Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Setting rates in everyone’s interest

Oct 6

Posted by Jeff in Constitution, Economy | 5 Comments

As we all know, thanks to our being safely outside of the Eurozone, the majority of members in the European Union have one set of interest rates and one currency. This economic shackling together of many nations has created a 16-member, 17-legged race that is causing all sorts of skints and bruises for those involved.

Greece, Spain and Ireland are unable to see their currencies devalued which would boost exports and neither can they drop interest rates to boost their struggling economies more generally. Germany on the other hand is motoring ahead with phenomenal growth of 2.2% in a single quarter this year and a rate rise should be taking place there to ensure money isn’t too cheap and new problems do not arise.

This balancing of economic requirements across the Eurozone may well be the European Union’s greatest challenge in the near future so can the UK watch on in splendid isolation safely enjoying its own arrangement with Sterling and the Bank of England?

To an extent, yes, but the UK also has a varied economy and different regions have different needs. Interest rates in this country may not be the one size fits all solution that we would like to hope that it is.

Scotland went into the recession in comparatively better condition than the rest of the UK but has now fallen some way behind. Were this trajectory to continue, which is regrettably easy to envisage with the bloated public sector, political wrangling and banking problems north of the border well known, then perhaps an unavoidable increase in interest rates at a UK level will serve London and the South but harm business north of the border if Scotland just needs a little bit more time to boost itself back to stability.

When the Monetary Policy Committee at the Bank of England does increase interest rates, probably near the end of this year or at the start of next year, there will be an almighty political fall out, particularly in light of the cuts that will be in the process of biting. The ‘Left’ will be against and the ‘Right’ will be broadly in favour and it is not difficult to see how this ideological split could quickly develop into a cross-border argument.

No-one wants to see unemployment rise and an economy falter but, were that to happen specifically in Scotland, may there be a case for devolving interest rate setting from the Bank of England to Edinburgh?

Is it time the coalition gave single parents a break?

Oct 5

Posted by Jeff in Culture, Westminster | 12 Comments

It is looking increasingly likely that the biggest losers from the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition will be single parents.

The headline debate from the Tory Conference this week has of course been the rights and wrongs of cutting child benefit for those earning £44k or more. I personally think this is actually a good idea, generally speaking, and I was even surprised that individuals earning so much were eligible for such income. However, there is a clear inconsistency and unfairness to a single parent earning £44k and not receiving any child benefit while a couple earning £83k does.

David Cameron has so far been unable to communicate how this will be addressed which suggests that the problem has thus far been overlooked. I would expect some sort of compromise will be arranged but for now there is a clear demographic that is undeserving of specific punishment, if not ‘vulnerable’ in their own right.

On top of this slight, single parents will at some point during this parliamentary term see their tax payments go towards subsidising married couples. To be fair to the Conservatives, this will see them delivering a manifesto pledge (which is something that undemocratically many of their Government proposals are not).

It is the lack of flexibility of the Conservative proposals that worry me, the old-fashioned notion that the only way that a household should be is Dad, Mum, 2.4 kids and a big shaggy dog. Real life doesn’t work that way I’m afraid Dave. I know Conservatives are in favour of nuclear power, nuclear weapons but I didn’t think their dogma would also extend to an unswerving insistence on nuclear families.

And so I do hope that Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats can be a voice of reason in all of this. I understand that their position of junior partners does not give them sway in every policy and every deliverable that the coalition Government holds but surely, as it stands, this is an illiberal result.

Single parents, punished twice by their Government for simply not being cohabiting or married, is not how 21st century Britain should look.

“We are all Europeans now”

Oct 5

Posted by Malc in International, Sport | 11 Comments

Here are two ideas that are not immediately linked, but bear with me.

Thought one

Remember just after 9/11 when French newspaper Le Monde led with the headline “Nous sommes tous Américains“? That is, for those of you who, like me, are not exactly linguists, “We Are All Americans“. It was a moment of solidarity with a country which had been shaken to its foundations, a recognition that whatever divided us was irrelevant in the face of the terrorist atrocities that befell American that day. Five years later, in September 2006, in the midst of the ‘War on Terror’, that opinion no longer held true. In short, we stopped feeling connected with the US and started finding reasons we were different.

Thought two

I’m a big sports fan. Huge. Golf doesn’t usually rank within my top five, but when the Ryder Cup is on, I don’t think you can beat it for tension. 12 men selected to represent Europe and 12 to represent the USA, 28 matches to battle it out for a small gold trophy and bragging rights for 2 years. Obviously, that dramatically undersells it. Its not really about the trophy or the bragging rights. Its about sportsmanship, teamwork, integrity, honour, dignity – as with most sports, its modern day warfare without bloodshed (and yes, this is golf I’m talking about!). But for “us” (that is, Europe), it brings together those from many different countries (in this case, players from England, Northern Ireland, Ireland, Spain, Italy, Germany and Sweden, as well as a captain from Scotland and Irish, Northern Irish, Danish and Spanish vice-captains). For one weekend, we are all Europeans. The one time, as Jim Murphy pointed out, that people celebrate being European.

Linking the two

Obviously, I’m not trying to compare a golfing event to a terrorist attack. It is the sentiment emanating from each that I want to focus on. The Ryder Cup has been going since the 1920s (and, in fact, was cancelled in 2001 and rescheduled for the following year in the wake of the 9/11 attacks). Post-9/11, Le Monde was, I think, right to recognise the things that bound us with the States, that common humanity prevailed over senseless violence. But in a sense 9/11 had the opposite effect – it set the US on a path where a “you are with us or against us” mentality prevailed. It also began a process of “othering”, of identifying specifically “American” values which set the US apart from others – and alienated some of its allies.

The process of “othering” is not necessarily a negative thing. It helps to strengthen ideas about a nation, to build a national identity. Sometimes, in order to define self it is easier to define what you are not. And this, I think, is where the European identity falters a little – as lamented by Jim Murphy’s tweet. For centuries, European “nations” have identified themselves as themselves, distinct from other European “nations”. When the Ryder Cup rolls round, we have an “other” to distinguish ourselves from – an “us against them” mentality.

I guess if Jim Murphy is reading this, that is why the Ryder Cup makes people happy to be European (especially when we win). It isn’t really about being European but not being American. But we can learn something here too. For the European project to be successful, we need a “them”. Europe can only really continue to strengthen with a strong US. Because we’ll always have that one thing which unites the 27 European states: not being American.

Cameron’s “Bring it on” moment

Oct 4

Posted by Jeff in Constitution | 7 Comments

I understood that champagne at the Conservative Conference was at a minimum this year as a result of the cuts to spending and last year’s shenanigans but surely Prime Minister Cameron had had one too many when he came out with this quote:

“I will be on that campaign if they ever have the courage to call that referendum on the future of the United Kingdom but it doesn’t look like they do right now does it.”

Perhaps this bravado stemmed from a frustration at his party’s poor, majority-denying performance north of the border at the May election but let’s just pick apart the things that are wrong with the above shall we.

1 – The SNP does not have the power to simply ‘call’ an independence referendum. With Scottish Conservative support at any point over the past 3.5 years there could have been a plebiscite but that support has, sadly, not been forthcoming.

2 – The use of the word ‘courage’ suggests that Prime Minister Cameron is actively spoiling for this contest, a consideration that First Minister Salmond will reflect on with lip-smacking relish. In an error that helped to bring down Wendy Alexander’s short tenure as leader of the Labour group in the Scottish Parliament, Cameron should be choosing his words more carefully on this constitutional issue. Loose lips sink ships after all. Or,alternatively, now that the Scottish Tories are in favour of a coalition are they soon going to come out as pro-referendum to pick up for tactical SNP support?

3 – This is, once again, a breach of the promise to treat the Scottish Government with respect. Looking past the man’s remarkable ignorance of how the parliamentary process works north of the border, a playground-style taunt is not how leaders should behave to one another.

Of all the posturing and positioning and strategising that can drag on on any political issue, sometimes it is a simple blurting out of a line that loosens the most intractable of positions.

Cameron has queried the SNP’s courage. The SNP, it is safe to say, will leave the Prime Minister in no doubt as to how much courage it possesses on this subject and where will that leave the UK Government, a body that has the power to hold an independence referendum?

Game on?

Prospecting for Goldie

Oct 4

Posted by Jeff in Holyrood | 17 Comments

There surely isn’t much remarkable about the Scottish Conservatives stating that they now have an open mind to forming a coalition Government with another of Scotland’s parties, what is remarkable that they ever closed their mind to the prospect in the first place.

The Conservatives can of course effect change from outside the Government, as they have done at the past few budgets and through committee work, but the real political impact for any nation is through Ministerial positions and setting the agenda. I accept it is unlikely that the Conservatives will find a coalition partner willing to do serious business with them, not so much because the Scottish Tories are toxic but rather because the SNP, Labour and Scottish Lib Dems would like to keep considering them that way.

I have noted in a previous post that the most likely alliance for the Scottish Conservatives is probably the SNP, though many disagreed. Put simply, were the numbers to fall a certain way, were Goldie to offer an independence referendum and were the Nationalists so thirsty for a plebiscite then I don’t see why it couldn’t happen. However, that’s speculation that hinges on a number of hitherto undecided factors so there is little point dwelling on it.

Furthermore, Goldie herself has said: “But if the constitutional issue could be parked and you ask ‘are there areas of common ground?’ The answer is yes.” which to me suggests there isn’t enough blue sky thinking from Scotland’s blue party. A deal can’t be done with the SNP without independence being part of the agreement. As for the Tories and Labour – a deal can’t be done. Simple as that.

Where Annabel Goldie has made a good decision in the here and now is to position herself as above the fray in terms of the back-and-forth, Punch and Judy debacle that we see most weeks in the Scottish Parliament. The Tories are marking themselves out as, for want of a better phrase, a third way.

Support for the top two parties at a UK level has decreased over the past few decades and perhaps the Scottish Tories are hoping to pick up any ‘anti-status quo’ vote that may be out there. We’ve had eight years of Labour and the Lib Dems and we’ve had four years of the SNP, perhaps a difficult-to-satisfy Scottish public may turn to the Tories in order to freshen things up.

Of course, I would suggest that if you were that way minded then you should turn to the Scottish Greens, not that I see many people struggling over who to support between the blues and the greens, of course.