Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Sending them homewards, to pay £9,000 a year

Aug 22

Posted by Jeff in Education | 70 Comments

The mess of student funding within the UK had another murky splurge added to it over the weekend with the news that human rights lawyer Phil Shiner is to challenge the Scottish Government’s plans to charge English students tuition fees. According to Phil, these plans breach the European Convention on Human Rights as they charge students from other parts of the UK to study north of the border while students from other parts of the EU won’t pay.

I really, really hope that this legal challenge fails.

Education is a devolved matter. That means that all Westminster control is rescinded to Holyrood and it also means that a different path is permitted to be taken. Encouraged even.

English students and their parents, as part of the wider English population, voted for a Tory majority that stood on a platform of students paying fees. Just this year, Scottish students and their parents, as part of the wider Scottish population, voted for an SNP majority that has remained steadfastly opposed to students paying a single penny for their education. Both sides have made their beds and should now lie in them.

A recent poll showed that 80% of British people believe that it is unfair that while universities in Scotland do not charge tuition fees to Scottish pupils or other EU nationals, students from England, Wales and Northern Ireland studying at Scottish universities do have to pay tuition fees. That propertion drops to 53% in Scotland only, still a majority.

Had I been asked the same question as this poll, I would also have said that it was unfair. Nonetheless, I still think that the Scottish Government is absolutely right to charge English students a certain level of fees. You have to fight fire with fire.

What this YouGov poll did not include was a question on whether charging English students £9,000/year (I think we can safely remove the “up to”) to study further education was also unfair. You can be sure that more than 53% of Scots would say Yes to that.

So, as a result of Tory/Lib Dem policies, the Scottish Government is faced with English student refugees, fleeing over the border to avoid paying a small fortune to George Osborne and intent on taking up as many of Scotland’s free spots as possible. This would inevitably be to the detriment of Scottish students, quite probably specifically to the detriment of Scottish students who would have just scraped into university and would have needed that opportunity the most.

People claim that this is unfair. Why should Swedish and Maltese and Hungarian students be allowed to study in Scotland for free while English students can’t? Three reasons. (1) There are less students coming to Scotland from continental Europe than there are from England, (2) the Tory/LD coalition has created a problem that it is not for Scotland to solve and (3) member states must treat other states fairly but can arrange its own affairs as it pleases.

Let’s just imagine what would happen if Scotland was forced to let English people pay nothing for their Scottish university places and had to treat all applications equally:

There are circa 50million people in England and circa 5million people in Scotland. That presumably means that Scotland can expect up to ten times more applications from England than it does from within Scotland and, if total fairness is applied and standards are assumed to be even across the UK, that means ten times more places for English students in Scotland.

What happens to all of those students that don’t make it into Edinburgh or Glasgow or, goodness, the English Oxford/Cambridge-reject ghetto that is St Andrews? Practically speaking it means Dundonians/Glaswegians/Edinburghians/Aberdonians paying £9,000/year fees in Liverpool or Exeter or Kent, all because English people voted for a Tory/Lib Dem Government that rammed through what is effectively an English policy. That surely is unfair and surely cannot be allowed to happen if we’re serious about devolution being a lasting settlement for the United Kingdom.

So, for me, from a fairness perspective, the Scottish Government’s decision is both fair and unfair, but, crucially, more the former than the latter.

And from a political perspective, the SNP might just be onto a winner here. It now has a UK-wide audience to whom it can show that it is the sole governing guardians of free tertiary education, a significant faultline between what the UK is and what an independent Scotland could be.

There does seem to be a swell of annoyance that the SNP has not made clear its position on how it shall fund tuition fees when/if Scotland is independent. For me, this is a separate concern for a separate time and, indeed, conflation of the immediate concern of whether the Scottish Government can proceed, now, as it intends with the imagined scenario of what Scotland would look like ‘if’ Scotland votes Yes in the referendum is an admission that an argument has been lost.

Fair is worth fighting for was the green slogan from the last UK election and it’s a motto that the SNP has thankfully taken right to the heart of its policy on further education. Scotland should be proud of the imagination and tenacity shown by Mike Russell and the Scottish Government at large and should be hopeful that Paul Shiner’s legal challenge fails.

Scotland’s currency – Eurozone, Britzone or Scotzone?

Aug 21

Posted by Jeff in Economy | 53 Comments

The tumult in the Eurozone these days is well documented but the knock-on impact on Scotland and the SNP’s designs for independence are anything but clear. 

To suggest that it doesn’t matter which currency an independent Scotland would have would be ludicrous. Has it made a difference whether Ireland has had punts, pounds or euros these past 11 years? Of course it has. 

So, as the SNP softly and quite sensibly backpedals on it’s ‘Scotland in Europe’ message, it is worth considering what currency options an independent Scotland actually has. For me, there are really only three:

1 – Keep Sterling

Probably the safest option and straight of the drawer marked ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. Our low rate of exchange has boosted exports at just the right time and that pound for pound advantage would remain even if our borders changed.   

Keeping the Queen on our bank notes is in keeping with the SNP’s strategy of maintaining the Queen (or King) as our Head of State and it avoids the otherwise unavoidable uncertainty surrounding the other two options. 

There is, of course, the rather odd anomaly of a Bank of ‘England’ deciding interest rates for Scotland but this is simply harmless nomenclature and not only no different to the status quo but also no different to the ECB deciding rates across the Eurozone. Who is to say that a Scot couldn’t be Governor of the BoE in this scenario anyway. Gordon Brown’s hardly a busy man these days, right? 

Indeed, a ‘Britzone’ of Sterling-denominated nations could seek to increase its power and influence by welcoming Ireland into the fold, a country that is already inextricably linked to the current UK’s economy. Who knows, maybe other countries in Northern Europe could be convinced to join – Iceland, Sweden, heck… Norway?

An independent Scotland outside of the Euro doesn’t mean it can’t still think big but even maintaining the status quo of old UK keeping the pound is a perfectly valid option for an independent Scotland.

2 – A Scottish currency

This is such a risky option for a new nation that it has pretty much already been discounted as an initial preference by the SNP, that I can tell. However, Sterling could provide the necessary stability in the first decade of independence before a new Scottish currency could be established thereafter.

A Scottish Central bank with Scottish interest rates and Scottish foreign exchange to help boost imports and exports, depending on economic conditions, is potentially a very powerful position for Scotland to be in. Ireland and Greece may have faltered but some of the strongest economies in Europe right now have this nimble, flexible model at their disposal, with similar population size, so there is no reason why Scotland could not leverage that to our own advantage.

It makes independence more of an adventure and puts us in better control of our own destiny too, which is not necessariy a bad thing at all. Life is to be lived, right?

3 – Join the Euro

An independent Scotland outside of the EU is, to me, practically unthinkable and, yet, ‘new’ nations cannot join the EU without joining the Euro so that leaves the SNP in a very tricky position as the Euro currency continues to approach the precipice.

An ‘inside or outside the EU’ is possibly the closest the SNP gets to internal warfare and Salmond will be mindful of plastering over any splits while European volatility continues, but he has his work cut out over the next few years. 

Pragmatically, the best thing for the SNP to do is simply sit on its hands and wait to see what is left of the Euro once Merkel, Sarkozy, Berlusconi et al are finished with their rounds and rounds of crisis talks. The SNP can then, to a certain extent, simply follow public sentiment to ensure their referendum chances remain intact.

That is not to say that the Scottish Government can’t be pro-Euro in the meantime. A quick win for the SNP right now would be to encourage Scottish businesses and retailers to accept Euros from the general public and tourists alike. After all, a country that looks and feels independent is more likely to be independent in due course. It would be a further welcome boost for tourism to me.

The jury is very much still out on whether the Euro will be in a fit enough state for Scotland to join it later this decade, if the referendum returns a yes vote but, thankfully, Scotland has time on its side. 

For me, an indepedent Scotland that used Sterling as a currency leading into either joining the Euro or creating a Scottish currency, whichever is the more practical at that point of time, would be a perfectly stable future for our nation.

So, exciting times and, hey, in amongst all of this, we might even get the gone-but-not-forgotten Scottish £1 notes back.

As I say, nothing wrong with thinking big.   

Ruth Davidson will be the next Scottish Tory leader

Aug 20

Posted by The Burd in Holyrood, Parties | 16 Comments

At the risk of giving the Scottish Conservatives far more ether-coverage than they are used to, or they deserve, another blogpost from me on their leadership contest.

So far there isn’t actually a contest, what with Jackson Carlaw MSP, the only one to show his hand. But you read it here first. Ruth Davidson will win.

Reliable sources, as they say, advise that she will stand and that she is garnering support from some of the party’s big guns. Apparently, the constituency party with the most members, Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire (John Lamont MSP’s seat), will vote for her. So too will David Mundell MP’s seat, Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale. Ditto John Scott MSP’s Ayr.

And these three constituencies count for big swathes of the party’s membership. It also indicates that not only does Ms Davidson carry the outgoing leader, Annabel Goldie’s, patronage but support from some of the party’s biggest hitters. In a party of 15 MSPs and 1 MP, she has effectively sewn up a quarter of that high level support. No doubt there are others in the wings too. Struan Stevenson MEP touted her leadership qualities when Malc and I caught up with him in Strasbourg in June (as you do) so there’s another of the party’s elected representatives in her court. And Struan’s a popular figure whose opinion will also count.

Anyone with a geography O/standard grade will have worked out that so far Ms Davidson’s support is from the South of Scotland. Murdo Fraser MSP is also likely to stand and no doubt he will pick up most of his support from his North East – ahem – heartlands. Like Jackson Carlaw, though, he’s tainted. While he has bestrode (bestridden?) this part of Scotland like a colossus, traditionally Tory territory has fallen to the Nats. Like snaw off a dyke, as the FM might, and probably did, say.

During his tenure as Depute Tory leader, his patch has been put through the wringer and turned totally yellow. They don’t count SNP votes anymore in these constituencies, they weigh them. Moreover, there appears to be a bit of a move on in the party to keep Murdo out. And anyone who has ever stood for political election, either internally or externally, knows you care little about why people vote for you, you just want them to vote for you. Ms Davidson therefore will accept such anti-Murdo votes with a gracious smile.

Moreover, Ruth Davidson represents the future face of Scottish Conservatism. Too young to be tainted by Thatcher, she might finally make the break with the past and allow the Tories to turn their fortunes around. Or at least that’s the thinking. Whether or not she will manage it remains to be seen – bigger political Tory beasts than her have tried and failed.

If she becomes leader – and she will, or I’ll eat someone’s hat – the Scottish Conservatives will have the youngest party leader, be the only party in Scotland not only to have a woman at the helm but to do it twice and moreover, elect a lesbian to the position. There are so many ironies in this I don’t know where to start. Progressive Torydom. Even in the Shires. Who knew?

For these and many more reasons, hers will be a remarkable election. She’s only been an MSP for a few months. Her rise may have been stratospheric, but she has undoubted qualities. Articulate and media savvy, she will inject something different into our political discourse. Cybernats will no doubt scoff at her prospects against the First Minister every week but I wouldn’t write her off. Going toe to toe with him is bound to end in disaster, but as Annabel has shown many times in recent years, there are other ways to get attention, get your point across and importantly, get under Alex Salmond’s skin.

Ruth Davidson is probably more centred politically than many on the right would like. That will make for an interesting conversation. While the rest of Europe lurches rightwards, including our ain dear UK Parliament, Scotland will have proven definitively that it is on a quite different political course. Her election will undoubtedly make it easier for the Scottish Tories to establish clear blue water from their UK counterparts – and hopefully detoxify their brand from the government’s activities that are not finding favour with Scots voters – but we await clues to see how this might pan out in policy terms.

But the most urgent task at hand is the implementation of the Sanderson review. The party needs overhaul at every level and in every sphere, to bring it out of the 1970s and into the 21st Century. Only when it has achieved this, can it seriously begin to think about political renewal. No doubt Ruth Davidson supports the review’s recommendations but does she have the mettle to push them through?

Such activity requires an attention to detail and a knowledge of what to do and when – qualities that John Swinney demonstrated in abundance during his ill-fated SNP leadership, during which he managed to push through a centralised membership scheme and also one member, one vote in all internal elections. This was no accident: his longterm membership and service in key party roles, particularly as National Secretary, served as a useful apprenticeship to achieving such fundamental structural changes. Does Ruth Davidson have the same organisational skills to bring to the fore?

The Scottish Conservatives have no doubt spent their summer chattering amongst themselves and one hopes garnering an inkling on what the three likely candidates think about stuff. And while these are the only votes that count for now, Ruth Davidson might like to share some of her thoughts on stuff with the rest of us. It would be bizarre indeed to greet a new Tory leader without knowing her views on well, anything.

And while the prospect of such a vibrant, youthful unknown leading one of Scotland’s main parties provides a frisson of excitement, I wonder if Ruth Davidson might just be peaking too soon? The Tories are in transition and such leadership stipends rarely last long enough to reap gains from any reforms enacted or attempted. Ask the afore-mentioned John Swinney. And Wendy Alexander.

Which makes John Lamont’s decision to sit out this round of musical chairs, and instead, throw his hat (and constituency votes) behind the most likely contender to defeat his shot at the next leadership election seem very shrewd indeed.

Tags: , , , ,

Edinburgh’s SNP/Lib Dem Council lives to fight another day

Aug 19

Posted by Jeff in Elections | 6 Comments

In a prolonged bout of Twitter-based drama this morning, the candidates for the vacant Edinburgh council seat were eliminated one by one until only two remained, the SNP candidate Alasdair Rankin and the unliklely figure of Iain McGill, holding onto first place from round one. Alasdair won out, by a closer margin than perhaps expected even at that late stage, and the rest, as they say is history, or has been for the past 8 hours or so.

The voting went as shown below and, of most interest (to me at least) is how the votes broke as candidates were eliminated:

Round 1

Con 837
SNP 797
Lab 682
Green 494
Ind 394
LD 251 (eliminated)

Round 2
Con 904 (67 votes from LDs)
SNP 825 (28 votes from LDs)
Lab 716 (34 votes from LDs)
Green 576 (82 votes from LDs)
Ind 402 (8 votes from LDs) (eliminated)

Round 3
Con 1043 (139 votes from Ind)
SNP 893 (68 votes from Ind)
Lab 745 (29 votes from Ind)
Green 635 (59 votes from Ind) (eliminated)

Round 4
Con 1110 (67 votes from Greens)
SNP 1084 (191 votes from Greens)
Lab 968 (223 votes from Greens) (eliminated)

Round 5
SNP 1368 (284 votes from Labour) – ELECTED
Con 1264 (154 votes from Labour)

So pretty rotten luck for the Tories really but a lot can be learned from the above, albeit from one Council ward with a very low turnout:

The Lib Dems are in line for a proper hiding in next year’s local elections and we can expect defections to continue. Indeed, there is a local by-election in my neck of the woods in London and the Green candidate is, you guessed it, a former Lib Dem.

The Lib Dem vote continues to transfer well to the Greens but does not transfer quite as well as expect to the SNP, only 28 votes going to the Nats in the second round after the Lib Dem candidate was eliminated. I found this quite surprising to be honest. Indeed, it does seem to be the case that the Lib Dems remaining loyal to the Lib Dems are at the more extreme wings of the party – the lentil munchers and the orange bookers (to put it more than a little bit crudely!)

The Labour vote fell more heavily to the Conservatives than I expected too, 284 votes to the left(ish) SNP and a sizeable 154 votes to the right(er) Tories. This is perhaps a sign that more typical lefties and would-be Labour voters have abandoned the red rosette from the first vote and may well symoblise the cross-border identity crisis that Labour is currently suffering from.

The main outcome to take from this by-election though is the simple fact that the SNP won and that Edinburgh Council is safe. However, given the SNP largely stood on an anti-tram platform, does this send the death knell of the project? Is that what Edinburgh voted for yesterday? That’s how I read it, particularly with the financially conservative Conservatives doing so well. Only time will tell of course whether the SNP intends to scrap the project once and for all and, I suspect, that decision may be delayed until after 2012.

NB – James has a longer, deeper and frankly better post on the by-election at STV Edinburgh.

http://local.stv.tv/edinburgh/news/22978-the-edinburgh-city-centre-by-election-what-have-we-learnt/

Best motion of the week – James Kelly

Aug 19

Posted by Jeff in Holyrood | 5 Comments

After being respectfully taken to task by Mark McDonald MSP after last week’s Worst Motion of the week post, I decided we’d have a Lib Dem FMQ style approach to these posts – two weeks on and 1 week off of worst/best motions. You know, in order to inject a bit of positivity into affairs given that’s what supposedly what this blog says on its tin. Not that I’m suggesting that FMQs are ‘worst’ when Lib Dems are involved and ‘best’ when they aren’t, of course.

And anyway, I looked for poor motions this week and there were none so that worked out rather well too. Maybe it’ll be more of an ad-hoc approach going forward, evolving as our MSPs’ motions improve or detiorate. We shall see.

Anyway, picking a winner was pretty straightforward this week. Step forward James Kelly, Labour MSP for Rutherglen, for this little beauty:

Motion S4M-00695 – James Kelly ( Rutherglen ) ( Scottish Labour ) : Nail the Rogues Campaign
That the Parliament believes that rogue traders have a significant impact on consumer rights and the informal economy in Rutherglen, Cambuslang and Blantyre and the rest of Scotland; notes, with concern, the recent figures released by the Office of Fair Trading showing that issues regarding home improvement work continue to be at the top of the list of complaints about rogue traders; further notes that, last year, Consumer Direct received more than 13,000 complaints concerning uninvited traders, almost half of which related to home maintenance work; is concerned that rogue traders have frequently been reported to offer services at what appear to be attractive rates and use persuasive sales techniques to pressure people into making hasty decisions; believes that older people and vulnerable groups are particularly exposed to the dangers of rogue traders, and commends the Federation of Master Builders Scotland, in conjunction with Trading Standards, for running the campaign, Nail the Rogues, in order to raise awareness of the dangers of rogue and dishonest traders, to offer advice for avoiding them and to provide information on how to find reputable traders.

Supported by: John Pentland, James Kelly, Kenneth Gibson, Jackie Baillie, Richard Lyle, Margaret McCulloch, Neil Findlay, Hanzala Malik, Bob Doris, Anne McTaggart, Drew Smith, Richard Simpson

Well said that man.

The problems with rogue traders is in danger of becoming the kind of inconvenience that nations put up with and don’t think they can really do all that much about. And yet, the financial and emotional impact on individuals and families must be horrendous and, furthermore, there is presumably no tax going into the state coffers with maintenance and joinery work when it is cowboys that are conducting it. I daresay the problem will increase as the economic woes continue too; I have noted companies are more anxious at getting cash in the door legitmately so why should it be different for those that raise revenue through illegitimate means?

I even (sort of) have recent experience of this as I was quoted a great price to fit my bathroom by ‘a friend of a friend of a friend’, it was almost unbelievably cheap, and, lo and behold, I’ve had problems with it ever since, the latest being the shower packing in once and for all this very week.

That experience is slightly different and not as bad as the horror of uninvited traders doing work and then basically bullying people into paying for it but it’s part of a wider issue that the Scottish Parliament is very well placed to address, and is the kind of issue that can attract cross-party support to combat, as the list of signees in the above testifies.

I would like to see fighting ‘rogue trading’ to be pushed out even wider – scrapping 0870 phone numbers north of the border for example as you shouldn’t pay a premium to contact your phone or utility company. That is exactly the type of policy area where I believe Scotland can lead and the rest of the UK may well follow, like smoking bans and minimum pricing.

A twin-win where people have more money in their pockets and there are more tax receipts going into the nation’s coffers (the UK’s and Scotland’s) is something well worth aiming for so, James Kelly, I salute you and I hope your motion goes all the way Sir.