosen a Tory budget, and that’s the real reason the Tories were in the bag before it began. They’re not playing a good hand, they’re recognising one of their own. A pair, if you like.

It was a poker post on the first class Burdz Eye View that got me thinking about this. She’s not alone – the CalMerc followed with one the next day, and I’m sure I’ve used the metaphor myself before. Here’s the Herald in 2008, and there’s a story missing here which suggests the Sun actually posted Budget coverage to poker.thesun.co.uk

It’s compellingly simple. John, Andy, Derek, Jeremy, Patrick and Margo are the players. The aim of the game for the opposition parties, the argument goes, is to walk away with a good headline and a nice wee pot while the banker runs the game. It’s not even how it works – by the time there’s a full house in the Chamber the decisions have (generally) been taken as a result of a series of bilaterals. If you’re determined to find a games analogy, it’s more like Bohnanza, except it’s always the Minister’s turn.

The more the media and the bloggers treat it as a game, any game, the less seriously the real-life impacts of these cuts on communities across Scotland get taken. There are no points of principle at stake in poker – it’s just about your hand, how you play it and what you can take from the others. There’s a principle here, though – do we believe in public services or do we want lower taxes?

It all comes down to the Lib Dems now, they say. The Greens should step straight in and get a good deal, I’m told. Sure, we could no doubt negotiate for a little here or there, but it’d be set against those thousands of job losses, the thousands of vulnerable Scots who rely on local services currently under threat so John Swinney and the Tories can work together. If the SNP would rather try again (that’s perhaps the most important article on this year’s Budget) and find a centre-left consensus and look beyond the retailers levy to limit the cuts, we’ll be happy to talk, but any left party that backed this particular Budget in these circumstances would be a busted flush, pure and simple.

Tags: , , ,

All at sea with Alex Salmond

Jan 15

Posted by James in Holyrood, Parties | 31 Comments

Caledonia advert stillWith the Great Puddin’ O’ The Chieftain Race going on Desert Island Discs tomorrow, it’s prediction time.

First, the music. You normally get eight choices.

Will he go for late-night-at-a-Scottish-wedding mawkishness, or go for a preponderance of tunes from foreign parts to avoid the charge of parochialism? My money’s on the first of those, although surely not even the FM would go 100% Scottish on an occasion like this, right?

Next, the book. Actually, I cheated and looked this one up. I had guessed the Declaration of Arbroath.

Salmond does Guitar HeroFinally, the luxury. A lifetime’s supply of spices so he can keep himself in curry? A saltire to fly from a coconut tree? A wee dram? I’m going for Guitar Hero simply because I found the picture.

So is it all over for the Lib Dems?

Jan 14

Posted by Jeff in Parties | 34 Comments

The whisperings of the Liberal Democrats falling into 3rd place in Oldham East (& somewhere else) came to nothing but so, equally, did the whisperings of another Dunfermline West shock victory. Second place before and second place now, any suggestions of an electoral crisis, (whispered or otherwise) should surely fall on deaf ears, no?

The results of the by-election were:

Jan 2011
Labour – 14,718
Lib Dems – 11,160
Conservatives – 4,481
Turnout – 48%

GE 2010
Labour – 14,186
Lib Dems – 14,083
Conservatives – 11,773
Turnout – 61%

Beaten by 3,558 votes in a seat that they lost by only 103 votes before entering into Government is not great, particularly when that 3,558 would have been larger if it had not been for tactical Tory top-up votes. Indeed, the above results could be painted as a disaster for Cameron but it’s pretty clear that it was the Coalition vs Labour in this contest and Labour won through.

However, 11,160 saw enough in Nick Clegg’s party to vote for it and Labour did have one huge advantage in this by-election – they no longer have Gordon Brown at the helm.

So, fun as it may be to entertain, I’m not buying into this notion that the Liberal Democrats are all but finished as a force in UK politics.

There is still a sizeable demographic that don’t wish to see themselves as Tories but still feel underwhelmed and/or sold out by Labour either over Iraq, or just generally through the wasted opportunity that the last 13 years patently was. There is the Green party for this group but, in the by-election, the Greens picked up only 503 votes, a third of BNP’s and a quarter of UKIP’s. I’m not sure where that leaves the GPEW strategy of picking off Lib Dem support, or the Scottish Green Party’s for that matter. North of the border there is of course the SNP that non-Tories and non-Labour can vote for but the issue of independence remains sufficiently polarising that voting for the Nats remains not an option for many.

Many are predicting a disaster for the Scottish Liberal Democrats in May and senior members of the party admit it will be “difficult” but, with clear evidence that Tories are willing to tactically vote for Lib Dems, some potential gains suddenly come into play – Aberdeen Central, Argyll & Bute, Edinburgh Central, Edinburgh Northern & Leith, Ettrick Roxburgh & Berwickshire, Inverness & Nairn and Midlothian South. Not to mention holding the existing seats with Conservative support making up for the loss of distinctly left-wing Lib Dem voters.

Many will bridle at the thought of the Lib Dems getting away with selling out without any electoral redress. That’s not to say things won’t be difficult and that Nick Clegg won’t remain as a political bogeyman.

First of all, is Clegg so bad? Probably not but he has cashed his political capital in early to bring his party into Government for the first time since 19 0 cake.

However, no MP has crossed the floor, no big-name blog has hung-up the keyboard and no Cabinet Minister is going anywhere anytime soon. They are “glued to their seats until 2015” as Chris Huhne put it. The Lib Dems will be on the ropes for the next four years, and they can expect further by-election defeats during this time, but no governing party has won a by-election since the 1980s and who has more momentum, the boxer everyone’s talking about that is coming off the ropes swinging or the lesser-known boxer that has a standing start?

Furthermore, the Lib Dems used to complain that they didn’t get any press between elections. That can hardly be cited as a problem now.

Clegg-mania may yet rise again but if it doesn’t (and it probably won’t), a clean skin like Tim Farron can take over the leadership of the party before 2015 and benefit from the positives of his party’s record in power while distancing himself personally from the more unpopular elements. Some will not be convinced that the Lib Dems can roll over a new leaf so quickly and easily but just look at Oldham East & Saddleworth or Springburn East by-elections? Contests caused by expenses greed from Labour MPs resulting in increased majorities for the incumbent party. Does anyone really think Labour won’t boost its margin over the Lib Dems in Barnsley Central once Eric Illsley has resigned?

The lesson is, remove the tarnished personalities and the brand will live on largely unblemished. And the Liberal Democrats still have a strong brand to sell, proponents of AV or PR would be foolish to suggest otherwise unless they really want to move towards the ding-dong of two party politics and the polarisation of society that has left the US in such a parlous state.

Looking at the by-election result again, focussing on how the Lib Dems have split the two big guns of Labour and Conservative and now stepping back into the 1980s, this constituency was split into two – Tory-held Littleborough & Saddleworth and Labour-held Oldham Central.

In a country where support for the top two parties at elections dropped from 81% to 67% in only a couple of decades, perhaps we should remember that the Lib Dems have a lot to be proud of and a lot that we should be thankful for.

Cameroons for Independence?

Jan 10

Posted by Malc in Constitution, Parties | 44 Comments

Look, I know I’ll get shouted down for posting this incredibly silly suggestion, but bear with me until the end of the piece before laughing/ calling me names.

The Conservatives should come out in favour of independence for Scotland.

Now I realise a couple of things here.  Firstly, the name – the Conservative and Unionist party suggests this might be an issue.  Except that the union referred to in that title is between Britain and Ireland, and that isn’t exactly a current issue.  And of course the Scottish Nationalist movement might not exactly take too kindly to an unpopular, right of centre party moving in on their ground – its not exactly like there is massive support for the Conservatives in Scotland, and this policy isn’t likely to help that much.

But think outside the box a little bit.  I’m not talking about a Scottish Conservative policy.  I’m talking about a David Cameron idea, a UK-wide policy shift for the party.  And that, in pragmatic, electoral terms makes lots of sense.

Put it like this – the Conservatives won the sum total of ONE seat in Scotland in last year’s general election. One.  Out of 59.  That means they need to win 58 more seats in England and Wales than the combined opposition parties to win a UK-wide election.  Labour, on the other hand, rely on MPs from Scotland and Wales for majorities – think the top-up tuition fees vote or foundation hospitals.

Again, with the maths, but there are 533 English MPs, of which 298 are Conservative, a comfortable governing majority of 32 at the moment.  Add in Wales (40 MPs, 8 Conservatives) and Northern Ireland (18 MPs, 0 Conservatives) and the picture is slightly different – 591 MPs (excluding Scotland’s 59) of which 306 are Conservative MPs, a governing majority of 10.  Still workable, but much tighter.  It’s only when you add in Scotland’s sole Conservative MP (and the remaining 58 MPs from Scotland from other parties) that the Conservative majority disappears.

So maybe if Dave wants to go it alone and ditch Nick and Vince, all he has to do is support Scottish independence.

Thumbs up if you support the motion...

Of course its crazy – and it likely will never happen.  But I’m pretty sure than, in an independent Scotland, the Scottish Conservative party would actually do better, given there would be less inclination to associate them with the remainder of the UK Conservatives – and indeed, I think there is a continuing “I can’t vote Tory, they’re the party of Thatcher” mentality.  But if they were no longer the party of Thatcher… then perhaps they’d have more success.

So… it would help PM David Cameron consolidate his and his party’s position as potentially the best placed to win a majority of seats in the rest of the UK, and it’d help the Scottish Conservatives get themselves some distance from their history, and perhaps people would start to put the “Party of Thatcher” stuff behind them.  Win-win?

It’s just a crazy idea.  But it might just work…

Can the SNP beat Labour at its own game?

Jan 4

Posted by Jeff in Parties | 26 Comments

It has been the scourge of many an SNP activist and Nationalist candidate alike during Westminster elections – ‘A vote for the SNP is a vote to let the Tories in’.

Despite there being a perfectly logical (if long-winded) response to such a taunt, I am sure many a frustrated political combatant has been left hamstrung and dumbfounded by the barb. Indeed, the above is the main reason why I believed the SNP should have made an unequivocal statement before last year’s election that a vote for the party would be a vote for Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, as if Angus Robertson and his colleagues could ever have brought themselves to vote in favour or even abstain in the face of a Conservative Prime Minister being voted in.

Scottish voters could have been free to vote for the SNP or Labour, safe in the knowledge that whoever won out of them, the chances of David Cameron getting in were unchanged. The ‘Tweedledee and Tweedledum’ attack never works when the electorate quite clearly prefers ‘dee to ‘dum. It could have been seen as Labour+, a vote for Gordon, a vote for Scotland and a vote against nuclear weapons. Smashing, where do I sign.

However, with May 2011 on the horizon, the tables may yet be turned. To what extent could ‘Vote Labour – get Gray’ work on to the SNP’s benefit?

Fresh from undignified insults of Ireland and Iceland (recovering faster than expected incidentally), the insult of Montenegro is the latest embarrassing incident that Iain Gray has pulled his party into, not to mention the latest bit of evidence that Iain thus far can’t match the statesmanlike gravitas and verbal delivery that Alex Salmond possesses. Even the harshest of the First Minister’s critics tend to agree that he is a tremendous politician in the purest sense of the word and therein lies Labour’s problem with current leader Gray.

And, well, does it get much worse than this?:

As I pack up to leave I ask Gray to give me five interesting and unknown facts about himself to dispel his boring image.

“I speak Portuguese although it’s very rusty,” he says. “I grow bonsai trees.” There is a silence and his press officer throws in the observation that Gray is a blue belt in karate. “It’s a green belt actually,” says Gray. “That’s three.” The PR comes up with the observation that Gray’s holiday job as a student was as a bus conductor. “That’s four,” says Gray. “We need one more.”

In the silence you can hear the sound of spatulas scraping barrel bottoms. “There must be something else,” says Gray. It’s like naming five famous Belgians. We all think hard. I suggest he thinks of the most mischievous thing he’s ever done. “No there’s nothing,” he jokes. “I’ve always been perfect. Smoking is the extent of my badness.” The seconds tick on.

I’m not having a go. Well, I am, but with an overriding, justifiable point. Labour are clearly ahead in the polls and currently has its tails up with an expectation that May is theirs for the taking but there is a large question mark hanging over its key individual and that is a question mark that the public is well within its rights to consider and ponder, and the public will do so in the months to come but not before the media really starts to peel back the layers of who this would-be First Minister is and how up to the job he may or may not be.

Many a country has seen a challenging party ride high in the polls in the run up to an election only to be denied victory at the last hurdle due to a flatfooted leader that just didn’t make the grade :-

Neil Kinnock in the UK (1992)
Segolene Royal in France (1997)
John Kerry in the US (2004)
Mona Sahlin in Sweden (2010)
Julia Gillard in Australia (2010) (ok, she eventually won, but only just and after throwing away a commanding lead in the polls)
Ed Miliband in the UK (2015) (just joking, but he is heading that way…)

The suggestion that Gray falls short of Salmond’s level of support could equally be applied to Labour’s Shadow Cabinet when compared to the current Cabinet, further reinforcing my point. When personality trumps party, the effects tend to apply late.

One can already feel that this coming election will be a visceral, personal, unattractive slugfest; the ‘enemy’ isn’t even contesting the election as Cameron and Clegg and the source of the cuts are safely ensconced in Westminster for the next four years which, I suspect, will only add to the level of bickering that will ensue up North. The bickering will lead to bruising, the contusion to confusion and, against that backdrop, a perceived weakness on the opposing side can only ever be expected to be exploited.

The SNP has wanted a referendum on independence for the past four years but, if it can make this coming election a referendum on Iain Gray, then therein probably lies its best chance of success.

It would be nice to talk of a great battle of ideals that is due to take place, a row of party leaders seeking to inspire and impress its citizens with high-minded ideas and wide-reaching solutions. I predict that in the various hustings and tv debates Scotland will, sadly, fall way short of this aim.

Play the ball not the man? For the Holyrood elections it doesn’t seem likely from an SNP perspective and, perhaps, justifiably so.

There will be no ‘Alex Salmond for First Minister’ voting option this year but ‘Vote Labour – get Gray’. Could that be the crucial slogan of Holyrood 2011?