Whitehall 1212

Parliamentary gags - it's all about timing

2012-01-23T12:21:00.005Z

The Daylight Savings Bill was grinding on in the background last Friday, and suspecting that it would be talked out of time, I didn't really watch too closely.

But The Hansard makes for good reading, particularly this exchange between these flashing blades, Angus MacNeil of the SNP and Labour's Tom Harris.

MacNeil, Na H-Eileanan an Iar, was arguing at length against a change in the clocks while Harris was arguing the toss.

Angus MacNeil : "On the data provided by the Lighter Later campaign, which argues that an extra hour of sunlight at the end of the day would be a panacea for the UK’s problems. It claims that people would go outside more, consume less electricity, watch less television, eat better, sleep better, run and swim more, commit fewer crimes, be less afraid to go outside, spend countless billions on tourism and be involved in fewer car accidents. Those projections do not stand up to scrutiny at all, although the change is presented as the greatest thing since sliced bread—

Mr Harris: It sounds like independence.

Mr MacNeil: The hon. Gentleman gives me a great opportunity to say that independence will be better than sliced bread."

Touche.

Votes for 16-year-olds not Salmond's real agenda

2012-01-12T10:57:00.006Z

One ear, my only ear, on the Holyrood debate on the referendum. Patrick Harvie, the Green MSP has just made a thoughtful speech, and Sarah Boyack is showing some passion.

It seems to be a good, and good-natured debate, although people tell me I missed a cracking contribution by Scottish Labour's Kezia Dugdale, the Shadow Youth Employment Minister.

I've always thought that the votes for for 16 and 17 year olds is as much of a red herring as the Bannockburn anniversary. It smacks too much of rigging the vote to be a red line issue for the SNP.

The point is not to actually enfranchise teenagers for the referendum, though that would probably assist the SNP cause to some degree.

The reason the party bangs on about the issue is to engage young people now so that when the referendum comes, and they are over 18, they will be more inclined to cast their first vote for the SNP.

It's the kind of inch by inch leverage of the independence vote that the SNP is engaged in every day, and there's no reason to think that work would cease on the wrong side of an independence vote in 20-whenever.

Salmond, I assume, will concede the teenage voting issue, as he always intended, to appear as if he his compromising in the wrestle with London. As one contrary wag put it to me the logic of arguing that teenagers ought to get a vote on their future extends to denying the over 80s the franchise because they have no future.

As his old friend Jim Sillars put it on Sunday, Alex Salmond is on very strong political ground but his legal standing is weak. There is going to have to be a great deal of compromise.

Who runs Scotland - Salmond or the Supreme Court?

2012-01-11T13:47:00.009Z

Like a good soldier I've staked the ground before the battle. After a television piece outside Westminster this morning, I walked across Parliament Square to survey the site for what will be a historic clash.

Really, I don't know why all these tv cameras were sent to Bannockburn yesterday - the real battle over the referendum is to be fought here, in the UK Supreme Court, across the road from Westminster. It's a fine building, and looking back across towards Big Ben I see that Room 2, the Scottish Room of the press gallery, has a view from the high ground.

David Cameron and Alex Salmond are set to meet over the next few weeks, but barring a renewal of respect vows, the fight for the future of Scotland will be slugged out by lawyers in the highest court in the land.

At least now we know why Salmond and Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill went so overboard in their attacks on the Supreme Court last June.

Salmond got his demonising of the Supreme Court in early over the Cadder case, whether an accused person should have access to legal advice where they are detained by the police for questioning.

Salmond knew then what we know now, that his plans for referendum will be challenged in the Supreme Court within 28 days of the bill being passed by majority in the Holyrood Parliament. If the Advocate General. Lib Dem Jim Wallace, doesn't do it then the Attorney General, Tory Dominic Grieve, will. That's is some proto-unionist or legal academic doesn't do so first.

To avoid the courts Westminster and the Scotttish Government, which are both issuing consultation papers on a referendum, have to agree on everything that they can't agree on on now.

You can see the scene in the bleak midwinter of 2015, when the cameras have taken up their entrenched positions to snipe at lawyers coming and going from the constitutional battlefield in the Supreme Court.

George Osborne, Salmond's real nemesis if you read this week's events closely, might be the incumbent in Downing Street, a Tory liked even less in Scotland than the current Prime Minister.

Salmond will be on Sky News, he doesn't do the British Broadcasting Company first, bemoaning how he would have had a referendum by now, if it hadn't been for that Union Jack court in London.

By then, he'll say, it's too late to have the two question referendum that London (whenever he says that he means "the English") deny him because the next Holyrood election is due in May 2016.

His slogan for the 2016 campaign is already written: "Who runs Scotland? - Alex Salmond or the Supreme Court".

Cameron's gamble on a Wheneverendum

2012-01-09T10:37:00.007Z

They say fortune favours the brave, and Cameron has certainly taken a bold gamble on the future of the UK by trying to wrest the independence referendum back from Alex Salmond.

The plan to offer the Scottish government the power to stage a binding legal referendum was discussed at cabinet this morning. The catch, of course, is that this would be a limited, once only offer, lasting 12 or 18 months after which the Prime Minister would be forced to consider staging his own, simpler Yes or No referendum.

Because the cabinet was was held in the Olympic Park the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman, who was in Downing Street with us, wasn't able to give a read out of the discussion.

We learned only that the proposal was put to cabinet by Chancellor George Osborne, who chairs the ministerial group on Scotland. (I admit, I didn't know he did but it indicates how seriously the UK government takes the issue).

Scottish Secretary Michael Moore and Treasury Secretary Danny Alexander also spoke on the proposal - a read out of what was said later, we hope.

Meanwhile any questions on the implications of Westminster limiting the timing of a referendum were batted away, pending a parliamentary statement on the matter, probably this week.

Asked whether the Prime Minister was "meddling" in Scottish democracy, as SNP deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon has it, the Prime Minister's spokesman reminded us: "In the Scotland Act 1988 it is clear that the constitution is a reserved matter."

There's the iron fist inside the consultative glove which Cameron has promised. Fully aware that Salmond will reject his offer Cameron must then be prepared to move to the next stage, and organise a Yes-No referendum from Westminster. That's when the game get's risky.

I imagine Alex Salmond must be quite relaxed about the latest twist in the game.

A fractious argument with Westminster about the mechanics of a referendum, instead of the substance of independence, plays right into the territory he has been fighting on for the last three decades.

Endless, niggling arguments about Westminster "disrespecting" Scotland will dominate the next year, which makes for a wearisome time for all, instead of a proper debate about whether Scotland would be better in or out of the UK.

(That's to say nothing of the normal political debate in Scotland about health, education, the environment and the economy - all of which is being played out through the prism of the indy referendum)

SNP members are already tweeting that the choice is between an SNP referendum and a Tory one. Given a choice between a referendum rigged by Cameron and one rigged by the Salmond, people would be expected to side with Salmond.

That said, I do recall that one of the questions in a recent poll asking people if they would boycott a Westminster-organised referendum - only two per cent said they would. (I can't reference that at the moment but I'm sure Angus Robertson, who does far more reading of tea leaves on that question than I do, will clarify. Now found the poll, added at bottom of this piece).

Anyway, talk of a boycott, respect, rights and questions are far better news for Salmond than talk of Scotland leaving the UK.

The last thing that Salmond wants is a definitive referendum on independence before the next Scottish election. He knows he would lose, and that that loss would make it more likely he would lose the election itself as well.

Either a legal challenge against his own referendum, or an extended row with the Coalition over their referendum (are you still with me?) is just the way he wants to go into the 2016 election for a third term.

Which brings us neatly, if we put the Lib Dems to one side, to the losers. Scottish Labour could be minced in this wrangling on a referendum.

Johann Lamont is-calling for a referendum as soon as possible but refusing, correctly, to back Cameron's bid to force one. We need to hear from Miliband on this one, and pretty soon, it's the future of the UK we're talking about after all. We also need to hear politicians making the case for Scotland in Britain.

Scotsman poll showing just two per cent of Scots would boycott Westminster referendum.

From The Scotsman - Tuesday 22 November 2011

"More than half of Scots are opposed to Scotland becoming independent, according to a new opinion poll.

A total of 53 per cent of those questioned by Progressive Scottish Opinion were against such a change, while 28 per cent were in favour of it and 17 per cent were unsure how they would vote in a referendum.

A total of 1,233 adults were questioned on the issue last week, with only 2 per cent stating they would not vote in an independence referendum if it was organised by Westminster rather than Holyrood."

All aboard for Capt. Osborne of the Titanic

2011-12-23T10:24:00.003Z

These clever people at Designiscentral have produced the STUC's Christmas greeting, which is a version of James Cameron's 1997 blockbuster "Titanic". (I know, 1997 Is it that long ago? )

"A Flag of Convenience - rearranging the deck-chairs" has Osborne, Cameron and Clegg starring in "a disaster waiting to happen".

It has been described as a "heart and pocket wrenching drama", but it's quite funny too.

I see that my blogsite doesn't do widescreen, so here's the link to the STUC website for the full experience.

Anyway, have a Merry Christmas, and take it away James Horner and the Titanic orchestra...

Cameron kippers Miliband at PMQs

2011-12-14T11:42:00.006Z

Unemployment higher than it has been in a generation, Britain isolated in Europe, the spectre of recession haunting Christmas spending and yet, and yet, the Conservatives are ahead in the opinion polls for the first time in 17 months.

Someone is doing something wrong here, and it ain't David Cameron. The Prime Minister gave Ed Miliband one mighty slap across the chops at Prime Minister's Questions today, on the one issue that voters identify the Labour leader with - doing in his brother.

It was all going so well for Miliband, teasing the mute Nick Clegg by Cameron's side about the problems of coalition politics, as Lib dem rival Chris Huhme smirked away further up the gangway.

Cameron rose fluidly to tell Miliband it would surprise no one that Lib Dems and Tories had their differences. He said Miliband shouldn't believe everything he reads in the papers.

"It's not that bad," quipped Cameron. "It's not like we're brothers or anything."

Game over - another bruising half hour encounter for the Labour leader, which is becoming a regular occurrence. The focus groups tell Cameron that fratricide is all voters remember Miliband for and every few weeks the PM makes sure that one salient fact doesn't slip from their mind.

Nick Watt of the Guardian thinks today was Miliband has had his Westland moment, when Neil Kinnock failed to kill Thatcher when she was there for the taking.

Labour's longtoothed strategists are biding their time, betting that the short term gains Cameron has made with his British bulldog stance to the EU will rebound as the consequences become clear and the economic weather worsens.

It may take more than that to change Labour's fortunes, and they all know it. I hear that one of the oldest Labour beasts in the jungle, the one who talked Eve into eating the apple, thinks that Ed Miliband can eventually be persuaded to eat something that's not good for him too.

Voters urge Salmond to get on with indy poll

2011-12-13T12:21:00.004Z

Thanks to the Balkanisation of the British press I had to scramble around behind The Times paywall for details of the Ipsos Mori poll on Scottish attitudes to an independence referendum.

The story is the splash in the Scottish edition of the paper and gets not a mention in the London copy I bought at the station this morning.

A large part of the dis-assembly of the UK is down to the London papers regularly slotting Scottish stories into edition silos that are read only by Scottish readers.

Conversely the Daily Record is the only Scottish daily still circulating in London, both the Scotsman and the Herald having withdrawn from the capital. I know there is a news life online but there is still a lot to be said for the visible and tactile power of print and its engagement in a national conversation.

Anyway, that's a personal diversion. As expected the poll shows that two thirds of Scots believe Alex Salmond is wrong to delay a referendum on independence until at least 2014.

The Ipsos MORI poll shows 33 per cent of Scots voters want a referendum as soon as possible. Another 31 per cent want one within the next two years.

That's 64 per cent want a poll before Salmond's "after 2014" pledge, a nine point increase since August.

None of that is likely to change Mr Salmond,'s mind which is set on a referendum in the second half of this five-year Scottish Parliament, meaning not before 2014. Everyone says 2014 - Bannockburn anniversary, Commonwealth Games, Ryder Cup - is Salmond's date with destiny. It could be later than that, I reckon, but that option is now backed by only 29 per cent of Scots, down eight points from August.

The bottom line is that Salmond would lose a referendum if one were held early or late.

The poll finds that support for independence among Scots certain to vote has risen by three points since August to 38 per cent.

But a clear majority of Scots — 57 per cent — still believe that Scotland should remain part of the United Kingdom. This has declined since August, again by three points.

Professor John Curtice, Professor of Politics at the University of Strathclyde, said the changes might be little more than the variability of all polls.

Cameron takes a bow

2011-12-12T12:50:00.003Z

David Cameron is due to be cheered from the rafters this afternoon by his own side following his "triumph" in Brussels last week.

Labour's frontbench have found themselves on the wrong side of populism twice in the last fortnight. When it came to the Autumn spending review I think Cameron and Osborne's attack line - "you can't spend your way out of debt" - resonated with voters' own experiences in the last few years.

As any passing Keynesian will tell you, national economies do not behave in the same way as household bank accounts. But the handbag analogy is working for the Tories right now.

Effective as he is Ed Balls hasn't found the same rhetoric to answer back with, regardless of how coherent his analysis is.

Similarly on Europe, by amplifying the Europhobia of his own backbenchers Cameron has tapped into the knee-jerk anti-Europeanism of the electorate. Labour doesn't quite have an answer.

Although Douglas Alexander, and David Miliband this morning, do fine destructive analysis of "the reasons not to", you don't get the feeling that penetrates far beyond the political village.

For now all Ed Miliband can do is hold the line for the long term, which is all opposition is about. In a year the public might see Osborne's plan A isn't working and British business will begin to express discomfort with distancing the country from its' biggest market.

Labour's pre-1997 experience was that Britain's business community didn't like Tory beef wars or the Brussels-bashing agenda of the Thatcherite rump left in Major's Tory party.

It might take a while for Britain to realise the consequences of Cameron taking Britain down a fork in the European road. It looks smooth for Cameron now, but the road gets rougher ahead.

Calum's Road comes home

2011-12-03T00:04:00.005Z

I went back to Raasay last Friday (I know, twice in a week. Even though the island tried to devour me whole I can't stay away). There was only one place to be that night, come hire car or high water, and that was in the new hall for the last tour performance of "Calum's Road".

It lived up to the billing as an extraordinary night of drama. Theatre and location and people don't come together like this very often. Here's my West Highland Free Press review of the Comminicado/NTS production of Calum's Road

A play is nothing without an audience, but a play becomes something else when it is its audience.

Taking the stage adaptation of "Calum’s Road" back to its island setting demonstrates the inescapable, powerful connection between art and the places from which it springs. Landscape and memory have a pull strong enough to draw people from very far away, and to fill Raasay Hall twice over last Friday.

In fact the National Theatre of Scotland could have taken residence in Raasay for a week and, weather permitting, sold out the run. But a play is essentially ephemeral art, and different each time. Anyway, casting like Iain Macrae as Calum cannot happen twice.

"He had my father to a T," said Julia, Calum MacLeod's daughter in her own review of Macrae’s performance as the islander who defied the world with a wheelbarrow and a shovel.

That’s the real Julia speaking — in front of her eyes, on stage, she is seamlessly represented as a young girl by Angela Hardie and as a woman by Ceit Kearney, who also managed to slip into the role of Julia's mother Lexy.

Fictionalising real people and a real place and projecting that back to the most discerning audience is a pretty neat trick, if you can pull it off. Raasay was lulled and lilted by Alasdair Macrae's score and let itself be carried down the road again.

After their own long journey around Scotland, the cast have honed the parts into a lesson in ensemble acting, so that characters play off each other and not just out into the audience.

While Macrae is as energetic as Calum himself Finlay Welsh, as Iain Nicolson, is a counterpoint in paring back a performance until he delivers the intensity of his emotions with a glance or a twitch.

Gerry Mulgrew’s Communicado Theatre has long experience of successfully adapting Scottish literature for stage. Roger Hutchinson’s book lends him some of the best lines, but it is the dexterous layering of a familiar tale by writer David Harrower that elevates "Calum’s Road", unexpectedly warming a slow-burning tragedy.

The gentle, unrequited love story cocooned in the play and the repeated motifs of the road saga — depopulation, the fragility of family and culture — are, like Calum’s struggle with the barrow against the county council, universal themes.

"Calum’s Road" is not just from our past. The question mark over end-of-the-road communities resonates through modern Scotland all the way down to the inner Clyde.

Even on islands like Shetland and Iceland, where they had money to throw at the situation, people continue to gravitate from the periphery to the streetlit centres.

But that is no reason to give up on places like Raasay. Even the new hall that hosted Calum’s homecoming is a symbol of hope. When it is not converted into an amphitheatre for the National Theatre of Scotland it hosts intense football sessions for the island’s youngsters. One day there will be enough kids for a Raasay 11-a-side team. There is, finally, a new pier in a sensible place, with a beautiful, working fishing boat moored to it. New social housing is being built, hopefully not too late.

And on nights like last Friday — when that rare thing happens and art, time and place combine to make huge emotional demands on an audience — it reveals a very special community at the centre of its own story.

Outside the hall winter’s wind rages and the complaints are all too real-life. They are much the same ones as Calum MacLeod might have made in a strong letter to Inverness County Council. The island’s roads are still awful.

Thoughts from abroad

2011-12-02T19:20:00.000Z

Cameron's off to Paris today and, coincidentally, so am I. He's trying to shore up Britain's influence on the Eurozone, I just want to spend my remaining summer holiday Euros while they remain acceptable currency.

All this existential worry about the Eurozone must start to be annoying for SNP campaign managers back home. It can't do for people to be distracted by an economic Armageddon and fret about whether they'll have a job or not when there's the serious task of nation building to be getting on with.

Implicit in the whole modern offer of independence was the notion that Scots need not worry about leaving the comfort blanket of their most beneficial monetary and economic union in 300 years, the UK. They would be replacing it with an even larger and more successful EU club. (Mmm, in many ways "Independence in Europe" could have been a more persuasive slogan than the selfishness of "Scotland's oil" which ran against the redistributive grain of many Scottish voters).

Well, given that the Eurozone is on the sliproad to the autobhan to hell (and us with it) the sell of separation from the UK is even harder to crack than that 28 per cent plateau, particularly if the leadership can't sound coherent on the currency or status of Scotland post-separation.

That means it's headscratching time at SNP central sloganising department. Indy in EU, nah, forget it; Arc of prosperity, uh uh; Risk it all on Yes in 2015, em, think again.

When the recessionary riptide is running the other way its hard to come up with ideas that broaden the economic appeal of independence. And on that score the SNP looks weak.

Unfortunately, apart from the welcome adoption of an idea for of a Minister for Youth unemployment, there's not much evidence of the Holyrood government doing much to stem the economic tide or move Scotland forward this week, or any other.

Despite a stonking majority in parliament, a mandate for anything, Salmond appears to be set on a course to becalm Scotland in the run up to the whenever'endum.

The message coming from political masters senior policy makers is that nothing will really be done to rock the Scottish boat in the next few years. Big issues like structural changes to the NHS, which may be electorally unpalatable but acknowledged as necessary, will be avoided. Reform of the education system, don't go there.
Criminal Justice, anything so long as it strikes a fine balance between dogwhistling reactionary retribution (core Labour vote) with liberal echo (soak up remaining Lib Dems).

Environmental policy, the SNP's biggest calumny, veers from "drill baby drill" in the wild Atlantic to somehow magicking windmills on and offshore with a continuing subsidy from the UK consumers even after independence! Check out the latest report from Citgroup for an even more devastating critique of why the Salmond's renewable vision will end up by 2020 in energy dependence on imports and a tacit acceptance of extended Scottish nuclear power generation.

It's unfortunate that in the five lost years of constitutional wrangling the government has decided to substitute hard policy with broad populism. That's deliberate, of course, in order not to upset any sectoral group on the road to i-day, the name campaign managers had been saving up for the Independence app.

But Alex Salmond's focus on a downloadable Gettysburg address actually gets in the way of a real world agenda for Scotland. Instead of mapping out a future he is being accused of putting Scotland's future on hold for another five years.

In a vacuum of political figureheads Scotland likes Salmond and my guess, and that of the polls, is that people would let him lead anywhere, except across the line to separation.

There's a growing tide of opinion calling on Alex Salmond to get on with a referendum to end political and economic uncertainty.
He calls the shots on that but why doesn't he use his considerable personality and political majority meantime to just get on with governing?

Hoots man - who do you think you are?

2011-11-24T12:02:00.007Z

Which MP is this? His mother was from Glasgow and his grandmother worked as a GP in the Gorbals in the hungry 1930s.

His grand-uncle was the chairman of Fairfields shipyard on the Clyde and was knighted for the company's manufacturing efforts in WWI.

His grand-aunt was a chandler in Oban, her surname was Goodwin and she was probably the only female chandler on the west coast.

Another grand-uncle, whose birthday fell on August 12th, was the one-time chairman of a Highland Distilleries, the manufacturers of Famous Grouse.

His great-grandfather was a Church of Scotland Minister in Avoch on the Black Isle, and he still has his bible (there's a clue to his identity).

He also owns a kilt, once played the bagpipes and went to school in Stirling for a while.

That would be enough burnishing of Scottish credentials for any politician, but there's more. He was also able to pronounce my name correctly first time, because he had an uncle from Skye called Torquil MacLeod.

But it was when he said another relative swam ashore from the Iolaire with the rope that saved over 30 souls from the infamous Lewis shipwreck I thought this MP was pushing it too far.

But as it was a MacLeod, John F MacLeod from Ness, that came ashore with the rope, and given that this politician has MacLeod relatives, the claim is not that fanciful.

So, who is he? Step forward Chris Bryant, Labour MP for Rhondda and scourge of News International.

Bryant, former Europe Minister, and a former Anglican priest, was born in Cardiff to a Scottish mother and a Welsh father but has kept the Scottish antecedents hidden under, er, a kilt until now.

Unfortunately, because of his gaydar profile pics from some years back we all know what he's likely to wear under a kilt - but we can look forward to the pictures nonetheless.

Surely he should make more of his background and have a voice in the debate on the Scottish referendum? Just as soon as he's dispensed with the Murdoch empire.

Coastguard closures - "an element of gamble" says Kennedy

2011-11-22T16:08:00.006Z

Been away for a week, though it seems like more. Amazing weather on Skye and Raasay and now back in harness in the Commons.

Transport Minister Mike Penning, a man we like more and more on the west coast, has just been on his feet in the Commons making a formal annoucement on the closure of coastguard stations around the UK.

As expected, Stornoway and Shetland coastguard have been retained as 24/7 operation centres after a furiously well organised campaign which, the Minister acknowledged, made an "overwhelming" case.

Alistair Carmichael, the Shetland MP, looked tremendously relaxed as the announcement was made - as well he might. There have to be some advantages to being deputy chief whip in the government. Carmichael, I'm told, burst a blood vessel when the original proposal to close Shetland was made and managed to get his station into a face-off for 24 hour coverage with Stornoway.

It took some amount of politicing to get both Stornoway and Shetland retained - though the maritime case is abundantly clear to anyone who looks at a nautical chart.

The Clyde, Forth, Portland, Liverpool, Yarmouth, Brixham, Thames and Swansea stations will all close, to be replaced by a new national network that must be fully tested.

The PCS union has already accused the government of ignoring the people who know best and Charles Kennedy MP, while quick to praise the retention of west coast coverage, issued what could be a prophetic warning.

Kennedy said: "there is a considerable element of gamble involved in all of this".

“Whilst welcoming the sensible concessions that have been made, not least with regard to the west coast, the Minches, the northern waters, because the earlier suggestions just flew in the face of all common sense whatsoever.

“Would the minister nonetheless accept that there is a considerable element of gamble involved in all of this? And given the warnings from the seafarers and the emergency services who have been doing this job successfully for generations, about what may occur, would he at least confirm today that if circumstances merited he would reopen this entire recasting and go back to the drawing board?"

It's Halloween, and Freddie's back

2011-11-01T10:41:00.001Z

It must be Halloween if the man once dubbed as the Freddie Kreuger of Scottish politics has been drawn back into the ring.

Yep, Michael Forsyth is back and the on Halloween eve Scotland's last Thatcherite ran his talons across Alex Salmond's tumshie.

Speaking in the Lords last night Forsyth made the extraordinary claim that the First Minister is ready to sabotage a referendum on independence - that's if Westminster has the temerity to call a vote ahead of the SNP government.

Forsyth, who served as the last Conservative Scottish Secretary, accused the SNP leader of threatening to organise a boycott of an indy referendum if Westminster puts a simple "Yes or No" question in front of the Scottish people.

It was certainly a combative return to form, because Lord Forsyth of Drumlean didn't stop there.

He also claimed the First Minister would order Scottish police and other public authorities not to co-operate with a Westminster organised referendum.

If the FM is ready to issue political orders to Scotland’s police forces, Forsyth asked: “Is the First Minister not getting a bit too big for his boots?”

The Scottish government last night dismissed Forsyth’s claims as “wishful thinking” and goaded the Scots Lord by repeating Salmond's own claim that Westminster had no mandate to hold a referendum on Scotland.

(Legally speaking the opposite is true, but I leave that argument to the noble Lord. Here he goes...)

Forsyth hit back that Salmond was not issuing an outright denial of his claim.

Speaking to the Daily Record he repeated the claim and said that the Salmond had delivered the private message of a boycott to none other than Chancellor George Osborne.

Lord Forsyth said: “In public Alex Salmond is saying he wants a referendum and privately he is saying that if you hold one he will not co-operate. I think people should know about that and that he should explain himself.”

He added: “This is a serious matter as the legal position is that he can’t hold a referendum that is legally binding. Constitutional matters are a reserved power for Westminster.”

Forsyth, in prickly alliance with Labour's Lord Foulkes, has led calls for Westminster to beat Salmond to the draw and organise a simple yes or no to independence instead of the SNP’s confusing multi-question options.

Salmond fears he would lose a simple Yes or No question on separation so is banking on a softer “devo-max” question as an insurance at a date to be decided.

A spokesperson for the First Minister said: “We have no idea what Lord Forsyth is talking about - the reality is that the Scottish Government won a resounding mandate in May to deliver the referendum in the second half of this Holyrood term, a position accepted by the Prime Minister after the election."

The official added: “The UK Government has no mandate whatever on the referendum issue, and no amount of wishful thinking by Lord Forsyth can change that.”

Campbell Christie 1937- 2011

2011-10-28T12:19:00.004+01:00

Campbell Christie, the former General Secretary of the Scottish Trade Union Congress, has died aged 74.

Christie served as General Secretary of the STUC from 1986 to 1998, during the height of Thatcherism, and was one of the key players in the campaign that led to the Scottish parliament.

He also served as chairman of Falkirk Football Club, and most recently he chaired a commission on the future of public services in Scotland.

First Minister Alex Salmond described him as a giant of the trade union movement who “served Scotland to the end”.

The tributes to Christie, who is survived by his wife Betty and his family, were led by Graeme Smith, the current STUC General Secretary.

He said Christie had been one of Scotland’s most outstanding trade union and civic figures whose leadership of the trade union movement in the 80s and 90s gained respect for himself and the union movement across the industrial and political spectrum.

Smith said: “Campbell was comfortable on the shop floor and in the boardroom. He was never afraid of taking the difficult decision, even if he knew it might upset others in the Labour movement. He always saw the bigger picture. Whether it was the myriad of campaigns for jobs, in support of manufacturing or public services or in opposition to the imposition of the poll tax, Campbell’s overwhelming objective was always to place the STUC and the unions at the heart of Scottish industrial and political life.”

“Under Campbell’s stewardship the STUC rose above the exclusion of unions from the ‘corridors of power’ and forged relationships across Scottish society which galvanised opposition to the brutal policies of Thatcher and Major Governments’. Those relationships remain in place today.”

Smith added: “He was a passionate advocate of Scottish Home Rule committed, not only to seeing the re-establishment of the Scottish Parliament, but to it being Parliament with a progressive purpose, accessible to, and working for the people. While politicians take credit for Devolution, the role played by Campbell Christie and others in civil Scotland was equally important.

“His influence reached way beyond the STUC. He was a prominent figure in the social partnership structures of the EU, in the international peace movement, he was active in voluntary and community organisations and of course”

While Chair of the Board of Falkirk Football Club, the team enjoyed a run in the Premier League and reached the Scottish Cup Final, something in which he took great delight.

Christie remained involved in public life until recently, leading the Scottish government’s Commission on the Future of Public Service.

First Minister Alex Salmond said: “Campbell was loved by many for his principles, his humour and his courage. He was a key figure in the campaign for a Scottish Parliament, a strong voice for democracy in the late 1980s and 1990s when civic Scotland led the movement for change. Salmond added: “He served Scotland to the end, his last public duty to lead the Christie Commission into Public Sector Reform, which he did with great wisdom and diligence. His advice in that report will live on to guide us in these new difficult times.”

Falkirk FC also released a statement paying tribute to their club director and said a minute’s silence will be observed prior to the team’s game against Raith Rovers on Saturday.

The club said: “After a period of illness, Campbell died peacefully at Strathcarron Hospice in the early hours of this morning. Our thoughts are with his wife, Betty, and his family at this time.

“Campbell loved Falkirk Football Club and was a great servant to the club. He spent three spells as Chairman and steered the club through periods of its greatest turmoil and greatest successes. He will be greatly missed by everyone at the football club.”

Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray said Christie will be great loss to the Labour movement and Scotland.

"He was one of our foremost trade union leaders and served with distinction as General Secretary of the STUC at a particularly difficult time for working people and the country. He led from the front in the struggle to defend working people against the ravages of the Thatcherite government as manufacturing industry in Scotland was hammered by the Tories.

“But Campbell was above all a true public servant in every sense and was very active in the civic life of Scotland, serving on many other bodies and organisations, not least his beloved Falkirk FC.”

Born in 1937 in Carsluith, Dumfries and Galloway, as one of six brothers, Christie moved to Glasgow with his family at 12 years of age.

As a youngster he represented Glasgow in football and athletics but went on to join the Civil Service, where he became active in trade unionism.

Based in London,Christie was key to transforming the Society of Civil & Public Servants into a modern and effective organisation with greatly increased membership.
By 1976, he became Deputy General Secretary of the union and a leading figure in the Trades Union Congress (TUC).

In 1986, he left London to become General Secretary of the Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC), the umbrella organisation representing the views of all unions in Scotland.

Christie represented the STUC on the Scottish Constitutional Convention from its creation in 1989. He also served on the European Community’s Economic & Social Committee and as a director of the Glasgow Development Agency for six years in the 1990s.

After retiring from the STUC in 1998, Christie was appointed to the Board of Scottish Enterprise and also to the Board of British Waterways

He was also Chairman of Falkirk Football Club and has held directorships in the health, brewing and transport sectors.

Awarded a CBE in 1997, he was granted honorary doctorates from St Andrews, Stirling, Napier and Glasgow Caledonian Universities, together with Queen Margaret’s University College.

In his tribute Alex Salmond captured the warmth of Christie’s personality.

He said: “Campbell’s life will not just be measured in the offices he held or the achievements he won, many as they were, but also in the generosity of spirit and dignified manner which distinguished all his actions.
I speak for the nation in sending condolences and sympathy to his beloved wife Betty and family.

“For many, Campbell’s warmth as a man and a fighter were evident in his love for Falkirk football club, and I know that all Falkirk Bairns will be mourning today.”

Happy Birthday Private Eye

2011-10-27T15:00:00.002+01:00

It's purile, it's childish, it's 50 years old and no home should be without it. This week's cover shows why we'll relish another half century of the Eye.

Option 3 - "I Can't Believe It's Not Independence"

2011-10-26T13:57:00.003+01:00

Here's the Hansard report of last night's adjournment debate on Scotland.

Tom Harris MP, aspirant leader of the Scottish Labour Party, called the debate to get some clarity on the timing of a referendum. No light, some heat, and a witty description of "Devo Max" as "I Can't Believe It's Not Independence"

Constitutional Status (Scotland)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Angela Watkinson.)

10.16 pm
Mr Tom Harris (Glasgow South) (Lab): Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to lead this important debate about the future of my nation. It will not have escaped your notice that the results of last May’s Scottish Parliament elections were less than satisfactory as far as my party is concerned. We now have a majority Scottish National party Government at Holyrood, a Government who are committed to ripping Scotland out of the most successful political and democratic union the world has ever seen.

Although I disagree fundamentally with the nationalists and the very notion of identity politics—my party has always believed that people are rather more important than borders—I nevertheless concede and recognise that the SNP now has a mandate to hold a referendum on whether Scotland should be a nation separate from the rest of Britain and, consequently, Europe.

I want to take the opportunity of this debate to remind the nationalists that the electorate have given them a mandate, not a blank cheque. I want to know from the Minister whether, if the SNP proves to be incapable of holding a free and fair referendum, the UK Government will have any role in ensuring that the Scottish people are properly consulted about the future of our nation. The SNP manifesto earlier this year stated:

“Independence will only happen when people in Scotland vote for it. That is why independence is your choice. We think the people of Scotland should decide our nation’s future in a democratic referendum and opinion polls suggest that most Scots agree. We will, therefore, bring forward our Referendum Bill in this next Parliament. A yes vote will mean Scotland becomes an independent nation.”

Unfortunately, since unexpectedly achieving an overall majority at Holyrood, the First Minister seems to have decided, rather counter-intuitively, that the manifesto on which he was elected matters less than it would have mattered if he had been forced to govern again as a minority. Even now, many SNP members claim that their party’s mandate is to hold the referendum towards the end of this Parliament. The manifesto says no such thing. The First Minister is entitled to hold a referendum at a time of his choosing, and it could be next year, or in 2015 if that is his preference. He obviously knows when it will be, and it beggars belief to suggest that he and his cohorts have not, at least, narrowed down the time to two or three possible dates. Why will they not share that information with Scotland? Are only high-ranking members of the party entitled to that information?

Whatever one’s view of independence, I am sure we can all agree that this debate will inevitably cause a degree of uncertainty in Scotland. Even if Alex Salmond today condescended to share the date of the referendum with us mere mortals, a degree of uncertainty and financial instability would ensue. The SNP could choose to minimise that, but instead chooses not to do so. More important than the effects on future investment decisions is the simple democratic right of ordinary Scots to know precisely what plans the SNP has for our nation.

25 Oct 2011 : Column 289

Nor does the SNP manifesto feature a commitment to lowering the voting age for the referendum, yet that seems to be exactly what the SNP is planning, since it clearly believes that the chances of the people endorsing their plans for independence would be less if the existing franchise were used. The SNP will, no doubt, point to its long-standing commitment to joining Nicaragua, Cuba, and Ecuador in the group of nations where 16-year-olds vote. Polling suggests that younger people are more likely to support independence, so who can doubt that a one-off reduction in the voting age for one specific event can be anything other than the most cynical move to get the “right” result? If the SNP really cared about enfranchising younger people, why has it made no progress towards lowering the voting age for local authority elections, over which it does have legislative control?

Thirdly, the SNP seems to have a problem with the idea of the Electoral Commission having any oversight of the referendum. I suspect I know why. When the Deputy Prime Minister announced his preferred question to put before the people in the AV referendum, the Electoral Commission said no and insisted on a more objective, more easily understandable question. I think that the Deputy Prime Minister’s preferred question was “AV is great, isn’t it?” To be forced to ask the Scottish people a straightforward, understandable question is something that the SNP, bizarrely, cannot tolerate.

Then there is the biggie: so-called full fiscal autonomy. However long it will be before the referendum, it is unlikely that this option—whatever we call it, whether it is “Devo Max”, “Independent Lite” or “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Independence”—is likely to be any better defined than it is today; it will still mean whatever one wants it to mean, which undoubtedly explains why it is consistently the most popular option in the opinion polls. Not only is it ill defined, it is not even deliverable, since it would affect fundamentally the way in which whole of the United Kingdom, not just Scotland, was governed. Scotland imposing a form of government on the rest of the UK would be no more acceptable than the other way round.

Moreover, once again, there is nothing in the SNP manifesto, nor in anyone’s manifesto, to justify the addition of a third option on the ballot paper.

Pete Wishart (Perth and North Perthshire) (SNP): Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr Harris: I am tempted; of course I will.

Pete Wishart: I have been listening very carefully to what the hon. Gentleman is saying. When does he think that Westminster should take over the whole referendum process? Given that he is so concerned, perplexed and exercised about the third question, what does he have to say to Lord Foulkes, Malcolm Chisholm, former First Ministers and those of his hon. Friends who believe that a third option should be put on the referendum?

Mr Harris: When the SNP starts telling us dates, I will, in turn, give the hon. Gentleman some dates for any deadline that the UK Government might wish to impose.

Even in his typically humble and understated conference speech in Inverness on Saturday, the First Minister gave an opaque hint that “Separation Lite” might yet be included on the ballot paper, but he fell short of clarifying the issue, though his spin doctors had told the press in advance that that was exactly what he intended to do.

25 Oct 2011 : Column 290

Let us be clear that none of these things—the refusal to name a date, the lowering of the voting age, the exclusion of the Electoral Commission and the inclusion of a third, vague option—was in the SNP manifesto, and for a very good reason: fair-minded Scots would have concluded that someone, somewhere, was attempting a constitutional sleight of hand; and they would have been right. Whether or not the Scottish people wish to remain part of the UK, it is of the utmost importance that the result of any referendum cannot be second-guessed, misinterpreted, reinterpreted or undermined. It must not be ambiguous.

In 1995, the people of Quebec were asked to take part in their second referendum on independence. One might be forgiven for assuming that the question on the ballot paper was, “Do you want Quebec to become independent?” That would have been far too honest and straightforward a question. After all, the actual question was framed by nationalists. This is the question that was put to Quebec’s voters in 1995:

“Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign, after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership, within the scope of the Bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on 12 June 1995?”

Very straightforward, is it not? Given the high esteem in which Scottish nationalists hold the separatists of Quebec, I expect that they looked upon that wording and on the narrow margin of defeat that it suffered with envy and admiration.

It would be a great shame if the nationalists’ posturing, prevarication and cowardice on the referendum were to result in the same kind of solution to which the Canadian Parliament was forced to resort: a Clarity Act to ensure that certain basic principles of transparency and honesty were adhered to in any referendum. That is not a road that I want to go down, but it is something we may have to consider. After all, the sovereignty of the Scottish people and our right to a fair and honest say in the future of our nation trump the pomposity and pride of Scottish Government Ministers of whatever rank.

Perhaps this jiggery-pokery—I do not know whether this will be the first time that that phrase will appear in Hansard—is understandable from a nationalist perspective. After all, politics is about priorities and the SNP priority is independence, nothing else. Jobs, the economy, the health service, schools, the fight against poverty—none of those issues matter as much to the nationalists as the prospect of replacing the words “United Kingdom” with the word “Scotland” on their passports. Perhaps in their minds, the end justifies the means. In my mind, and in the minds of the great majority of Scots, it certainly does not.

It is not too late. The Scottish Government could, even now, rescue their reputation and re-establish their commitment to Scottish democracy by making it clear that the question we were promised—yes or no to independence—will be asked, with no fudging, no cheating, no rigging, and with complete transparency. The Scottish people deserve that at least.

If the SNP Government cannot rise to the challenge of delivering their own manifesto commitment, we may have to accept that the UK Government have a role to play. Alex Salmond is highly thought of in Scotland. [ Interruption. ] He is. He is a substantial politician and I have no doubt—I am not being sarcastic—that he loves Scotland dearly. If he is guilty occasionally of putting his party’s ambitions above those of the Scottish people,

25 Oct 2011 : Column 291

it is only because he too often conflates the two. So what would it say about Alex Salmond if the right hon. Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), the Prime Minister, turned out to be more capable than he of delivering the SNP’s key manifesto commitment?

10.28 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (David Mundell): I congratulate the hon. Member for Glasgow South (Mr Harris) on securing this debate on what is an important issue, and I thank all hon. Members for their presence at it. I note the hon. Gentleman’s participation in the contest for the leadership of the Scottish Labour party. I would wish him well, but I know that that would damage his chances. There is also a contest for the deputy leadership of the Scottish Labour party. As I have already made clear, when a newspaper headline read, “Mundell Backs Davidson”, it did not refer to the hon. Member for Glasgow South West (Mr Davidson), so that should help his chances.

The Government have been clear that they are totally opposed to the break-up of the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister has committed to working constructively with the devolved Administrations on the basis of mutual respect. There are many issues on which the Government have worked successfully with the Scottish Government. However, we do not agree with the Scottish Government in their pursuit of separatism. On that issue, we will give them no succour. Whatever factors played a part in May’s election result, a rise in support for Scottish separatism was not one of them.

However, let me be clear that we are not complacent about the Scottish Government’s call for a referendum on the breaking up of the United Kingdom. We are challenging them. They must answer the substantive questions, to which the hon. Member for Glasgow South referred, about what they mean by “independence”. They have been uncharacteristically shy in setting out exactly what independence would involve and what it would cost.

After repeated questioning, the Scottish Government have now told me that the 2009 White Paper “Your Scotland, Your Voice” and the 2010 draft Referendum (Scotland) Bill hold all the answers. As hon. Members would expect, we are scrutinising those papers thoroughly. However, so far they appear simply to raise more questions than answers. We now also have another glossy SNP pamphlet entitled “Your Scotland, Your Future”, in which, as usual, dozens of promises are set out but there are no facts and no evidence.

The hon. Gentleman raised valuable points about the Scottish Government’s proposed referendum. First, the date of the referendum is crucial. Not only is the current situation unsettling, but many people’s patience is being tested by the lack of detail coming from the Scottish Government on what independence would actually mean. Business leaders are now beginning to say that they are worried about the uncertainty that that is creating about Scotland’s future, which is damaging to Scotland and to the United Kingdom. We are trying to get more detail out of the Scottish Government. At present, all that we have to go on is the vague time line of

“the second half of the parliamentary term”

25 Oct 2011 : Column 292

and no other detail. We do not have to accept that that is satisfactory. As the hon. Gentleman said, that time scale was never a manifesto commitment. In fact, the First Minister revealed the notion only a week before the elections took place. If the case for separatism is so strong, why wait to hold the referendum?

Secondly, the hon. Gentleman mentioned the referendum question. The First Minister has raised the prospect of “devolution-max”, also known as “independence-lite”, or possibly “full fiscal autonomy”, and is dangling it as a supposed third way. That is a fallacy. There is no third way. The only choice is between separatism and remaining in the United Kingdom.

We can review and update the devolution settlement, as Calman did and as the Scotland Bill is currently doing. The Calman commission, formed through cross-party consensus, recognised the strength and benefits of the economic and social union between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. Its recommendations are now being implemented through the Scotland Bill, which represents a radical, historic and significant change to the financing of public services in Scotland. We can allow the settlement to evolve, but selling the Scottish people the undefined SNP construct of “devo-max” is selling the Scottish public a pig in a poke. Any referendum question needs to be clear—yes or no to separatism. As the hon. Gentleman said, anything else would simply be jiggery-pokery.

Thirdly, the hon. Gentleman mentioned the franchise. The Scottish Government have indicated that 16 and 17-year-olds should be given the right to vote in any referendum. Many people are already suspicious that the SNP is trying to rig the electorate to get the result it wants. Is it appropriate to experiment with changes to the franchise on a matter of such importance as the future of Scotland?

Finally, the hon. Gentleman discussed the role of the Electoral Commission. It is an independent body, respected for ensuring transparency in polls across the United Kingdom. In their 2010 draft referendum Bill and consultation paper, the Scottish Government stated that they intended to create their own electoral commission for any referendum. Questions have to be asked about that course of action. What is wrong with the current Electoral Commission, which has delivered so much in Scotland to date? What is the motive behind the Scottish Government creating their own commission? How many extra costs would that create for the taxpayer?

The hon. Gentleman also made a valid point about the Canadian Clarity Act, and it is worthy of further consideration. Hon. Members will be aware that the Scottish Affairs Committee is holding two inquiries into questions relating to a referendum and what the break-up of the United Kingdom would mean for Scotland and the rest of the UK. I have no doubt that academics and experts called before the Committee will be keen to explore the Canadian Clarity Act and its parallels with Scotland.

Mr Ian Davidson (Glasgow South West) (Lab/Co-op): The Minister correctly identifies that the Scottish Affairs Committee is looking at aspects of a separation referendum. Will he make the resources of government, particularly civil servants, available to provide information to the Committee? That would help us to clarify some of the

25 Oct 2011 : Column 293

questions that we identify in our current trawl. Those issues will require settlement before any referendum is held, so that the Scottish public can be well informed.

David Mundell: I can give the Committee Chairman that assurance. The Government will do everything we can to support the Committee’s work, because we believe that the people should be well informed before any referendum takes place. We sincerely hope that the Scottish Government will follow our example and be forthcoming with the same level of information, which is required not just by the Committee, but by the people of Scotland if they are to make a decision on this important matter.

Pete Wishart: The Minister does not quite understand that the days of this House determining and dictating what the Scottish do in future are over and gone, and do not matter any more. Does he foresee any situation or condition in which this Westminster Conservative Government will take over the referendum process?

David Mundell: If the hon. Gentleman believed a word of that diatribe, he would call the referendum now and demonstrate what the people of Scotland think.

25 Oct 2011 : Column 294

We share so much in common across the United Kingdom and we have a successful partnership that delivers stability and prosperity for all parts of the nation. I think we will see people across Scotland coming out in favour of the most successful economic and social union ever when they eventually get the chance to vote. It is right to keep the United Kingdom together when so much unites us. The best of the UK is still to come.

Let hon. Members be in no doubt that the Government will not be neutral on the break-up of the United Kingdom. We will continue to argue for a better future for Scotland within the UK. We look forward to continuing this debate and to contributing to the Scottish Affairs Committee inquiries in due course, and to the Scottish Government’s co-operation with those two inquiries, when they can answer the questions raised in the debate. What the people of Scotland need now is not vulgar triumphalism from Mr Salmond and glossy brochures from the SNP, but facts, evidence and answers.

Question put and agreed to.

10.38 pm
House adjourned.

"Odd Couple" revive domestic double act

2011-10-25T11:43:00.006+01:00

As far as I can see the committed Europhobe Ian Davidson (Glasgow South West) was the only Scottish MP, though not the only Labour one, to vote for a referendum on the EU last night.

Davidson spoke for a third way - a renegotiation of the European Union, a kind of EU-max perhaps. He doesn't want to be in a position of voting to leave when what he wants is reform.

That argument allowed his old roommate Michael Connarty MP - they shared a flat in a Walter Matthau-Jack Lemmon arrangement before the MPs' expenses reforms - to give him a bit of a ribbing later on.

While detailing how article 49 and article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty mean that renegotiation of EU membership is a nonsense - you're either in or out - Connarty noticed with disappointment that Davidson had left the chamber. "He is not so much a friend as an ongoing further education project for me," said Connarty.

You can imagine the chats the pair have had over a cocoa in the old days.

Meanwhile, the well known Europhile Denis MacShane had a rough write up in Hansard, the offical parliamentary report which sometimes inadvertedly captures the mood of the house in its formalised style:

Denis MacShane (Rotherham, Labour) rose —

Hon. Members: Groan!

Nigel Evans (Deputy Speaker; Ribble Valley, Conservative): Order. He has not said anything yet.

Tory EU rebellion limits Cameron on Scotland

2011-10-24T22:55:00.003+01:00

The scale of the Tory rebellion on the EU referendum - it looks like 81 MPs - has implications for the constitutional future of Scotland too.

With almost half the Tory backbencher who are not hired as ministers or bag carriers openly defying him, Cameron has entered the nightmare territory for any Conservative leader.

The Tory Party's ability to tear itself apart over Britain's role in Europe is well-remembered, not least by Cameron who as a party researcher had a front-row seat on the "bastards" vs John Major over Europe in the 1990s.

This time it's different - a highly Eurosceptic Tory party and a leader who over-promised the rightwingers on his path to power.

In the next few years Cameron could be wrenched by either arm on the constitutional questions as Salmond on one side, and his own Eurosceptics on the other, try to tear up the UK settlement.

Tonight's Westminster rebellion on the EU must now limit Cameron’s room for maneouvere on Scotland. Downing Street has been mulling over whether to call its own early referendum on Scotland’s future in the UK.

The PM is said to be open-minded on whether to order a simple Yes-No referendum on Scottish independence ahead of Alex Salmond’s plans for a multi-option ballot sometime beyond 2014.

But to call a referendum on one constitutional issue while denying his own backbenchers a vote on another will prove highly tricky.

Neverendum groundhog day

2011-10-24T12:19:00.003+01:00

Today the main news is about a political feeding frenzy as a fundamentalist, fiercely nationalistic party pursues it's obsession with a multi-question constitutional referendum while the rest of the country worries about the economy plunging off the edge of a cliff.

Sounds strangely familiar...

Come on Mr Salmond, it's our country too

2011-10-18T11:05:00.004+01:00

“There is no one on the Scottish Affairs Select Committee, apart from Eilidh Whiteford [SNP MP for Banff and Buchan] that has a mandate to say anything about a referendum, apart from the fact that they are opposed to it. The only ones with a mandate to say or do anything are the ones sitting in the Scottish Parliament.” - Alex Salmond.

I think that's a genuine quote from the First Minister reproduced this morning in the Scottish edition of the Daily Telegraph, itself culled from a Holyrood magazine interview.

Salmond was responding to the idea that the Westminster Scottish Affairs Committee is to launch an investigation into his plans for three-question "yes, no, mubee" referendum and the practicalities of what the SNP actually means by an independent Scotland.

It's quite some statement to claim that only signed up SNP MPs, and presumably MSPs, have a right or a mandate to say anything about the political future of Scotland.

It's quite staggering how the First Minister continues to be relatively unchallenged on that presumption too. Come on Mr Salmond, it's our country too, don't forget that.

You don't have to dig too deep to get at what the SNP leader is signalling with his get your Westminster scooters off my lawn rant ahead of his party conference this weekend.

The thing a dominant SNP fears most is a Westminster-organised referendum with a simple Yes or No to the nation, an idea which is gathering momentum across the other parties. He'd lose that one.

Och, here's the news and pass a razor blade

2011-10-17T16:26:00.003+01:00

If a nation is the story it tells itself then the PA news schedule for Scotland this afternoon is a depressing tale.

Sectarianism, unemployment, murr-der, impotence, robbery, we've got it all. Even the one film that gets accolades, Peter Mullan's Neds, is the story of a violent, urban Scottish upbringing.

I phone the newsdesk to complain that there must be some good cheer somewhere to report and the deadpan response is: "Listen, that's only the news, you should see the weather."

Here's that full list, unabridged:

Press Association Scotland schedule update at 1600 on Monday October 17.
COURTS Bigot: A man who used a social networking website to post sectarian comments about Catholics and Celtic supporters has been jailed for eight months.

SCOTLAND Unemployment: Scotland is suffering from a "youth employment crisis" with one in four young men out of work, Labour said today.

SCOTLAND Redundancies: Councils have spent millions of pounds on voluntary and compulsory redundancy payments in the last two years, according to new figures.

CITY Philips: Lightbulbs-to-TV maker Philips is to cut 4,500 jobs after announcing its profits nearly halved during the summer.

SCOTLAND Death: A man has been charged with murdering another man who was found seriously injured at a house.

SCOTLAND Jobs: The rate of improvement in the Scottish labour market continued to ease off last month, according to a report.

SCOTLAND Trams: The first tram is expected to be delivered at the newly completed depot on the outskirts of Edinburgh this morning.
STAFFING PICS

ENVIRONMENT Energy: Household electricity bills could be pushed up by around £300 a year by 2020 as a result of a continued reliance on fossil fuels to provide energy, environmentalists claimed today.

SCOTLAND Football: Two men are due in court in connection with football-related hate crime, police have said.

SCOTLAND Pylons: Work gets under way today to remove a string of electricity pylons from the UK's largest national park.

SCOTLAND Impotence: A convenient new drug to help men overcome erectile dysfunction has been approved by Scotland's medical watchdog.

MONEY Pension: Automatic enrolment into pension schemes could create an extra six million people saving, generating £12.5 billion annually to the retirement pot by 2017, research from Standard Life suggested today.

SCOTLAND Robbery: Three men have stolen more than £10,000 from a supermarket during an armed robbery.

SCOTLAND Stags: Male red stags are being snubbed by their female counterparts as they fight for attention during mating, research has shown.

SCOTLAND Burns: A mural inspired by Robert Burns's poem Tam O'Shanter has been unveiled at the bard's birthplace museum.

SCOTLAND Mother: A mother of five who died after a night out at a music festival has been named.

SCOTLAND Dog: Animal welfare inspectors are appealing for information about a starving and injured dog which was found in a "dreadful state".

SCOTLAND Climber: A man died after falling around 1,000 feet while climbing in the Highlands.

SCOTLAND Baftas: The nominees for this year's Scottish Baftas have been announced with Peter Mullan's film Neds named in four categories.
WITH PICS

SCOTLAND Bank: Police have been stopping motorists and pedestrians near a city centre bank which was held up and robbed last week.

SOCIAL Funerals: A quarter of people fail to show the proper respect to a funeral procession, according to a survey.

SCOTLAND Pharmacists: The role pharmacists play in helping care for people could be developed in the future, Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon said today.

Dughlas - a cheud ceum air ais airson na Labaraich

2011-10-13T14:45:00.010+01:00

‘S e fear de phrìomh bhall a’ Phàrtaidh Làbaraich an Alba - agus a-measg an fheadhainn as motha a th’ air a bhith an sàs ann an iomairtean Albannach agus aig ìre Westminster.

Ach a-nochd bheir Dùghlas Alexander òraid ann an Sruighlea far an aidich e gu bheil am Pàrtaidh Làbarach air chall agus gu feum cruth-atharrachadh tighinn air ma tha iad a’ dol a thàladh luchd-bhòtaidh.

S e òraid inntinneadh, tuiseach a th’ aig Dùghlas, agus bu chòir a leughadh bho cheann gu ceann. ‘S e a' cheud ceum air ais dha fhèin agus a phàrtaidh ann an Alba, a' tighinn as dèidh do Mhairead Curran dreuchd mar neach-labhairt dùbhlanch air cùisean Albannach a ghabhail.

Sa cheud àite tha e ag aideachadh a-nochd dìreach cho dona sa bha na Làbaraich ann an taghaidhean sa Chèitean. Fhuair iad pronnadh cho cruaidh bhon SNP 's gun tug e gu seo fhèin mus tàinig iad timcheall. "We were gubbed," tha e ag aideachadh.

Tha e a' mìneachadh carson a chaill na Làbaraich, carson a bhuannaich na Nàiseantaich. Tha diofar adbharan ann ach 's e a' phrìomh fhreagairt air sin, a rèir Dùghlas, 's e nach do rinn am pàrtaidh aig e-fhèin ceangal sam bith ri sluagh na h-Alba.

Thairis air na bliadhnaichean, le fèin-riaghladh, le crìonadh ann an aonaidhean ciùird agus seann obraichean tha na ceanglaichean sin eadar na Làbaraich agus luchd-bhòtaidh air briseadh sìos.

Bha sin a' fàgail am pàrtaidh a' sabaid seann chogaidh an aghaidh Thatcherism agus a' feuchainn fhathast an t-eagal a chur air bhòtairean mu dheidhinn neo-eisimealachd.

Feumaidh a-nis am pàrtaidh prìomhachas a thoirt do chuspairean Albannach, a bhith a' maipeagadh cùrsa air adhart airson na dùthich, a tha a' toirt misneachd do dhaoine agus a tha a' bruidhinn ribh mu dheidhinn dòchais agus chan ann mu dheidhinn dorchadais.

Ceart gu leòr, ach chanainn-sa gu bheil gu leòr bhòtairean a bhiodh tòrr nas cruaidhe air na Làbaraich airson nan adhbharan a chaill aid. Agus tha sibh a' coinneachdh riutha, bhòtairean Làbarach a bha cho freagarrach le mar a bha am pàrtaidh a' cur iad fhèin air adhart, agus an ceannard a bh' aca, 's gun do ghluais iad a-null dhan SNP.

'S e a chanas Mgr Alexander gu feum am pàrtaidh e fhèin as-ùrachadh, stèidhichte air na prionnsabalan a tha aca co-dhiù - co-ionnanachd agus ceartas sòisealta.

Feumaidh iad a bhith mar thagraichean airson Alba, ach chan e Alba a tha air a reubadh a-mach às an Aonadh, ach dubhaich far a bheil na buannachdan mòra sòisealta a rinn na Làbaraich fhathast rim faighinn.

Tha e a' cur air an SNP gu bheil ùirsgeul acasan a tha a' cantainn nach urainn dhut a bhith na d'fhear Albannach mura h-eil sibh a' cur taic ri na Nàiseantaich.

Chan eil sin fìrinneach, canaidh Alexander, ach feumaidh am pàrtaidh Làbarach a bhith làn gràdh-dùthcha ach le teachdaireachd gu bheil e ceadaichte a bhith na d' Albannach agus na do Bhreatannach, agus gu bheil buannachd anns gach stàit.

Chanaidh na Nàiseantaich gu bheil e ceart - gu robh na Làbaraich sgriosail sna taghaidhean agus nach eil buannachd sam bith ann dìreach a bhith a' feuchainn ri an t-eagal a chur air daoine mu dheidhinn neo-eisimealachd.

Ach cuiridh Alexander dragh orra cuideachd. Seo cuideigin aig àrd ìre sa Phàrtaidh Làbarach a' tòiseachadh a' mìneachadh nan adhbharan cinnteach, dearbhadh airson Alba leantainn am braoin an Aonaidh.

'S e deasbad a leanas bliadhnaichean a seo ach bheir an òraid seo misneachd dha na Làbaraich gu bheil cuideigin aca a chuireas air adhart gu aragmaidean làidir airson prionnsabalan sòisealta an aoidh neo-eismealachd.

Taing do Eilidh Dhubh

Dr Fox still outruns the media hounds

2011-10-13T11:03:00.006+01:00

Simon Heffer (Daily Mail), Jonathan Freedland (Guardian), Trevor Kavanagh (Sun) - the list of columnists calling for the pelt of Defence Secretary Dr Fox grows with each morning's newspaper delivery.

He may well go in the next day or week, but that will be thanks to the money trail that reporters are uncovering. None of the Fleet Street pillars will be able claim the credit.

Trevor Kavanagh's Monday column "..if he hasn't been sacked by the time you read this..." was perhaps the most significant.

A decade and more ago The Sun would have published that kind of column in the sure and certain knowledge that the deed had already been done. The paper would then present the shrill demand as the act that really forced the minister's dispatch.

On Monday the determined Dr Fox did not stick to the script and that tells us two things. Firstly, as we know, we're dealing with one crazy fox here and secondly, the Sun is not the Whitehall power player it once was.

Osborne bonus refunds SNP c-tax freeze

2011-10-03T11:59:00.004+01:00

So, Osborne has found £805m down the back of the sofa for a council tax freeze in England for another year.

This, I'm told, will deliver the Scottish government a Barnett consequential of about £67.5m into its general budget. The Holyrood government can use the bonus as it pleases, it is not assigned to specific spending.

The SNP administration has already budgeted around £70m a year to pay for a Scottish council tax freeze for 2012-13. The SNP pledged in their manifesto to keep the charge frozen for the lifetime of the parliament, up to 2016.

Effectively, Osborne could claim he is reimbursing the Scottish government for its popular policy, but the Tories here in Manchester aren't spinning it like that.

On the subject of finding money down the sofa, hats off to the Treasury team for finding -albiet at the very last minute - £3m to keep the two emergency tug vessels on the west coast of Scotland going for another three months.

The contract for the coastguard tugs in Shetland and Stornoway ran out on Friday and was not due to be renewed under the cuts programme. But the Department of Transport has been told, quite directly I understand, to find the means to keep the cover until another funding solution is devised.

Just as well, because it's blowing 70mph out there in the Hebrides today. Had there been a shipping disaster anywhere from the Shetland Islands to the Western Atlantic with no towing vessel available Lib Dem MPs Alistair Carmichael and Danny Alexander would have had some explaining (and possibly some resigning) to do. The pressure will now be on to resolve this lifesaving issue.

With every turn away from austerity the government is, of course, making a rod for its own back. You know what the mantra is going to be for the coastguard tugs and every other crucial u-turn - if they can find £250m for weekly bin collections then surely...

Dave Cameron's sing-along referendum song

2011-10-03T11:01:00.006+01:00

The songbook for tonight's traditional Scottish Conservative reception has been published.

All four leadership candidates are expected to make a contribution to the ceilidh but I'm not sure which of them will dare sing this one about David Cameron's options for calling an early referendum on independence. It's not an easy question to answer but it is an easy tune to remember...

“T’was by yon bonnie banks and by yon bonnie Braes,
That Wee Eck had a victory so glorious,
But since that day in May there’s been no yea or nay,
On when we get a say on who rules oo’er us.

So You’ll tak the High Road and I’ll tak the low Road,
And I’ll get the Scots votes afore ye,
For me and my true love my bonnie Nicky Lad
We can still stick a ballot box afore ye.

There’s a tribe out the west that the Scots know the best,
But the Gray men went down in the slaughter,
Now they havnae got the crown and they havenae got a king,
And they’re seeking for a Prince oo’er the water.

Oh, you take the High Road and I’ll take the low Road...

On the banks of the Thames the air was stirring warm,
With the sound of the pipes far up yonder,
If Salmond got his plan, there’d be no bawbies and no dram,
It’s the thought made Davie’s clan sit and ponder.

Oh, you take the High Road and I’ll take the low road...

If Eck played in long then the Scots could be gone,
With the folks that were stacking in his favour,
Was it best to cut him short with a vote oo’er the lot
And put a Union yes or no on the table

You take the High Road and I’ll take the Low Road...

Young Danny was sent north to cut the Saltire cloth,
With a nine o diamonds as his callin
Was quite a sight to see, his plaid and finery,
Frayin on Drumossie muir on that morning.

But for all that Libs could yell , Wee Eck said go to hell
For the time o the fight was his choosing,
He’d wait till close of play and he wouldn’t face a crowd
On any day it looked like he’d be losing

You take the High Road and I’ll take the low road...

But the Scots knew the score and their patience it grew sore,
With the flummery he was making of their future,
If the man was ‘frit’ to call then the deal it must be soor
Or was he taking them for fools in their trustin.

So you take the High Road and you take the Low Road
And let us Scots have a vote put afore us
And we’ll tell baith masters then with the power of our pen
That none has a right to rule oo’er us."

(Trad: arrangement Crichton & Kidd)

Things you see when you're out without...

2011-10-02T12:06:00.006+01:00

I respectfully stood aside for the Prime Minister and Mrs Sam Cam as they returned to the conference hotel after breakfast tv interviews this morning.

Not so Kevin Maguire, associate Editor of the Mirror and left-wing bane of the Tories.

The cheeky chap met Cameron coming out of a lift in the hotel last night and greeted him with a cheery: "Hello, Dave."

Cameron replied with an equally bright: "Welcome..." trailing to "...ish" as he realised who he had encountered.

Cam-1, Maguire-0

Tory conference opens with Scottish dust-up

2011-10-02T11:30:00.007+01:00

And so onto the last lap, the Tory party conference in Manchester, which begins with a bit a Scottish dust-up.

Scotland Office Minister David Mundell, who had stayed above the fray in the Scottish leadership contest, has now thrown his lot behind Ruth Davidson.

Mundell, the Scottish Unicorn of the Tory Party as their only MP north of Carlisle, has spoken out against the Murdo Fraser plan to close down the Tories and relaunch with a new right of centre "Caledonia" Party.

It's an idea that has given Murdo first name recognition in Scotland but also left his campaign crashed on take-off.

Mundell joins Michael Forsyth and other top Scots Tories in backing Ruth Davidson as the kind of fresh new face that will appeal to people who don't traditionally back the party. He certainly doesn't think that a new party is the answer to the Scottish Tories poor showing.

"If I'm elected the next time I'll be taking the Conservative whip in Westminster and not entering coalition negotiations on behalf of some brand new party," Mundell tells me this morning.

"I think we've got to build on what we've got not destroy it. No one denies we don't need significant change but this is throwing the baby out with he bathwater," he says dismissing the Fraser plan.

"I had intended to remain neutral in this election but its not just about the leadership it is about the future of the whole party and about whether people would be able to continue voting Conservative in Scotland. I can't just be a bystander any more."

Mundell and Annabel Goldie make platform speeches today - sticking it to Salmond and Labour in equal measure. There is a lunchtime leadership hustings at the conference tomorrow at which we expect there to be a fight over the sandwiches

So much for the Indian Summer, it's raining in Manchester, the Fort William of England.

Magic darts put Rennie ahead of "Fingers"

2011-09-21T12:38:00.005+01:00

The results of the electronic darts competition are in.

Firing a digital dart at a tv screen on an exhibitor stands at the Lid Dem conference is not as easy as it looks, and is in no way indicative of a wasted youth.

After all Nick Clegg scored a lowly 70 but in the Scottish stakes Willie Rennie displayed his leadership qualities with a winning score of 105 from a three dart throw.

Smooth Menzies Campbell, dark horse Alan Reid and Alistair Carmichael shared equal second place with throws of 100 each. Carmichael tried burnishing his thuggish credentials by muttering something about breaking his opponents' fingers before the next round. As Lib Dem chief whip that is something I suppose he's entitled to do.

Wait a minute, I'm hearing unconfirmed reports that Willie Rennie's score was only 100 yesterday and that he must have had a second go. Or is that the Lib Dem equivalent of magic darts? Either way, all eyes will be on the Scottish Labour leadership candidates to see how they score in Liverpool next week.

Rennie flexs New Home Rule muscles

2011-09-20T11:37:00.008+01:00

We've seen signs of life, if not revival, in the Scottish Lib Dems at Birmingham this week, it has to be said.

The leadership has looked in the mirror and decided it was time to hit the gym. As a result we're seeing a more muscular response from the Lib Dems to the challenge of taking on Alex Salmond and the prospect of a referendum.

Scottish leader Willie Rennie is, in contrast to Cable, very chirpy about the future and getting stuck into the independence debate. Even Michael Moore is moving from quiet man to big man but I feel they’re both to a bit too decent for the short sword fighting that the SNP leader prefers to conduct politics.

I’m not convinced that Rennie’s opening gambit - a commission on New Home Rule, reclaiming devolution max for the Lib Dems - is the kind of chest expanding move that will cause the SNP to lose much sleep though.

Willie Rennie disagrees he says its not just about recapturing fiscal federalism and devolution from the SNP it is about power redistribution to local communities too.

“We can see the SNP wanting to pull power into Edinburgh, we want to go the other way,” Rennie tells me in an appeal to localism.

“In 1998 the biggest fear was that the Scottish parliament would be Strathclyde writ large and that rural Scotland would not be able to shape its own future. Who would have thought the SNP would be delivering Strathclyde writ large.”

Why indulge in navel gazing when the big issue is a referendum, I ask? Salmond offers a vision and the Lib Dems offer us a committee of grandees.You'd have to be an expert on the American Civil War to work out federalism and co-federalism, which is the kind of constitutional wrestle the Lib Dems want to get involved in.

That provokes a wee bit of passion from Rennie. "There is a debate to come on Scotland's future and people need to know what shape the country could take."

He adds: "Salmond is pretending he’s in favour of more powers for the parliament but that is just a stepping stone to independence for him. We believe in Home Rule as the final resting point."

It's not a bad line but it needs a bit more weight training before it can be deployed against Eck.

Cable sets the weather dial to gloomy

2011-09-20T10:55:00.004+01:00

If you've never been measured for a coffin while standing up you've never really listened to a Vince Cable speech.

The prophet of doom did his best here in Birmingham to outdo Alistair Darling as the gloomiest man in politics with his predictions that we are all doomed.

Opinion polling suggests that what Vince says is true for the Lib Dems at least. The news this morning that credit rating agency Standards and Poor has downgraded Italy for the second time in four months shows that his grey skies analogy might hold true for the rest of us too.

Cable's dramatic confession that we can expect very little in the way of economic growth sends a shudder through the collective spine and sets the tone for the rest of the conference season and, one suspects, the rest of this parliament.

It has been a bit of a heads down, lacklustre and unenticing affair, the Lib Dem conference. The conflicting platform messages of rowing away from the coalition while emphasising the need to stick to government and the deficit reduction plan just don't add up to a clear narrative.

Simon Hughes and Tim Farron and Evan Harris are causing licensed trouble for the leadership but you don't detect any great rebellion on the conference floor.
The Lib Dems are conflicted, as relationship counsellors would say, and it's beginning to show.

Concreted Birmingham has matched the weather and my mood. I'm trying to like the city but can't find any greenery. There are trees in the far distance, but these sunny uplands seem a long way away.

Alistair Darling...behind every great man

2011-09-07T08:42:00.004+01:00

Whizzing through the Alistair Darling book this morning digging for any gems that haven't been excavated in the serialisation and the leaks of the memoir to Labour Uncut.

I'm not struck by anything major so far but the concern I raised about the Sunday Times reducing its serialisation fees seems to have been borne out, according to Nick Watt of the Guardian.

Reading these books as journalists do, via the index, I'm struck by the very generous references Darling makes to Catherine MacLeod, our former Herald colleague, who joined him as media adviser when he became Chancellor.

At every twist in the tale Catherine is there offering the straight-talking advice and wisdom that are her trademark. For example, when it came to the release of the Lockerbie bomber Catherine told Downing Street that Prime Ministerial silence just wouldn't wash. Brown's advisers slapped her down, insisting it was a Scottish story. Catherine said they were wrong (and they were), it was a story that would reverberate around the world.

Darling also confirms in the book that it was Catherine, and his wife Maggie Vaughan (another former Herald journalist), who gave him the willpower to resist Brown when the Prime Minister tried to sack his chancellor in 2009.

I suspected as much at the time and in the aftermath phoned Catherine to ask if it was indeed the Vaughan-MacLeod axis that had seen the Brownites off.

I got a typical MacLeod reply - short and sweet. Catherine quipped back: "Aye it was us, and no Balls between us."

Behind every great man, as they say...

Murdo Fraser shot at the Scots Tory startline

2011-09-05T12:33:00.006+01:00

I love the Daily Record editorial this morning (I didn't write it) on the Scottish Tory makeover that Murdo Fraser is proposing.

"To most of us Cif is still Jif, a Snickers is a Marathon, Katie Price is Jordon and the Tories will always be the Tories."

Given the reaction to Fraser's audacious plan it looks like the frontrunner may have shot himself in both feet at the startline.

Just as he was about to launch his candidacy Jack Harvie, the main funder of the Scottish Tories, said he'd go on strike if Fraser won and binned the Tory party.

Fraser says he can find other financiers but suddenly Ruth Davidson, who put in an excellent performance on the Today programme this morning, looks like a good bet.

Whether Fraser's overstated reforms get going is a matter for the Scottish Tories alone, Conservative Central Office says it is staying well clear. But it is hard to see, from this end of the telescope, how a Conservative Prime Minister fighting to save the United Kingdom could go campaigning in Scotland for a party he would no longer be a member of.

With the Independence option inching ahead in the Herald opinion poll today - 39% for to 38% against - Alex Salmond can only be laughing as his opponents split themselves asunder.

Labour shouldn't mock the Tories too loudly given that their own Scottish party might have to go through the same devolutionary transformation in the next month and detach itself from the main UK party. Anyway, Labour prays at night for a Scottish Tory revival to take some votes and some seats away from the mighty SNP.

Right now the SNP is cruising - no date names no questions unveiled - while the other parties try to get their arguments in a row.

The mischievous George Foulkes is making a play tomorrow in the Lords to "seize the initiative" and force referendum on Scottish independence by 2013.

Lord Foulkes, a former Scotland Office Minister and former MSP, is tabling a series of amendments to the Scotland Bill, one of which will require the Coalition to hold a referendum within two years of the legislation being enacted.

Foulkes explains his bold plan thus: "Salmond has been getting away with far too much and should not be making the running. We can do that by exercising our constitutional right."

Cameron's "gearchange" on independence

2011-09-02T07:37:00.002+01:00

David Cameron has signaled that he is preparing to take Alex Salmond’s independence challenge head-on with a renewed focus on fighting the SNP.

The Prime Minister could even beat the First Minister to the draw on an independence referendum by staging a simple Yes-No ballot on the future of Scotland long before the SNP’s preferred three-question poll.

The move comes after the government’s most powerful cabinet group - "the quad" composing of Cameron chancellor George Osborne, deputy PM Nick Clegg and Danny Alexander - met this week to discuss the threat of an independence referendum for the first time.

Whitehall sources said there will now be a "gearchange" in the way the Westminster Coalition deals with the SNP and the independence question.

In a speech to business leaders in Scotland last night Lib Dem MP Danny Alexander, the Treasury number two, blasted the idea of an independent Scotland as a busted flush.

The chief secretary to the Treasury said that a separate Scotland would have a national debt would have been around £65bn, without taking into account the cost of bailing out RBS and HBOS.

He said: "Even with the most flattering account of oil revenues, there was a gap between what Scotland raised in tax and what it spent of £14bn in 2009/10. Scotland’s deficit would have been one of the largest in Europe."

These aren't new arguments but the broadside by Alexander, following on an indy-attack by Scottish Secretary Michael Moore the other day, is the opening salvo in a new campaign against the SNP’s separation plans.

Moore sat in on the quad meeting in Whitehall on Scotland and will be part of the process of gauging the appetite for a Westminster referendum on independence. There are senior Scottish Labour figures who are also open to the idea that is being floated as a runner for 2013, at least a year, possibly two, before the SNP's planned poll.

We've also seen the appointment of a dedicated Number Ten staff to dealing with Scotland as Cameron realises that the future of Scotland is to be the biggest constitutional question of his first term as Prime Minister. This will mean more Ministers will be seen in Scotland making the case for "Scotland in the UK".

Cameron has already indicated that he is ready to short-circuit the SNP’s long game by holding a snap referendum with a simple yes or no question on independence.

SNP government wants to hold a multiple choice referendum late on in the parliament, 2014 at the earliest, to allow momentum for an independence campaign to build up.

If the answer was favourable the SNP government would hold a referendum tomorrow.But SNP polling shows the party it would lose a yes-no referendum hands down so Salmond plans to fudge the question by asking Scots if they want a) independence, b)more powers or c) the status quo.

Combining the majority created by a+b is what Salmond counts on to lever the country further towards independence, whatever form that may take.

Last night the chairman of business leaders’ group CBI Scotland, Linda Urquhart, said any referendum had to deliver a clear result.

She said: "It has to be Independence "Yes" or "No" and no second questions which might produce an inconclusive result."

Urquhart warned that the legality of the referendum must also be put beyond doubt . "The constitution is a reserved matter – so the Scottish and UK Governments must work together to ensure legal certainty and a decisive result."

The same message will come from the Conservatives Murdo Fraser and from all the other pro-UK institutions in the days and weeks to come.

Finally, the sleeping lions in Whitehall have woken up to the independence debate. As the provocatively entertaining John McTernan and people like Stewart Hosie, on Radio Scotland just now, show it is going to be robust exchange.

Darling memoirs being killed by slow leaks?

2011-09-01T10:57:00.003+01:00

Did Alistair Darling save the banks only to lose his own fortune?

The volume of leaks coming from the former chancellor's memoirs via Labour Uncut must be causing anxiety in the Darling household and at the Sunday Times.

The blat is due to serialise "Back from the brink -1000 days at No 11" this weekend, but one wonders what will be left to print.

Already we've learned Darling's opinion on the "volcanic" moods of Gordon Brown, that he wanted to sack Merve "the swerve" King from the Bank of England and his lacerating assessment of Shriti Vadera. Today it is the turn of the Lords of Finance - the bankers who nearly broke the world.

"My worry was that they (the bankers) were so arrogant and stupid that they might bring us all down," writes Darling, according to Labour Uncut.

The former chancellor earned £75,000 for writing the book but stands to gain a lot more from the newspaper serialisation rights. But the Sunday Times must be poring over the small print of the contract, and the extracts, to see what's left to print.

Who is doing the leaking, and spoiling the pitch for the weekend is the big question? It won't be anyone in the Darling camp, he is very proper about these things, and none of his friends would want to see him lose his fees.

Cui bono? Well those that get stiffed in the book, like some former cabinet colleagues, would be keen to kill the serialisation via slow leaks that would take the sting out of an uncomfortable Sunday read. But how would they get a hold of the book in the first place?

Donohoe declares against indy Scottish Labour Party

2011-08-24T12:53:00.004+01:00

Brian Donohoe, Labour MP for Central Ayrshire, has entered the debate on the future of the Scottish Labour party, no doubt after Tom Harris's declaration yesterday that he would stand for the leadership.

Implicit in having an MP as Scottish leader is the case for an independent Scottish Labour Party, something Donohoe and others remembers as a cause for schism and heartache in the late 70s when Jim Sillars was a young maverick.

Donohoe has issued a stark warning against a free-standing Scottish Labour Party, proving, if it needed to be, that there is a strong pro-unionist streak in the Scottish party and no concensus on the future direction of travel.

Donohoe said: “There is no way a United Kingdom party can have a separate identity and people who think the opposite are deluded!”

“I have spent long enough in politics to have had experience of a Scottish Labour Party before which thankfully died on the vine. I am pro-unionist and believe arguments should be presented on the strength of the union not the whim of the separatist.”

Strong words indeed for Murphy and Boyack, and indeed, Tom Harris to chew over.

My morning listening is split between GMS, Athris na Maidne and the Today programme so I contrived to miss Douglas Alexander ruling himself out of standing as a candidate on Radio Four this morning.

He said it was very kind of Tom Harris to suggest him as a future Scottish leader but said he was busy with Libya and pursuing his Foreign Affairs brief.

As I expected Harris's move has opened a gap for Alexander and Murphy to escape demands that they should be the ones turning north.

Alexander said: "I think there are people who can and should offer themselves for the work of rebuilding (the Scottish Labour party) and in that sense if Tom wants to put his name forward that's all to the good."

Clear the runway, here comes "Bomber" Harris

2011-08-23T11:48:00.006+01:00

Good on Tom Harris MP for enlivening the Scottish Labour leadership debate, such as it is, by indicating that he will throw his hat into the ring.

With the Scottish party moribund,and the leadership looking as it might go be default to Joann Lamont MSP, Harris is stirring the pot again.

But quite a few things would have to happen for a Harris candidacy to get onto the runway. Almost all of them depend on Jim Murphy, who is currently conducting a review of the party with the consequence that he is being boxed into answering the question of whether he'll sort out Labour's Scottish problems

Firstly the review of the party structure has to make the leadership post is for leader of the Scottish Labour party, not just the group of Scottish Labour MSPs. Otherwise Harris, Murphy or anyone else with MP after their name just couldn't stand. That one move would logically lead to the Scottish Labour party defining itself as a separate entity from the UK party with all that (positively) entails (Another blog, another time).

Secondly the review, or later the party, would have to find a mechanism for MPs to move easily from Westminster to Holyrood.

The next Westminster elections are due in 2015, the next Holyrood elections the following year. It would be a political high wire act for an MP to stand down and wait a year in the hope that the d' Hondt formula or a patient constituency would grant them their wish to go to Holyrood.

From this I would deduct, the dual-mandate politician, serving a transition term in Holyrood and Westminster, is back on the agenda. No harm in it either, as Donald Dewar, Alex Salmond, Henry McLeish and others would testify. As would many continental politicians who transit between regional and national parliaments.

The most crucial human factor that would have to come into play in the Harris gambit is that Jim Murphy, the former Scottish Secretary and Shadow Defence Secretary, does not stand as Scottish leader. Or Douglas Alexander for that matter, the other MP Harris would like to take up the claymore.

Harris's move on the kingship doesn't quite put Murphy into check but it will force him to declare his hand, sooner or later. Murphy is deft though, and Tom's declaration might have just given him the means to decline the offer.

The leadership question might anyway be settled before any major reform of the party gets put in place.

Whoever wins, whoever stands, has to mark themselves out as the leader of a very distinctive Scottish Labour party if they are to escape the SNP's definition of Scottish Labour being "London Labour"(which is itself natspeak for English).

As Salmond proves leaders of devolved parliaments need a streak of independence (small i) for the electorate to back them. The job, in the eyes of the agnostic voter, is to stand against the central power of UK government of whatever hue. Salmond is very aware that he might be overreaching himself by seeking to define the job as dismantling the UK.

Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone before him, show the electoral appeal of being their own man. There are many politically talented male and female Scottish Labour MPs - they won't thank me for naming them - who now find themselves the wrong side of an electoral boundary following the rout by the SNP.

Any of them who thought that Westminster was more important battleground than Edinburgh now has cause to think again.

Referendum, or not, if Labour doesn't re-establish itself as the social democrat vehicle for mainstream Scottish politics then what happened at the Holyrood election could well repeat itself in 2015 UK-wide.

Tom Harris's merits as a candidate are that he speaks the blunt truth about the Labour Party and Scotland. This, of course, also counts against him by the core of Labour membership who decides. He also stuck his neck out against Gordon Brown which for some makes him a brave politician, for others someone to be struck down on sight.

Tom's trouble, and the SNP's delight, is that he challenges Labour othrodoxy. He's centre-right, by that I mean he is more interested in giving a voice to working people who pay taxes to fund social services than he is in defending the recipients of these social benefits. He is not the comfort-zone candidate and defeated parties tend to retreat into the cushions.

But even over the internet, his chosen weapon, Harris delivers a fair payload of incendiaries onto the SNP independence strategy with regular accuracy. On a leadership platform he would give the opposition a good pounding. Against him is that he has bombed his own side fairly often too with his blunt pronouncements.

He's not often accused of being shy but if he really wants to go for the leadership he has to stop being self-effacing. His, I'll do it if Jim Murphy and Douglas don't stand, already has the SNP lampooning him as his own third choice candidate.

If he wants it he should go for it. It would be good if some of the other Labour MPs at Westminster gave him a run for his money.

Coulson and Co in Strathclyde crosshairs

2011-08-17T12:23:00.007+01:00

"Wanted man in Mississippi,
Wanted man in ol' Cheyenne"

The claims by former News of the World royal editor Clive Goodman that hacking was "widely discussed" at the paper obviously raises fresh legal dangers for Andy Coulson, the editor at the time and latterly David Cameron's communications strategist.

Coulson and the News of the World are in the crosshairs of police investigations in two juristicions - Scotland and England.

I'm told by sources that Strathclyde police have 42 officers working on Operation Rubicon - the force's investigation into perjury, phonehacking, data interception and bribery arising from the Tommy Sheridan perjury trial.

Appearing in the witness box at the Sheridan trial Coulson insisted he had no knowledge of illegal activities at the News of the World, like bribing police officers .

That was the day, according to Coulson himself, that he decided he could no longer carry on as David Cameron's communications strategist.

His evidence, and that of other News of the World witnesses, has been subject to complaints to the Scottish police by Sheridan's legal team.

Although Strathclyde won't confirm the numbers officially Rubicon has, by my figuring, as many if not more officers than are working on Operation Weeting, the Met police investigation into phone hacking.

Given that some London officers will have been pulled off the case to help out with the aftermath of the riots, the Scottish inquiry could well be the biggest investigation into the hacking allegations.

The thorough, clean broom, approach by Strathclyde no doubt reflects well on Stephen House, the chief constable of the force, who was approached to apply for the vacant post as the next commissioner of the Metropolitan police.

House is also in the frame to be the first chief of a new single Scottish police arising from the merger of the current eight forces. I suppose that sometimes it is okay to be wanted in more than one place.

Brian Wilson Writes - online.

2011-08-16T11:25:00.004+01:00

My goodness, the revolution has reached Mangersta.

Welcome online, at last, to Brian Wilson who joins the world of blogs with his Brian Wilson Writes, an online version of his West Highland Free Press column.

This is as auspicious an occasion as double-width looms beings introduced to the Harris Tweed industry. Although he's moved on from politics Brian's take on current affairs has always been required reading.

It took land campaigner Andy Wightman's patience to haul Brian away from print and into the digital age.

Until now his take on politics has only been available in the Free Press, and I hope giving the column away online doesn't affect circulation.

There's plenty for him to comment on more than once a week and instead of posting facsimiles of the Free Press I hope the blog as platform for more than re-printing the Free Press column

And there are plenty out there who'll violently disagree with Brian's opinions because of his politics and often because of their own insecurities. Provoking the SNP with a meatslicing turn of phrase is one of life's minor pleasures for Brian, and is quite amusing for the rest of us. But mostly he's to be read for his original insights, on the Highlands, Scotland and the wider world.

I expect some cybernats will be rolling up their well-paid sleeves up on hearing the news that they have a new target. But the online nats, like the midges, are always with us if slightly less annoying, so don't let that put you off Brian.

There's no obligation to publish derogatory comments, it's bizarre that furious, online guttermouths don't understand that.

As I keep reminding my own nationalist friends and foes, read without prejudice, and at least read to the end before pouncing on the keyboard.

Glasgow gangs ceasefire lessons for the riots

2011-08-11T13:01:00.004+01:00

A bit of a mixed bag of measures there in David Cameron's "fightback" against the summer riots. Everything from insurance claims, bans on balaclavas and closing down social networking sites is to be considered in an attempt to slap down on the social disorder we've witnessed this week.

One of the most significant announcements is that the example of Strathclyde Police anti-gang strategy could be rolled out across the UK.

The operation targeting gangs in Glasgow has resulted in a 50% reduction in violent offending by those taking part. In a city with a stab rate on a par with New York that is some result.

The prosaically-named Community Initiative to Reduce Violence (CIRV) is itself a copy of the more bling-sounding Boston Ceasefire project which was ran in that US city from 1996 and had success too.

Both schemes made breakthroughs by talking to gang members, offering them an alternative, and getting them to confront the victims, the mothers, the surgeons and the cops that have to stitch back together the slashed lives of gang violence.

Quite simply the young gang members were told if they stopped the gang fights they'd have access to help with training, housing, education and community groups. If they carried on, they'd go to jail.

Four hundred gang members signed up in Glasgow - mostly pressurised through their parents - and violent offending among those who undertook the most intensive programme fell by 73%.

All the gen is towards the end of this excellent Prospect magazine piece on Karyn McCluskey, the officer who brought the scheme to Strathclyde after it had been rejected in London and and West Mercia.

Iain Duncan Smith's social justice think-tank has done a lot of work on gang culture and the Work and Pensions Secretary is working with Home Office on how the Westminster government will respond to gang culture.

We're expecting a report in October, expect Glasgow to feature prominently again in Iain Duncan Smith's thinking.

Why Scotland's neds aren't rioting

2011-08-10T14:25:00.008+01:00

The hubris of the First Minister of Scotland over his "frustration" that the riots being described as a UK event, rather than an English one, is beginning to get traction as a news story.

Alex Salmond's comments just remind me of the parochialism displayed during the terrorist attacks of London in 2005, and the attempts on the capital in 2007.

As a London-based reporter I remember trying to engender news desk interest in the failed Tiger-Tiger bombing on Haymarket and the fact that an Islamist terrorist cell was on the run with Wimbledon, Gay Pride and a Royal event all taking place in the city that weekend.

The message came back to write an atmospheric wrap, because none of this really affected Scotland. Boom! A few hours later Glasgow airport was aflame and Scotland was the frontline in the War on Terror. Thankfully no one was killed, apart from one of the bombers, but the event shook Scotland out of its complacency.

You'd think that event alone would have been enough of a lesson for Salmond, who was First Minister at the time. It doesn't pay to be smug or feel that Scotland is somehow different or immune to events that can sweep across the country as fast as it takes to send a BBM.

While Salmond may be playing to his nationalist constituency many have been wondering why the Neds, Scotland's answer to Yobs, haven't been rioting.

Geography has something to do with it, I guess, but not the borderline between England and Scotland.

Scotland doesn't have many inner-city housing estates close to High Street shopping centres. It does do a good line in peripheral urban deprivation, far from the glistening consumer cathedrals.

But for any disaffected youth to get to downtown Glasgow, say, they would have to pass through the territory of rival youth gangs, and get back again once the looting was over. I suspect the police helicopter would be the least of their problems on that booty-laden journey.

Also, there is obviously no black street culture in Scotland, and I can't understand why people have been reluctant to consider race as a factor in this.

There aren't that many black Scottish kids who get stopped and searched by an almost all-white police force. The neds don't complain of being harassed regularly or casually abused by "the Feds" the way black teenagers in London do.

Scottish teenagers might then have less reason to be pissed off in the first place, though they face the same problems of unemployment, lack of opportunities and see the same level of inequality.

That said, the contrast between highly visible wealth and poverty in London is on quite another scale. The pavements may not be lined with gold but a Porsche is one of the least expensive cars you'll see parked on some streets.

It's also worth remembering that before last weekend the most recent event that required a mounted police charge to disperse the mob was the party in Kelvingrove Park in Glasgow on the day of the Royal Wedding.

Everyone else in Britain had a street party, Scotland had a ned riot.

Footnote: I forgot the obvious reason why there aren't riots in Scotland - not sectarianism, not national character, just the fact that its raining flat out.

In the evening there is fear, in the morning they are gone...

2011-08-09T08:33:00.004+01:00

It is the morning after the night before, or rather the third morning after the third night of looting and rioting in London.

This city is so gargantuan that it rolls on anyway, with people making their way to work in the morning sun as if it is just another office day at the slightly chilly end of high summer.

But last night, after it became dark and the police sirens could be heard criss-crossing the city, the mood was apprehensive and edgy. The disorder that broke out in Hackney in broad daylight began to look like pantomime rioting when the rolling news coverage began broadcasting the looting and the licking flames in Croydon and Peckham.

Cuts, racism and plain bad policing don't go near explaining what is happening in the capital and in other cities across Britain when darkness falls.

Mary Riddell, in the Daily Telegraph today, give the best account of the insidious reasons why we are seeing London ablaze against the backdrop of a global economy posed for freefall.

She argues that massive social inequality, stories of corporate larceny and a crippled economy are combining as they did after the Great Crash of 1929 and that the hopeless generation is mustering for the backlash.

She quotes Isaiah, Adam Smith and JK Galbraith in short order to work out why young people who have already fallen off the edge of the economic cliff have taken a peculiar consumerist vengeance on society. The unrest, for now, seems more centered on targeting shoe shops and mobile phone franchises than it is at overturning the political system. But each night has been different and the mood of the mob could change again.

Apart from the question of public order the big political issue is whether Cameron's premiership take a fourth night of pillaging on the streets of the Olympic city without being seriously wounded?

The Prime Minister was badly behind the curve on the last big political crisis, the hacking scandal, and he is in danger of being seen as not having a grip on this far more serious issue. It will take more than a fine speech and a stiff upper lip to sort out the underlying causes of the violence.

Mary Riddell hits the mark by paraphrasing Adam Smith's observation that a well-ordered society cannot develop when a sizeable number of its members are miserable, and as a consequence, dangerous. Read her Telegraph article on the underclass riots here.

Keynes vs Hayek - the fight of the next Depression

2011-08-05T17:32:00.005+01:00

While the world waits for leadership or a repeat of the 1930s economic apocalypse John Papola and Russ Roberts have produced "Fear the Boom or Bust" and "Fight of the Century", two great economics hip-hop music videos.

They're a lot more fun than listening to Robert Peston trying to explain it all. Thanks to David Williamson at Wales Online.

Salmond's Dear Rupert letters

2011-08-04T17:43:00.003+01:00

Robbie Burns couldn't have penned a finer exchange of letters that those between First Minister Alex Salmond and media mogul Rupert Murdoch.

From a day at the races to a night at the opera, Salmond's courting of News International has the makings of a fine one-sided bromance. Here we go...

After the 2007 New York meeting, Salmond wrote:

"Dear Rupert,
It was good to meet you again in New York last earlier this month.I enjoyed our conversation and, as ever, found your views both insightful and stimulating.

Thank you very much for your letter of 12 October and Jim Webb's book which I will read with interest."

An invitation to join the GlobalScot network was extended, but it doesn't look as if Rupert took out membership. Undeterred, Alex ploughs on...

"Dear Rupert

Many thanks for taking the time to speak with me earlier this week.

As discussed I would be delighted if you were able to join me as guest of honour for The Gathering celebrations on 25 July. I will host a reception at the Great Hall in Edinburgh Castle before the unique Pageant production takes place, a highlight of the weekend's celebrations."

Ach, Rupert didn't make it home, so Alex tries to get him on his own patch.An invitation for Murdoch to join Salmond at a golf event in Kentucky in the US follows.

"Dear Sir Rupert(sic)

Scotland is a country renowned for being the birthplace of Golf and as such we take pride in calling ourselves "The Home of Golf. Scotland is due to host the Ryder Cup at Gleneagles in 2014 and as future hosts we have the opportunity to invite a limited number of guests to the preceding tournaments.

I would like to invite you to join me as part of the official Scotland delegation to the forthcoming 37th Ryder Cup Matches to be held at the Valhalla Golf Club in Louisville, Kentucky, next month..."

Later Salmond offers the media tycoon tickets for a performance of the Black Watch play in Brooklyn:

"We would be very happy to organise for you to meet with the artists if you like. However, if you would like to attend incognito this can also be arranged. I will arrange for my office to contact your secretary to make further arrangements."
He went on to advise Mr Murdoch that the play is a "rough, tough production" with views he might find controversial."

Then Salmond sents Rupert a DVD through the post, the political equivalent of a homemade teenage mixtape:

"Dear Rupert

I recently wrote to you enclosing a copy of a DVD with a voice over by Sean Connery that encouraged golfers to come to home of golf next year and to join in our Homecoming Scotland 2009 celebrations. I asked that you help ensure maximum exposure for this film and I am very grateful to you for showing it across some of your network...As I mentioned before, I would be delighted if you where able to join me at any of the Homecoming events as my special guest and I look forward to welcoming you back to Scotland in the near future."

Finally, Rupert replies:

Dear Alex:

Thank you very much for your letter and the beautiful brochure about your coming celebrations. I can't yet promise to be there but I am trying.
I have passed your letter on to Sky Television to see what they can do and either they or I will be in touch with you very soon."

See me, see Pele...pass the ba'

2011-08-03T15:42:00.005+01:00

The wee guy in the middle with the ball, that's Pele. And the wee guy on the right, that's my pal Kevin Schofield doing a diving header in an attempt to cut me out of the picture with the Brazilian football legend.

The greatest football player of all time came to Downing Street today and some of the lobby football squad were privileged enough to meet him.

Pele seemed like a gent, and a fit looking one for 70 years of age. Shake that hand and it's the hand that lifted the World Cup first in 1958, and 1962, and 1970. Wow, it's the hand that shook the world.

Along with some others in this picture I wouldn't even grace the subs bench of the lobby team, but I was tolerated anyway. And seeing the pathetic way Schofers tried to bring me down out there today I'm going to have a trial for his left back position. But I'll only play in a number 10 shirt.

The Commons power to summon witnesses

2011-07-14T12:58:00.002+01:00

Fascinating extract from the guide to Disciplinary and Penal Powers of the House

"A refusal by a witness to attend a Select Committee may be construed as a contempt.
If a witness is unwilling to attend, the committee can agree to order the attendance of a witness at a specified date and time. Such an order is signed by the Chairman of
the Committee and is either forwarded to the witness by registered post or served
personally by a member of the Serjeant at Arms' office. Similarly, an order may be
served upon a witness (not being a Minister, a Member of either House, or an officer
of a Government department) for the production of papers or records required by a
Select Committee.

If a Select Committee has issued a summons to a witness to attend, or produce
papers, and the witness has not responded, it is for the House to act (or not) on the
basis of a Report made to it by the committee. The House may order the Serjeant at
Arms as Warrant Officer of the House to serve a Warrant on the witness. Formerly,
the Serjeant would be sent with the Mace as the symbol of his authority, to order the
attendance of witnesses. However, by the end of the seventeenth century, it had
become accepted that the Mace was required to remain in place for the House to
meet. Therefore, the device of the Speaker's Warrant was invented. In serving the
Warrant, the Serjeant or his appointee may call on the full assistance of the civil
authorities, including the police.

The last use of the Warrant to summon witnesses was in January 1992 (when the
Maxwell brothers were reluctant to attend the Social Security Select Committee
inquiry into the operation of pension funds).

Refusal to answer the questions of a Select Committee is more complicated. In such
an instance the House would look to precedent. A series of options, mentioned
below, are available to treat contempt of the House; these would similarly apply to
contempt before a Committee.

Parliamentary privilege is the sum of the peculiar rights enjoyed by each House
collectively as a constituent part of the High Court of Parliament, and by Members of
each House individually, without which they could not discharge their functions, and
which exceed those possessed by other bodies or individuals. Because neither House
could perform its functions without the unimpeded services of its Members, privileges
Disciplinary and Penal Powers of the House Department House of Commons Information
are required by each House for the protection of its Members and for the vindication
of its own authority and dignity.

(Memorandum by the Clerk of the House of Commons to the Report by the Select
Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, HC 34, 1966-67.)

Following the reports of the then Nolan Committee and the House's Select
Committee on Standards in Public Life (HC 637 1994/95), in 1995, the House of
Commons merged the functions of the former Select Committees on Members'
Interests and on Privileges into the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges: the House also appointed Sir Gordon Downey, KCB, as Parliamentary Commissioner for
Standards, now Mrs Elizabeth Filkin. Matters involving the declaration and
registration of Members' interests, or complaints regarding the more general conduct
of Members, are dealt with in the first instance by the Commissioner, who advises the
Committee on an appropriate course of action.

The House may consider a matter relating to privilege itself: more often, however,
matters arise, usually involving the conduct of non-Members, which need more
detailed investigation. In these circumstances, the House would refer the matter to
the Select Committee of Standards and Privileges. Although the Committee may
consider any matter relating to privilege referred to it by the House, the normal
practice is for such cases to be raised by individual Members by letter with the
Speaker, who has the authority to decide whether or not to allow the Member to
move a motion relating to the matter in the House. Such a motion has precedence
over other business. The usual course after the Motion has been moved would be for
a Member (often the Leader of the House) to move that the matter be referred to the
Select Committee on Standards and Privileges. The Committee would report its
recommendations to the House: these would be debated and the House would
decide whether or not to accept the recommendations.

In modern times, the House has shown increasing reluctance to exercise its powers
even when evidence of a contempt is clear. Indeed, in 1967, the Select Committee on
Parliamentary Privilege (a Committee specially set up to consider every aspect of
privilege) recommended that "the House should exercise its penal jurisdiction (a) in
any event as sparingly as possible, and (b) only when it is satisfied that to do so is essential in order to provide reasonable protection for the House, its Members or its Officers from such improper obstruction or attempt at or threat of obstruction as is causing, or is likely to cause, substantial interference with the performance of their respective functions".

This recommendation was endorsed by the Committee of Privileges in 1977 and approved by the House and given immediate effect on 6 February 1978. This decision guides the Speaker, the House, and the appropriate Committee.

A new Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege was set up in the 1996-97
Parliament, to consider the current situation on privilege, given, especially, the
aftermath of the 'cash for questions' affairs and on Members' ability to waive
privilege. It reported on 30 March 1999 (HC 214 1998/99, available on the internet at: http://www.parliament.the-stationeryoffice.co.uk/pa/jt199899/jtselect/jtpriv/43/4302.htm

The House debated the report on a motion for the adjournment on 27 October 1999,
but has not yet agreed to implement its findings. In the 2010-11 Queen’s Speech,
the Government announced its intention to publish a Draft Parliamentary Privilege Bill to build upon the Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privileges’ 1999 report.
If the witness is in attendance, he or she may be brought by the Serjeant at Arms to
the Bar of the House and before the assembled Members, to be admonished by the
Speaker. If not in attendance, the witness may be ordered into the custody of the
Serjeant, by use of the Warrant, to be brought to the Bar at a date and time specified by the House.

The last stranger (non-Member) to be brought before the Bar and admonished by the Speaker was John Junor on 24 January 1957, for an article
published in the Sunday Express casting doubt on the honour and integrity of
Members. Junor apologised and no further action was taken. Members are
admonished standing in their places. The last Member to be so admonished was Mr
Tam Dalyell on 24 July 1968.

On 6 February 1750, Alexander Murray was called to the Bar in connection with
malpractice at a City of Westminster election. Found guilty by the House, he was
ordered into custody at Newgate Prison until the end of that parliamentary session.
When hearing sentence, he refused to kneel at the Bar and was further found guilty of
a "high and most dangerous contempt of the authority and privilege of this House".
The House further ordered that while in Newgate, (Murray) "be not allowed the use of
pens, ink or paper; and that no person be admitted to have access unto him, without
the leave of this House". (HC Journal 6 February 1750)

The last fine imposed on an offender by the House was on 6 February 1666. Thomas
White was fined £1000 (£114,000 today): White absconded after being ordered into
the custody of the Serjeant at Arms, for causing Henry Chowne, the Member for
Horsham, to be arrested and prevented from attending Parliament. The power to fine
was denied in 1762 by Lord Mansfield in R v Pitt and R v Mead (3 Burr 1335) and the
House has not sought to revive the claim to fine since. In a report in 1967, the
Privileges Committee recommended that legislation be introduced to enable the
Commons to impose fines with statutory authority. The Committee repeated this
recommendation in 1977, but no action has been taken.

The last imprisonment by the Commons of a non-Member was of Charles Grissell in
1880 (breach of privilege in connection with the Committee on the Tower High Level
Bridge [Metropolis] Bill). The House no longer retains it right to imprison. Instead
the House uses a division of the Metropolitan Police based on the Parliamentary
Estate to detain and, if necessary, arrest individuals.

In the lower third of the Clock Tower, is a room in which unruly Members were
confined when committed to the custody of the Serjeant at Arms. Technically, a
Member so committed could be detained for the remainder of the Parliamentary
Session but one day was the general rule. The last Member committed was Charles
Bradlaugh (Northampton), who spent the night of 23 June 1880 in the room.
Bradlaugh had repeatedly refused to take the oath of allegiance required of every
newly elected Member and claimed the right to affirm. Over the next six years, he
was excluded from the House, unseated four times, and re-elected for the same
constituency every time. He finally took his seat in 1886 and remained a Member
until his death in 1891, having successfully introduced a Bill which led to the Oaths
Act 1888, which allowed an affirmation to be taken in all cases where an oath was
Disciplinary and Penal Powers of the House Department House of Commons Information
necessary.

The former cellroom is now used for other purposes."

Scotland through both ends of the media telescope

2011-07-13T11:42:00.006+01:00

There is plenty happening at Westminster that would fill quite a few pages of a Scottish newspaper today, except that this is no ordinary day.

Just going to book a ringside seat for Prime Minister's Questions and for the debate on News International that will follow. Cameron is not taking part in the debate, though he might make it to the vote, but he can't escape a hammering on Coulson et al in half an hour.

The global spread of the News International Scandal, and the drama promised downstairs, mean stories like the Mull of Kintryre crash inquiry, the Secretary of State for Scotland in front of the Scottish Affairs committee and the end of fish discard, effectively the beginning of the end for the EU Common Fisheries policy, all fall down the news list.

Speaking of news lists, I open the Scotsman today to see a familiar, if depressing, "English bias" headline. This time its the BBC showing English bias in its news coverage, as if 90% of the population don't live in England and Wales.

The word England is rarely mentioned in the Scottish media these days, except in negative terms.

Here's an interesting challenge. Can anyone in the next week find a positive reference to England or the word English in any Scottish newspaper? I know it's the silly season, so there is a chance it might happen.

Postscript: It seems it is not just England that gets a rum deal from the Scottish medai. Professor Kenneth MacKinnon of Aberdeen University has been monitoring coverage of Gaelic in the Scottish press and found it to be "degenerated into inaccuracy, prejudice and mockery".

His report is here . Now he's revealed a universal truth about the media's treatment of Gaelic another academic might be interested in researching the media's treatment of England. As for Northern Ireland or Wales, our devolved cousins, they seem to be completely off the media map.

Gordon Brown interview on hacking allegations

2011-07-12T12:34:00.002+01:00

GORDON BROWN – News International scandal
BBC News interview transcript
Tuesday 12th July 2011

Speakers: Gordon Brown
Glenn Campbell

GC: Can you take me back and detail for me the instances where you believe your personal security has been breached?

GB: I think what happened pretty early on in government is that the Sunday Times appear to have got access to by building society account, they got access to my legal files, there is some question mark about what happened to other files, documentation, tax and everything else, but I’m shocked, I’m genuinely shocked to find that this happened because of the links with criminals, known criminals who were undertaking this activity, hired by investigators who were working with the Sunday Times, and I just can’t understand this, if I, with all the protection and all the defences and all the security that a Chancellor of the Exchequer or a Prime Minister has is so vulnerable to unscrupulous tactics, unlawful tactics, to methods that have been used in the way that we’ve found, what about the ordinary citizen? What about the person like the family of Milly Dowler, who were in the most desperate of circumstances at the most difficult occasions in their lives, in huge grief, troubled, not knowing where to turn, and then they find as they have found over the last few days that they are totally defenceless in this moment of greatest grief, from people who are employing these ruthless tactics with links to know criminals,

GC: And that is where I want to take you to, you are saying, or alleging that news International have been involved in a criminal conspiracy with the underworld?

GB: I believe now from what I have seen and heard and what has been told to me by people who have investigated this and I’m looking at the evidence that has been accumulated by Nick Davis of the Guardian and the most brilliant of research, that the links that made possible the intrusion into people’s lives and particularly the intrusion into the lives of completely innocent citizens who deserve to have the privacy of their lives, particularly at times of the greatest grief, at the times when they are at the most vulnerable, that news International were using people who were known criminals people who had in some cases criminal records an that News International as a result were working through links that they had with the criminal underworld and I think when people find out that the invasion of their liberties, their private lives and their private grief’s and their private thoughts and their innermost feelings becoming public property as a result, not of a rogue reporter, or a chance investigator or someone saying something out of turn when they meet a friend at the street corner, or when they talk to someone on a bus, but because criminals were hired to do this particular work, and these were known criminals, these were criminals in some cases with records, in some cases with records of violence and these links have now got to be explored, and I find it quite incredible that the supposedly reputable organisation made its money, produced its commercial results at the expense of ordinary people by using known criminals and that is now what has got to be investigated.

GC: A very strong allegation, your building society wrote to you in 2000 about its concerns with News International and you being a targeted subject of hacking and blagging, you knew then in 2000 did you contact the police did you contact News International, who you had a good relationship with at the time.

GB: I don’t think I can ever say that I had a good relationship with News International. What actually happened was that News International were trying to prove a point and they were completely wrong and they were trying to suggest that I had bought a flat without nit ever being advertised and factually it had been advertised in the very newspaper that was making this allegation, the Sunday Times…

GC: So completely unfounded?

GB: Completely and utterly unfounded, nothing could be further from the truth, a flat that I bought that was advertised and I bought at the price that was going in the market place, but the Sunday Times wanted to allege, with the purposes of bringing me down as a government minister that I had bought in some underhand way. It now appears from what I now know as a result of investigations that have been done by other people and not myself, that they had hired someone who was breaking into my lawyers files, effectively by ‘blagging’ as they call it, talking to my lawyers, getting information out of them, that on 6 occasions they went to my building society and they asked for information and managed to get it out of people on the basis that I was phoning, I was asking for information about myself…

GC: Did you complain to the police?

GB: I complained at the time to the building society, I complained at the time through my lawyers to the Sunday Times, I wanted an apology from them about what happened, but I didn’t know at this time…

GC: Why didn’t you complain to the police?

GB: I did not know at this time that they had hired criminal elements to do this, I did not know at this time about the links with the criminal fraternity, I have only found out as a result of the investigations that have been done, particularly by the Guardian but by you and by many other people, I have only found out about the links between the Sunday Times and what I would call elements of the criminal underworld who were being paid, while known criminals, to do work that if you like was the most disgusting work, not against me only but against people who were completely defenceless…

GC: Hacking and blagging is illegal, do you wish you had complained to the police?

GB: I think the issue then was, who had done this, and the issue now is that we have got a huge amount of information that has been brought to me, even since I was in government that shows the link between the Sunday Times and known criminals, but equally the links between the News International organisation and known criminals and that is information I did not have at the time and it is information that I could not base any complaint upon because I had no idea about who was doing this.

GC: How receptive were News International, you obviously had the ability to pick up a phone and talk to people, senior executives there, what did they say when you said, what are you doing, why are you accessing my private information?

GB: Well when I talked to the editor off the Sunday Times and said that this was completely out of order, that the story was completely inaccurate, he distorted my conversation and actually used it in the Newspaper, there was no support going to come from the editor of the Sunday Times, in dealing with the indiscipline and the practices of his own reporters. So this was in culture in both the Sunday Times and in other Newspapers in News International where they really exploited people, people particularly, I’m not talking so much about me you know, I’m talking about people who were at rock bottom… and rock bottom was the rock upon which the Sunday Times founded their reputation and other Newspapers in News International founded their reputation for purely commercial gain and in some cases to abuse political power.

GC: A question I have to ask, you’ve said that and made those allegations, but during your time in government, both as Chancellor and Prime Minister you courted News International, is it true to say that you had to court them because they were so important they were vote winners for you and isn’t this at the very heart of what has gone wrong here?

GB: When the record of my time as Prime Minister is looked at and all the papers will be there for people to see they will show that we stood up to News International, that we refused to support their commercial ambitions when we thought they were against the public interest, that we did not allow them to take decisions or allow them to pursue actions which were purely in their commercial interests but against the public interest and I think people will find it is partly because we stood up to News International and partly because we refused to go along with some of their commercial proposals that were purely in the interest of their company that News International did not find that they could support the Labour Party at the last election.

GC: Can you give me three instances where Rupert Murdoch or News International tried to influence you on decision-making or you felt that pressure was being put on you whilst you were in public office?

GB: I think it will be pretty clear when the record is examined that News International had an agenda about the BBC, an agenda to neuter Ofcom, the regulatory organisation, and they had an agenda also in relation to the pursuit of their own commercial interest. On each of these three issues News International made proposals, they made propositions, they had policies. We refused to go along with them.

GC: Do you believe that your unwillingness to cooperate is why they didn’t support you at the last general election?

GB: I think when you look at the record – and people will have to look at the record – they will understand that News International pursued an incredibly aggressive agenda in the last year. They are entitled, of course, to have their own views about the politics of this country. I think when people look at the record they will find evidence of how News International was distorting the news in a way that was designed to pursue a particular political cause. In other words, you can complain about how News International abuse their power for commercial gain, and all these press awards they were winning for stories that we now find out were stories that were not achieved in the most clean of ways is one thing. But, of course, the abuse of their power for political gain is going to have to be looked at. Any inquiry that’s going to be set up is going to have to look at how News International attempted to abuse political power for political gain.

GC: We talked about bank records, your bank records being invaded. We’ve talked about your lawyers. Medical records is another instance. Tell me about that.

GB: I have never, never talked about by son or wanted to talk about my two sons or my late daughter in public. I have always been very reluctant to bring them into the political arena. I never thought that it was right that the private lives of young children who are growing up, who I want to have an ordinary life, should be paraded across the media. I have always sought to keep them from the glare of publicity and I think the record will show that’s exactly what I did at Downing Street, despite people wanting to have all sorts of stories about their private life and their families’ private life. So I have never talked about my son’s medical condition before. I have never talked publicly about my son’s medical condition.

GC: But we are at a point where it is very relevant, aren’t we?

GB: I’ve never talked about it. I’m not sure whether even at this stage I want my son to be able to go the internet when he’s six or seven and find all these stories that have been written about him. I think that the invasion of privacy of young people and young children is a big issue.

GC: How do you think that your son Fraser’s medical condition for cystic fibrosis was leaked out?

GB: I have never talked publicly about Fraser’s condition. Obviously we wanted that to be kept private for all the obvious reasons. As a parent you want to do the best by your children and I’ve never complained about what happened to me before. The truth is that information did come out. I was approached by the Sun newspaper. They told me they had this story about Fraser’s medical condition and that they were going to run this story.

GC: How did that affect you, as a father?

GB: In tears, your son is now going to be broadcast across the media, your, Sarah and I were incredibly upset about it, we were thinking about his long term future, we are thinking about our family but there is nothing you can do about it, you are in public life and this story appears, you don’t know how it has appeared, I’ve not questioned how it appeared, I’ve not made any allegations about how it appeared, I’ve not made any claims about how it appeared but the fact is, it did appear and it did appear in the Sun newspaper.

GC: It was Rebekah Brooks who phoned, am I right?

GB: We were told by the Sun and Rebekah Wade at the time, Rebekah Brooks now, the problem that I have is that if this is the policy of newspapers in this country that they are going to write about the medical conditions of young children, then you have got to ask yourself, where are they getting this information from. I have never made any claims. I am not making any claims today. I have never wanted to talk about it. I have never raised it in the public arena. I don’t really want these matters to be public matters that are about the private life of a young child.

GC: The Sun say they got it legitimately. They say they got that information legitimately.

GB: They will have to explain themselves. I can’t think of any way in which the medical condition of a child can be put into the public arena legitimately unless the doctor makes a statement or the family makes a statement. They will have to explain themselves, The issue for me is this. I have never wanted to talk about my son’s medical condition. I have never wanted to raise questions about it. It is in the public arena now. I make no claims but the fact of the matter is that I have my bank accounts broken into. I have my lawyers’ files effectively blagged, with someone getting information from my lawyers. My tax returns went missing at one point. Medical records have been broken into. I don’t know how all of this happened. But I do know that in two of these instances, there is absolute proof that News International was involved in hiring people to get this information. I do know also that the people that they work with, because this is what really concerns me most, is that the people they work with are criminals, known criminals, criminals with records, criminals who sometimes have records of violence as well as records of fraud. These links with the criminal underworld mean that there is nothing that a serious organisation can say when it is alleged that they are using underhand tactics by criminal elements. And people will rightly say, how can a reputable news organisation run their affairs by using known criminals to carry out much of their work.

GC: You and your wife, Sarah, both went to Rebekah Brooks’s wedding and now you are here criticising News International and making allegations regarding their activities against you and your wife. Is this a case of now that you are out of office you don’t need them anymore?

GB: It’s a case of me not knowing until now and until the evidence had been brought to me by work that has been done by investigative journalists telling me what actually was happening. As I said, I have not talked about these things. I now have been given information. The police are obviously looking at some of the information about how this came out, how these things were done, how my bank accounts, my legal affairs, my property affairs and all that could become public property for no other reason that a newspaper wanted to make some commercial gain or abuse political power in doing so. Now I know that to be the case, it’s clear that there were issues that have got to be raised. I did not know the level criminality involved until now.

GC: Last Friday, David Cameron stood up in the House of Commons and he effectively laid the responsibility at your doorstep. He said Labour and you as prime minister had not done enough to combat or investigate phone hacking as it started to emerge. How do you react to that?

GB: I think that’s completely wrong. I think the record will show – and perhaps it’s something I’ve got to talk about later – is that not only did we stand up against the commercial ambitions of News International and make it clear that the public interest was to dominate how we made decisions in government, no matter what they said, no matter what they wanted, but also at the same time we were also very clear that if allegations of wrong-doing were proven, action should be taken. I think the record will show that against the advice of the police, against the advice of the Home Office, against the advice of the Cabinet Office, against the advice in a way of the Select Committee who hadn’t asked for it, I wanted a judicial inquiry some months ago before I left office into the workings of News International.

GC: Did you at all contact Gus O’Donnell or anyone asking for a public inquiry? What action did you take proactively to try and investigate?

GB: I think the record will show that once the Select Committee had reported it was very clear to me that there were questions that were unanswered. They talked about the deliberate obfuscation of News International. They talked about the number of people being far greater than the number of people being named. They talked about all these issues but they haven’t been able to reach a conclusion. I came to the conclusion that the evidence was now becoming so overwhelming about the underhand tactics of News International. I didn’t know about all the illegality at that time, but the underhand tactics of News International, using these private investigators to trawl into people’s private lives particularly people who were completely innocent, completely defenceless, that we had to have a judicial inquiry. That was my view At the time however, there were very few people who accepted that this was the right thing to do.

GC: How big a scandal is this for our political system, our media and the lives of normal people?

GB: My view is that there comes in different times big questions that have got to be confronted by the public and by the political system of our country and it’s pretty clear to me that not only are people utterly defenceless against some of the tactics that have been used by the some of newspapers that are linked to the News International stable and perhaps wider, but also that the level of criminality, which is going to be exposed, meant that there were links between that newspaper and that groups of newspapers and well-known criminals in this country. If that is case, then we have a duty to clear this up entirely. I tried in government to do the best that I could to have totally clean relationship with these papers. No private deals, nothing. Equally at this time I tried to secure a judicial inquiry. I think the record will show that lots of people were very keen that that did not happen. But at the end of the day, we now have a choice to make. Do we have a system in this country where we can uphold the freedom of the press - and I’ve never at any stage during the course of my political career do anything other than champion the right of the press to expose wrong-doing where they find and to speak truth to power, which is what a free press ought to be able to do - but there are some serious questions that the press have now got to answer and there are some serious considerations that we have got to have about the protection of individual members of public in this country, not politicians. The protection of defenceless citizens who at their moments of greatest grief their private feelings and their private tears are intruded upon by huge over-bearing news organisations. It is right that we take action to deal with these problems.

GC: Is it also a time to focus on the relations between politicians and the senior executives at newspapers, especially News International. I have heard stories that Rupert Murdoch turned up at Chequers whilst you were there uninvited, trying to see you, trying to get a conversation with you.

GB: Not true.

GC: I’ve heard a story that while you and your wife were up in Scotland attending a funeral for oilrig workers in a tragic accident, a text was sent from Rebekah Brooks suggesting that you may want to get rid of one of your junior defence ministers.

GB: I think the record will show that some people at News International abused their power. There’s no doubt about that.

GC: Is it true, that last one?

GB: I don’t want to get into individual instances that affect what was said to Sarah, my wife. It’s up to her to say …

GC: But is it true?

GB: I leave it up to her to say anything about these texts that relate to her. The issue for me, the issue we’ve got to focus on…

GC: Did that take place Mr Brown, could you just answer that?

GB: You are asking something that affects Sarah, not me directly.

GC: So she did receive a text?

GB: Sarah would have to answer for this herself, because basically this is about information between two people that was communicated by text if your story is accurate, but it’s not for me to answer for something that happened there.

GC: They were putting pressure on you. They were trying to influence policy, is that correct?

GB: There’s absolutely no doubt that News International were trying to influence policy. There editorials show that they are publicly wanting influence policy. Of course they use channels to do this. This is an issue, and it will become an issue, about the abuse of political power as well as the abuse of civil liberties and I think people will look askance at the British system of government and the way we pride ourselves on the democracy of our country and the civil liberties we guarantee to every individual and the transparency of our political system. And yet at the same time there are these influences working in our political system that have to be brought under democratic scrutiny.

"Pinging" - sinister new level in hacking scandal

2011-07-12T12:01:00.006+01:00

Assistant Commissioner John Yates has just told the Commons Home Affairs committee that he is 99 per cent sure his own phone was hacked during 2005-2006, though he has no idea who was behind the illegality.

Meanwhile the New York Times, which has been doing a fair bit of running on the case, has focused on the other highly dubious methods newspapers use police resources to locate their quarry.

It's called "pinging" and involves the kind of cellphone tracking normally carried out against terrorist suspects or kidnappers. The claim is that the News of the World routinely paid for police resources to be deployed to find anyone who might be trying to flee their attentions.

You can read the article here, and below is the key passage:

"According to Oliver Crofton, a cybersecurity specialist who works to protect high-profile clients from such invasive tactics, cellphones are constantly pinging off relay towers as they search for a network, enabling an individual’s location to be located within yards by checking the strength of the signal at three different towers. But the former Scotland Yard official who discussed the matter said that any officer who agreed to use the technique to assist a newspaper would be crossing a red line.

A former show business reporter for The News of the World, Sean Hoare, who was fired in 2005, said that when he worked there, pinging cost the paper nearly $500 on each occasion. He first found out how the practice worked, he said, when he was scrambling to find someone and was told that one of the news desk editors, Greg Miskiw, could help. Mr. Miskiw asked for the person’s cellphone number, and returned later with information showing the person’s precise location in Scotland, Mr. Hoare said. Mr. Miskiw, who faces questioning by police on a separate matter, did not return calls for comment."

Yates of the Yard and the 11,000

2011-07-12T10:50:00.002+01:00

Still in the whirlpool of the phonehacking scandal. Today it's Yates of the Yard, Assistant Commissioner John Yates, in front of the Home Affairs Committee.

Several Labour MPs will want their vengeance on him. Yates, remember, pursued Blair over groundless cash for peerages claims and played a crucial part in the News International cover-up of phonehacking.

The last time Nick Davies uncovered the extent of the practice in 2009 it fell on Yates to review the evidence collected by the police.

Most of what we now know was in the hands of the police at the time, contained in Glenn Mulcaire's extensive notes. But Yates spent barely an afternoon looking at the case again. About 5.30pm he came out of Scotland Yard, stood in front of the live cameras and declared, to effect, that there was nothing to see here, move on.

That was the moment you knew David Cameron had all the luck, as well as the talent, to propel himself into Downing Street.

The man at the centre of the cover-up allegations was Andy Coulson, by then Cameron's communications director. Any hint of illegality would have tainted Cameron and recontaminated the Tory brand.

Instead Yates' effectively gave News International a clean bill of health.
with which to discredit the Guardian.

New York Times does the "British Spring"

2011-07-11T14:21:00.004+01:00

According to the New York Times view of the world we are living through nothing short of a revolution in Britain as politicians cast aside the shackles of the crumbling Murdoch media empire.

David Carr, observing the spreading phone hacking scandal from 30,000 feet, writes: "In truth, a kind of British Spring is under way, now that the News Corporation’s tidy system of punishment and reward has crumbled. Members of Parliament, no longer fearful of retribution in Mr. Murdoch’s tabloids, are speaking their minds and giving voice to the anger of their constituents.

Meanwhile, social media has roamed wild and free across the story, punching a hole in the tiny clubhouse that had been running the country. Democracy, aided by sunlight, has broken out in Britain."

Quite. I'm not sure about a revolution but clearly the hacking scandal has created an atmosphere akin to an insurrection. The story is so chaotic, so well out of control, that no one knows where this will end. There has been a new twist every working hour for the last week and no prospect of the pace slackening over the next few days.

Yesterday the News of the World shut, and today Murdoch's BSkyB bid looks doomed. The Prime Minister's former communications director has been arrested and is being put in the frame (by selective leaks) for ordering the corruption of the Queen's Royal Protection Squad.

The Prime Minister is feeling the heat, the police themselves are under scrutiny, and politicians are running a mile from the Sun God that was Rupert Murdoch. Will it end up with increased plurality in the press, a political class freed from fear of the media?

Who knows, in journalism the industry feels like it is going through a British winter right now, not some kind of revival.

And as I write here comes another breaking line - that Gordon Brown and the Sunday Times are about to become the story of the day. The next act of the saga could be Brown's revenge on Murdoch.

Brown's people deny he's making any statement today but he has been seen around the Commons. This story might not be a revolution, but it is a rollercoaster.

Sir Iain Noble's estate worth £4.7m

2011-07-05T16:06:00.005+01:00

The late Sir Iain Noble, the merchant banker who devoted many years of his life to championing the Gaelic language, left an estate worth more than £4.7m, according to his recently published will.

Noble, who died aged 75 on Christmas Day last year, owned the 25,000 acre Eilean Iarmain estate on Skye and founded Sabhal Mor Ostaig, the Gaelic college on the island that is his real legacy.

Sir Iain's will shows the Skye lands and his Eilean Iarmain hotel were worth £2.5m at the time of his death, more than half of the £4,738,373 of his will.

His will shows he also had household contents and goods worth £200,000, and
more than £1 million in bank accounts and stocks and shares.

Sir Iain left the bulk of his estate to his wife Lady Lucilla. Bequests of
£10,000 were left to the endowment trust of Sabhal Mor Ostaig and the Skye Trust.

McKenzie brings some sunshine to Labour

2011-07-05T14:24:00.003+01:00

The train was delayed, his luggage was stuck, and Iain McKenzie said his journey to Westminster yesterday seemed longer than the five weeks of campaigning in the Inverclyde and Greenock by-election.

At least he brought some sunshine, and a smile to the face of Labour colleagues when party leader Ed Miliband greeted him outside St Stephen's entrance to Westminster Palace.

Labour were nervous (and behind, according to their own polling) when the campaign began after the hammering they took from the SNP in May.

McKenzie held the Westminster seat with 15,118 votes over the SNP's Anne McLaughlin on 9,280. Labour's majority fell from 14,416 bequeathed by the late David Cairns to 5,838.

The Conservatives took third place with 2,784, the Liberal Democrats polled 627 votes and UKIP was fifth with 288. A result like that makes Scotland look like a two-party state, with the Lib Dems heading in the direction the Tories took a decade ago.

Anyone seen Labour's bridge back to Scotland?

2011-07-04T12:21:00.009+01:00

After the Inverclyde by-election confirmed the Scottish Labour Party still has a pulse, the first stage of moving the patient out of intensive care is underway.

Later today as Shadow Defence Sectretary Jim Murphy and Sarah Boyack MSP discuss their ideas to reform the Scottish party with MPs in Westminster.

The pair have already had talks with the MSPs in Scotland but persuading the Westminster party to swallow some of the Irn Bru reforms I outlined in today's Daily Record may not be easy.

Senior party figures insist they have an open mind about changes but it's pretty clear they want to beef up the Scottish identity of Labour - and not just with Barr's "made in Scotland 'fae girders" branding.

Structurally the party will have to become organised around the 73 Scottish parliament constituencies, most of which do not overlap the 59 Westminster seats.

Harder to sell to MPs is the idea that the leader of the Scottish Labour Party should be the overall team general. There's resistance to that but it will strike anyone who doesn't follow politics closely as odd that Iain Gray, always described as the Scottish leader, in in reality only leader of the Labour MSPs at Holyrood.

That, in turn, will lead to a looser relationship with the UK Labour party, a positive thing for the Westminster leader if it turns voters back to Scottish Labour and prevents the break-up of the UK.

But the most symbolic reform - structural and psychological - is enabling, and persuading, Scottish Labour MPs to make the return journey to Holyrood.

To paraphrase Angus MacNeil, Labour has to address the problem of why it fields its A team for Westminster and its B team for Holyrood.

Asking Scottish Labour MPs to find the political highway to Holyrood, to stand in seats that were once fiefdoms and are now enemy territory, to relinquish parliamentary ambitions and take leave of the national political stage, is not going to be easy. That's not to mention the tartan toes of MSPs and candidates that would have to be trampled on to facilitate a transition.

The bridge back to Scotland might be hard to find, but until some of Scottish Labour's big Westminster beasts set out on that journey the party will always be challenged on whether it is has learned the lessons of 2007 and 2011.

Salmond's Scottish speech patterns

2011-07-01T13:00:00.004+01:00

I've only read the First Minister's speech to the opening of the Scottish parliament, not heard the delivery yet, but it strikes like a very well crafted piece of work.

It is quite subversive to use her Majesty's own words as an argument to dismantle her kingdom. Salmond is getting very comfortable in taking in the historical and cultural sweep of the nation (though perhaps a little less would be more) and parceling it around the core message - optimism and equality. Or separatism cosseted in fine words, if you disagree with him.

Who writes the scripts for Mr Salmond these days, I asked out of curiosity? "Team Salmond," came the first evasive reply from SNP central. I'm told it is the First Minister's own draft tweaked by advisers. I think the individuals behind the message ought to get some credit.

Conversely, isn't time SNP HQ relaxed the discipline on candidates to make "gracious" acceptance speeches from election platforms.

I can't be alone in finding it a little creepy that every SNP candidate in every constituency at the Scottish election carried near-identical copies of win, lose or draw tributes to their opponents, many of whom they quite publicly despise.

There is being on message and there's being on autopilot. Such cod "graciousness" only reinforces the perception that some candidates couldn't be trusted to behave nicely if left to their own devices.

That said, no, I didn't find Iain McKenzie's victory speech for Labour at the Greenock by-election last night very gracious either.

Greenock and the Janus Scottish electorate

2011-07-01T06:25:00.008+01:00

Like a Spaghetti western character who felt their luck was on the verge of running out Scottish Labour's Iain McKenzie is tapping the body politic in amazement this morning and finding out he is the one left standing after an almighty gunfight at the Greenock corral.

When the smoke cleared Labour came home with a majority of over 5000 in the Inverclyde and Greenock by-election last night, that's down from a 14,400 majority the late David Cairns bequeathed the party.

At the beginning of the shoot-out with the SNP Labour's own polling showed it was heading to disaster. McKenzie's denouncement of the SNP in his acceptance speech betrayed the bitter tension in the campaign.

By-elections are but straws in the wind but Labour will take heart that they have taken some wind out of Alex Salmond's sails. The First Minister camped out in Greenock - seven visits in a month - but the SNP's Anne McLaughlin didn't have the momentum to get over the finish line.

Implications? Yes, Labour is standing and breathing again in Scotland but the party high heid yins openly acknowledge they have a massive task to do in restoring the Scottish party. Jim Murphy's interim proposals are due soon but these will just dip a toe in the waters of reform with plans to give council candidates contracts of commitment and the like.

Labour's Scottish fightback begins in Greenock but it is hard to see Greenock as a personal boost for Ed Miliband. On a day of national strikes against Coalition cuts (ostensibly pension reforms) Labour should have been romping home in a constituency that used to spit out Labour votes like shipyard rivets.

The result proves Miliband a competent opposition leader, but that's the trouble isn't it, being a good opposition leader isn't good enough.

For Alex Salmond Greenock, and several other Scottish constituencies, demonstrates the Janus nature of the Scottish electorate, willing to vote nationalist for the Scottish parliament but coming back to the Labour fold in a Westminster contest.

But the SNP is still the party making the best offer to the left-of-centre Scottish voter, they are the ones with all to play for and the energy and finance to campaign.

How will that two-sided nature of the Scottish voters play out in the independence referendum? If it were held tomorrow the independence option would be overwhelmingly rejected by Scotland, but Salmond will hedge his bets with a two question referendum - offering a choice of independence or more powers - and will spend spend the next three years hauling on the cables that bind Scotland to the UK.

There's no little irony in the Queen attending the Riding of a Scottish parliament at Holyrood today, one dominated by nationalists who want to rip her kingdom apart.

Today is the official opening of the five year Holyrood term (one year longer to avoid a clash with the general election due in 2015) which will be defined by the referendum issue.

And forget AV or Lords reform, the future of Scotland is due to become the big constitutional issue of this Westminster parliament too.

Cameron hasn't quite woken up to that yet, but how could he with his party still dead from the neck down in Scotland, and in many other parts of the country outside the south of England.

Business as normal there though strategist George Osborne marvels at the SNP's ability to govern as a minority and then go into an election as the party offering a better vision of the future. It's a script the Tories will borrow at a UK level the next time.

The most worrying result, for all the pro-UK politicians, is the complete disappearance of the Lib Dems, who only managed a streetful of votes.

There are some very bitter words from that great Greenockian, Ross Finnie, this morning. He called the 627 votes "a humiliating result" and said "there were clear issues of trust in the leadership". That translates as oh Nick, why have you foresaken us?

Every time a Scottish Lib Dem politician appears on the television you can see the truth in their eyes. I felt sorry Jo Swinson, the deputy Scottish leader, giving that glazed defence of their doomed marriage to the Conservatives late last night.

But Scottish Labour should be careful what it wishes for. I remember the campaign to wipe the Tories out in Scotland, which Labour gleefully achieved, but where did these voters transfer their allegiance to?

The same level of fury with the Lib Dems in the last year has crushed their support in Scotland. But disgruntled Lib Dem supporters have split between Labour and the SNP at a ratio of two to one in favour of the nationalists, according to SNP polling.

That gives the SNP heart and it also gives big clue as to the direction of travel for Scottish Labour if Greenock is to be a turning point rather than a waymark on the road to further Holyrood defeats.

How Scotland fares in tomorrow's strikes

2011-06-29T17:24:00.007+01:00

Scotland is facing the biggest public sector shut down in a generation on Thursday as thousands of workers take strike action over Coalition government cuts to their pensions.

There are close on 30,000 members of the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) in Scotland and many of them will join 750,000 public servants across the UK on strike in a row over pay, pension and jobs.

Staff in government departments and public agencies in every part of Scotland will walk out with their counterparts in England and Wales in the fight to protect their pensions and jobs against cuts.

One of the biggest picket lines in Scotland is expected at the Faslane nuclear base on the Clyde where civilian security staff are due to strike in large numbers.

Glasgow’s George Square will host the biggest trade union rally in years while in London all police leave has been cancelled as the city braces itself for mass protest action against the government.

The 24 hour walkout by public servants across the UK, joined by teachers in England and Wales, is expected to cause major disruption.

International airline passengers have been warned to expect delays at Scotland’s major airports at Aberdeen, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Prestwick when immigration and passport staff leave their posts.

Benefit offices and tax offices across Scotland will shut and court services could be hit where clerks to the court go on strike.

The Scottish government itself is preparing for paralysis as over 7000 staff in finance, administration, and ministerial drivers and security staff could walk off the job.

There will be pickets outside government headquarters at St Andrews House and Victoria Quay in Edinburgh, forcing Ministers to break the strike if they cross the lines.

There will also be picket lines at many prisons where prison officer and ancillary staff are members of the PCS union.

There will pickets at the Scottish parliament and Edinburgh castle, where members of Historic Scotland staff are striking. The Museum of Scotland staff will walk out and the National Galleries in Edinburgh could close due to staff shortages.

But the effects of the strike will be visible across Scotland. The Scottish Public Pensions Agency, at Tweedbank in Galashiels will be on strike; Forestry Commission staff, hit by massive job cuts announcement in Edinburgh, will be out.

The Students Awards Agency, in South Gyle in Edinburgh will be affected and the Student Loans company in Glasgow too.

The Accounts and Bankruptcy Agency Kilwinning in Ayrshire is expected to be 100 per cent solid behind the strike

The biggest, and perhaps most symbolic, picket line in the whole country will be at Faslane where government security guards are due to strike, forcing the military to take on civilian roles.

"I have never seen a build up to a strike like this," one of the trade union organiser told me.

Some 48 per cent of the public are sympathetic to the aims of strike action but there is a sustained media and government campaign to divide the trade unionists from other sections of the population.

Debtocracy, alternative view of Greek tragedy

2011-06-29T14:16:00.004+01:00

Greece's parliament has just approved a five-year austerity plan with 155 votes in favour and 138 votes against. This will open the door to the next stage of the EU bail out, but the Greek tragedy is far from over.

The MPs voted through the package in the face of a general strike and a two days of rioting on the the streets of Athens.

Tomorrow they will focus on raising taxes to secure some 14bn euros over the next five years and introducing 14bn euros in public spending cuts.

To meet EU demands, Greece must sell 50bn euros-worth of public assets by 2014, almost 20 per cent of GDP. Public sector pay is being cut 15 per cent. It kind of puts Britain's economic situation in the shade and makes comparisons between tomorrow's public sector strikes in the UK and the pain being inflicted on the Greek public pretty spurious.

The UK media have Greece typified by early retirement, tax dodging and corruption. For an alternative view of how this is all impacting on ordinary people here's a link to the English language version of the Debtocracy documentary which has swept Greece in recent weeks.

Hail Margo, Queen of Scottish columnists

2011-06-29T13:55:00.005+01:00

I didn't know Margo MacDonald was on the blogosphere, but there she is posting her Edinburgh Evening News columns onto her Mxrgo website.

(Does that not put her Labour contemporary Brian Wilson to shame, his Free Press columns remain in the inky darkness despite repeated appeals. Someone is on the case, I hear)

Anyway, there's Margo on the SNP defence policy, on the Greek crisis, assisted suicide and much else beside. A voice worth listening to.

Scotland doesn't do elected monarchs but if it did then I reckon Margo Macdonald would be the Queen by next week. Until that day dawns we'll have to read her edicts online.

Inverclyde by-election gets all , er, cuddly

2011-06-27T16:59:00.006+01:00

I have to admit I'm baffled by the relevance of the teddy bear in this photo but it must be a vote winner or the most successful election-winning machine on the planet wouldn't have put it on an SNP leaflet.

No one is taking a punt on the outcome of the Greenock and Inverclyde by election this Thursday either. Labour are feeling "frisky", one of their people told me today, and reckon they have the SNP on the run.

With a Westminster majority of over 14,000 they should have the SNP grizzlies chased into the Paisley Braes by now but these are changed days in Scotland.

Duncan MacNeil (big brown bear) scrapped home for Labour with a 511 majority at the Scottish elections so anything could happen.

The SNP (Care Bear Bunch) are playing down their chances in the hope of an upset in another Labour heartland that will continue their May momentum.

That, as they say on the Main Street, would be a "baw breaker" for Labour, already floored by the Scottish election debacle. SNH would have to set up an urban nature reserve for Scottish Labour politicans to allow them to roam around like they did in the old days.

But if the campaign has been more teddy bears than grizzly bears then it will come down to which camp can get their core vote out on the day.

It may even depend on what the Yogi Bears, the rump Lib Dem support in the constituency, decide to do. Like you, I can bearly wait for the result to see if the recent SNP gains have polarised (oh, yes) voters.

Cameron won't play referendum games with Alex

2011-06-21T12:45:00.004+01:00

Back from the Prime Minister's Downing Street press conference which was noteworthy for the way he slapped down his military chiefs who have been squealing about the RAF and the Navy "running hot" to maintain the Libyan bombardment.

He said, rather glibly: "sometimes I open the papers and think you do the fighting, I'll do the talking." I suspect he'll pay for that remark down the road because top brass can turn can do into can't go quite quickly for a PM.

Oh, there was a U-turn too, on prison sentencing in England and Wales today. These have become pretty regular events.

On the Scottish question, and at least one is compulsory on the day the Scotland Bill is going through parliament, Cameron was asked by Mike Settle if he would be tempted to short-circuit, the two question/2014-2015 guessing game that Alex Salmond is playing on the referendum issue.

Cameron gave a pretty full answer, emphasising that we would enable a referendum when the Scottish parliament votes for one, but also serving notice that he did not want to "play games" on independence while the First Minister prepares the ground to maximise support for separation.

He didn't quite rule out a short-circuit by calling a referendum himself (which Westminster could do anytime). But he seemed impatient for Salmond to get on with it and warned him to govern for the wellbeing of Scotland not for the circumstances that will maximise support for a independence vote.

Here's what he said in full:

“What I worry about is that the government of Scotland is going to be too much about how to bring about the right circumstances for his referendum - whether he wants two questions or four or six - rather than trying to the right thing by people in Scotland

“I genuinely believe in a respect agenda. I respect the mandate that Alex Salmond has as First Minister, the governemnt here in Westminster will work with him and talk to him about how to amend the Scotland Bill, about how we can make sure everyone can benefit from the policies of the UK government and two government work well together

What I won’t have an endless situation where this isn’t about the health and wealth and wellbeing of Scotland, and it’s just about trying to get to a referendum situation to satisfy his needs. That s not right at all.

“If the Scottish parliament votes to have a independence referendum that is a vote we have to respect that vote and we have to enable that to happen. I don’t believe in Scottish independence, I believe in the United Kingdom and I want to keep the United Kingdom together. I’m not going to play a game with Alex Salmond about the hows and whens and wherefores.

“I think he should get on delivering good government for the people of Scotland and working with the Westminster government to make sure we join in the endeavour and not play games.”

Edwin Morgan - the "Game Maker"

2011-06-19T14:40:00.005+01:00

The SNP, and the rest of Scotland, has been stunned by a £1m donation from the estate of the late poet Edwin Morgan.

Personally, I'm stunned that a poet could become a millionaire, twice over, because he has left another £1m to create a poetry prize for young Scottish writers.

Morgan, who died last year aged 90, was appointed Scots Makar, Scotland's poet laureate, by Jack McConnell in 2004.

The SNP is still in the dark about the donation but if confirmed, and there's no reason to doubt the story, the £1m Morgan legacy will be the biggest single contribution in the history of the party.

It far outstrips anything the Brian Soutar gave Salmond for this year's election campaign.(It is ironic that these two big donations come from either end of the rainbow. I'm glad to see that NUS Scotland is at least protesting the Stagecoach boss's knighthood for services to homophobia).

Anyway, the immediate point is that the Morgan money can go straight into an SNP campaign war chest in the run-up to the 2014 independence referendum.

Meanwhile, Scottish Labour's accounts are about as robust as fistful of Greek government bonds while the party struggles with the existential questions ranging from what it is about to how does it find money to say that.

In modern political campaigning those who spend the most tend to win the most and the Morgan legacy could be a game-making donation to the SNP's independence cause.

Michael Gove, the striker on the strikes

2011-06-16T16:16:00.005+01:00

I like Michael Gove, he's witty, polite, erudite, a fellow-hack and a proud Aberdonian to boot.

In fact I like him so much that when we were both young men - and he was a striking journalist at the P&J on the east coast of Scotland and I was a staffer at the radical West Highland Free Press - I used to send regular donations to his cause which became an NUJ crusade.

So, when I heard the Education Secretary on the wireless this morning, I nearly choked on my west London muesli mix. (Ach, we've both come a long way haven't we)

Speaking about the simmering prospect of teaching strikes, Gove the Cove said: "I don’t think a strike helps. I’ve been on strike myself, when I was much younger, it didn't solve anything."

Is that right, Michael? Most reporters remember the P&J strike as a principled stand that delayed by a decade the journalistic deforestation of the Scottish newspaper industry.

We can agree to disagree on that if you like Michael, but what's your address, I'd like my money back.

Patrick Leigh Fermour's time of gifts

2011-06-14T14:30:00.006+01:00

I am belatedly catching up with the news that Sir Patrick Leigh Fermour, the acclaimed writer and adventurer has died, at the fine old age of 96

From walking across Europe as a teenage boy in the 1930s to kidnapping a German General in wartime Crete, there was not much in Leigh Fermour's life story that wasn't dazzling.

It wasn't just that he was just a man of action, he wrote like an angel. His two volumes about a teenage odyssey from the Hook of Holland to Constantinople are the among the best books I have read.

My friend, Calum, presented me with "A Time of Gifts" and "Between the Woods and the Water" as we prepared to embark on a post-Ceausescu tour of Romania many years ago. I thought we were going to witness the aftermath of a dictatorship, but Calum explained that Leigh Fermour was the real reason we were traveling.

The books were written some 50 years after the event but Leigh Fermour blended the exuberance of youth and the wisdom of age into incredible prose. As an author he rendered the history, topography and culture of central Europe with such vivid strokes of the pen that it changed that trip and ever other journey I have undertaken since. That was quite a gift for any book to bestow.

He leaves a third volume, completing the journey to the Bosporus, in draft form and an official biography, by Artemis Cooper, is due out next year.

The Daily Telegraph obituary columns give a good account of his "Ill met by moonlight" adventures on Crete and subsequent literary career. You read it and you think what a guy, what a life, what a writer.

Osborne comes bearing gifts for Scotland

2011-06-13T17:41:00.006+01:00

On the face of it the UK government's plans to give the Scottish parliament more financial powers, announced today, seem extraordinarily generous and magnanimous.

Mmm, beware of Greeks bearing gifts, I say, or George Osborne saying that he's giving anything away.

I'm no financial whizz but laid out in their simplest terms these new powers appear to be reflected through a haze of smoke and mirrors.

The big one, which was anticipated anyway, allows pre-payments of the block grant to let the Scottish government put a down-payment of £200m on the new Forth Replacement Crossing.

That allows engineering work on the £1.6bn infrastructure monument to the Salmond era to begin. There's a helluva bill coming down the road, but that's for later.

Also amendments to the Scotland Bill, made in response to demands from the Scottish parliament committee, will give Holyrood the option of issuing bonds to access cash from capital markets instead of just going on bended knee to the Treasury

The floor for borrowing is £2.2bn, Scottish Ministers could theoretically ask for more. The bond issue, one beloved of Alex Salmond and dismissed a few months ago as a "vanity project" by UK Ministers, will be subject to a value for money review by the Treasury.

The catch, I guess, is that bond issues are usually more expensive than borrowing from the National lending board. Still, if Salmond wants to flash tartan dollars that he's raised himself from Chinese or Middle East investors, or canny Scots, then he has that option. Very gracious of Osborne to allow this but the £2.2bn, obtained either way, has already been accounted for in Treasury figures.

Additionally Scottish Ministers will be able to insulate public services against any variation in the tax receipts they budget to receive. So, if the tax-raising parliament envisioned by Calman sometime after 2016 falls short of cash because the economy is flat-lining it can borrow up to £125m instead of cutting public services.

Similarly, it can protect itself from sudden changes in spending levels by putting up to £125m into a rainy day fund when times are good.

For Chancellor George Osborne it is all about tidying up the rights and responsibilities of the Calman tax-raising powers, and respecting the wishes of the Scottish parliament.

For Alex Salmond it is a "down payment" on future powers that he wants to wrestle from Whitehall. He's had a not bad result today but the bottom line, I suppose, is that nothing is added to the bottom line of borrowing by the UK Treasury.

Tories stand a candidate for Greenock

2011-06-08T14:37:00.003+01:00

The Scottish Conservatives have selected local councillor David Wilson as their candidate for the forthcoming Greenock and Inverclyde by-election for Westminster.

Cllr Wilson will be formally adopted at a meeting of local members tonight, as Labour moves the writ for the 30th June by-election in parliament.

Wilson is Depute Provost of Inverclyde. So far, he'll be facing up to Inverclyde Council convener Iain McKenzie, the Labour candidate and Anne McLaughlin , who lost her seat as a regional MSP for Glasgow, who will contest the seat for the SNP.

Scotland could benefit from Strategic Defence Review

2011-06-08T14:27:00.003+01:00

Report on Defence Secretary Liam Fox's evidence to the Scottish Affairs Committee yesterday. This dispatch didn't make it into a print version.

Scotland will end up with more defence spending, more defence jobs and more military personnel than many other parts of the UK in the next few years, according to senior government sources.

Plans to move the British Army divisions from bases in Germany, spending on Trident’s Faslane and on new warship contracts will give Scotland a major military role in the UK.

The claim, by senior Minister of Defence figures, was made on the day Defence Secretary Liam Fox insisted that he wanted to maintain a strong military "footprint" in Scotland, amid continuing speculation over the future of two key air bases.

The future of RAF Leuchars in Fife and RAF Lossiemouth in Moray, along with RAF Marham in Norfolk, will be decided next month when the Ministry of Defence announces the outcome of its basing review.

Giving evidence to the Commons Scottish Affairs Committee yesterday, Dr Fox said that no final decisions had been made on the future of Lossiemouth or Leuchars, both earmarked for closure under the defence review.

Responding to claims by the SNP MP Elidh Whiteford that Scotland does not get a fair share of UK spending on defence Fox said strategic defence budgets were not decided "according to some ethnic ledger".

The Scottish-born Defence Secretary admitted that over the past decade, the military forces stationed in Scotland had fallen more sharply than across the UK as a whole.

He said: "I am aware of the fact that, between 2000 and 2010, the total reduction was 11.6% but the reduction in Scotland was 27.9%, so over the decade there were bigger reductions made in personnel as a proportion than in other parts of the UK."

But he stressed that the MoD would continue to need significant basing capacity in the UK to house the thousands of British troops returning from bases in Germany.

Fox said: "With some 17,000 leaving the armed forces and some 20,000 coming back from Germany that doesn’t leave a great deal of room for actually reducing capacity for accommodation. So it is a question of how we use the bases in the review," he said.

"I have a very strong view that we need to maintain a strong footprint of the UK’s defence assets across the whole of the United Kingdom. It is one of the things that we will take into account."

Dr Fox said he had not had any discussions with First Minister on the future of the military bases in Scotland, including the Trident nuclear deterrent, which Salmond has declared would be removed from an independent Scotland.

Ian Davidson, the Labour chairman of the Scottish Affairs Committee, said uncertainty over an independence referendum was causing concern in the shipbuilding industry.

Davidson said that trade unions in his Glasgow constituency had expressed concern about the future of work at Scottish yards.

Fox replied that the MoD would continue to award contracts to Scottish defence suppliers , although he warned that the "uncertainty" over the country’s future was not helpful to industry.

"Uncertainty is not good for long-term investment," he said.

Greenock & Inverclyde by-election - Thu 30th June

2011-06-08T07:22:00.003+01:00

The Westminster by-election for the Greenock and Inverclyde constituency is to be held on Thursday 30th June.

The writ for the by-election, caused by the sudden death of Labour MP David Cairns, is expected to be moved in the House of Commons this afternoon. This normally happens after Prime Minister's Questions.

Labour’s candidate, Inverclyde Council leader Iain McKenzie, will be defending a majority of 14,416 during the three-week election campaign.

However, in the nearest equivalent Holyrood constituency, also Greenock and Inverclyde, Labour’s lead slumped to just 511 in the Scottish Parliament elections last month.

Anne McLaughlin , who lost her seat as a regional MSP for Glasgow, will contest the by-election for the SNP.

The late David Cairns, who died from pancreatitis on May 9th, was MP for the seat since 1997.

Iain McKenzie, 52, said: "This is an election no-one wanted, because David Cairns was a well-respected MP who served people well."

Scottish Labour's coming hame

2011-06-07T14:09:00.004+01:00

Here's a link to Labourhame, which looks like an online therapyboard to help Scottish Labour think its back from the electoral catastrophe that befell the party a month ago.

It's all the work of Tom Harris, the irascible Glasgow South MP, who actually cares about all this much more than he lets on. It looks good, has people that are worth listening to and, you know, it could have a future.(That's the website, the party is still in intensive care).

Westminster, the one story town for Scots

2011-06-07T12:18:00.008+01:00

Holidays over, Westminster is back in harness today with Cabinet meeting, an Ed Miliband press conference, David Cameron promising to protect the NHS (from his own reforms), coastguard campaigners in town and Defence Secretary Liam Fox in front of the Scottish Affairs committee. Rust never sleeps and all that, but every move in Thamesville has to be seen through the prism of an independence referendum now.

Thanks to the genius of Scots Secretary, Michael Moore, the Westminster lobby was left at the wrong end of the "second referendum" story yesterday.

He made his two referendums announcement in Edinburgh where it was lapped up by the Holyrood lobby hacks (The logic is obvious - Michael is trying to do me out of a job here at Westminster, and there's me thinking that was the SNP's mission).

Salmond was scathing, accusing Moore of "withering and irrelevant nonsense" but the SNP will be well chuffed with the extended logic of the Moore doctrine, which is to ensure that everyone can take the option of voting for independence in the first ballot and think again in a second ballot, or vice versa.

I do get the feeling that Westminster still doesn't get the idea that the independence agenda is seriously on the table in the UK.

Labour leader Ed Miliband gave a pretty pat answer when asked about the second referendum at his post-honeymoon press conference this morning.

He talked about making a positive economic, cultural and social case for the Union and said he was confident that there would be no second referendum because the pro-UK vote would win the first one.

To be honest, he didn't sound that convinced himself and there's no sign of that "positive agenda" as the SNP organises for a vote on the question and timing of its choice.

With Labour still getting over a Caledonian mauling there is no one out there every day challenging Salmond on when this first referendum is going to be held, and what people will be asked?

Let's see if David Cameron fares any better tomorrow when all the devolved leaders come to Downing Street for a meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee.

Salmond invariably comes out of these formal roundtables and strides straight to a microphone to fill the media maw with his upbeat version of events. You have to wait an age for an alternative account to emerge.

We're promised a joint communique tomorrow (what is this, the UN or the UK?) and I expect the Prime Minister to bang on about his "respect agenda".

What Cameron won't do, I'll bet, is bang the desk in defence of the UK. That's good for First Minister Salmond again, it means two Westminster leaders will have given him another week of a free run for independence.

Salmond names his cabinet

2011-05-19T16:39:00.002+01:00

The new Scottish Government Cabinet with portfolio responsibilities have been announced.

Not enough time for analysis just now, but on a quick scan I see Nicola Sturgeon has responsibility for the Commonwealth games - that will create a political legacy for her to inherit as well as a sporting one. She is the chosen one.

Welcome Michael Russell to shepherd the Gaelic portifolio though I see language policy is separate from culture, a bit strange.

Richard Lockhead has land reform but John Swinney has the Crown Estate to wrestle with, both the same side of the coin I would say but I hope they tackle them both with vigour. Presuming Richard has crofting to look after too. Mmm, this is more about my political priorities than the goverment's. Heres' the list:

First Minister Alex Salmond MSP
Head of the Scottish Government: responsible for development, implementation and presentation of Government policy, constitutional affairs, and for promoting and representing Scotland.

Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Cities Strategy Nicola Sturgeon MSP
NHS, health service reform, allied healthcare services, acute and primary services, performance, quality and improvement framework, health promotion, sport, Commonwealth Games, public health, health improvement, pharmaceutical services, food safety and dentistry, community care, older people, mental health, learning disability, carers, substance misuse, social inclusion, equalities, anti-poverty measures, veterans, and cities strategy.

Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth John Swinney MSP The economy, the Scottish Budget, employment, public service reform, deregulation, local government, public service delivery, and community planning, Registers of Scotland, Scottish Public Pensions Agency, relocation, e-government, budgetary monitoring, business and industry including Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise' trade and inward investment, corporate social responsibility, voluntary sector and the social economy, community business and co-operative development, energy, renewables, tourism, building standards, land use planning system.

Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning Michael Russell MSP
Further and higher education, science and lifelong learning, school education, early years, training and skills, new education agency, the Scottish Qualifications Authority, nurseries and childcare, children's services, children's hearings, social work, Social Care and Social Work Improvement Scotland, Gaelic and Scots.

Cabinet Secretary for Parliamentary Business and Government Strategy Bruce Crawford MSP Parliamentary affairs and the management of Government business in the Parliament, and developing Government strategy and co-ordinating policy delivery across portfolios.

Cabinet Secretary for Justice Kenny MacAskill MSP
Criminal law and procedure, youth justice, criminal justice social work, police, prisons and sentencing policy, legal aid, legal profession, courts and law reform, anti-social behaviour, sectarianism, human rights, fire and rescue services, community safety, civil contingencies, drugs policy and related matters, liquor licensing, vulnerable witnesses, victim support and civil law, charity law, religious and faith organisations.

Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment Richard Lochhead MSP
Agriculture, fisheries and rural development including aquaculture and forestry, environment and natural heritage, land reform, water quality regulation, sustainable development, and climate change.

Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs Fiona Hyslop MSP
Europe, external affairs, culture and the arts, broadcasting, architecture, built heritage, Historic Scotland and lottery funding, National Records of Scotland, and major events strategy.

Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure and Capital Investment Alex Neil MSP
Scottish Water, procurement, European Structural Funds, Scottish Futures Trust, transport policy and delivery, public transport, road, rail services, air and ferry services, housing, communities and regeneration.

Law Officers
Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland
Frank Mulholland QC was appointed Solicitor General for Scotland in May 2007.
He has been a prosecutor throughout his career, having joined the Procurator Fiscal Service in 1984, working in Glasgow and Edinburgh offices before taking up policy and managerial posts in the Crown Office.

Hammond tacking on coastguard closures

2011-05-19T08:55:00.007+01:00

The Independent and The Times report today that Philip Hammond, Transport Secretary, has abandoned the plans to close the majority of Britain's coastguard stations.

Although the Department of Transport claims this is merely speculation at this stage it has all the signs of a major climbdown by the Coalition and a huge victory for Britain's coastal communities.

Hammond, who is in the studios today talking about trains, has just been popped a question about the reports on BBC News. He said he was "looking again" at coastguard closure plan after receiving "strong feedback" but insisted this does not amount to a u-turn. An announcement is expected before the summer recess.

David Cameron has been distancing himself from plans almost since it was first proposed to shut 11 of 19 UK stations and cut the rest's opening hours.

The rationalisation would have left Scotland with one 24 hour station in Aberdeen with Stornoway and Shetland scrapping it out to remain open during daylight hours.

The outcry from every one of Britain's coastal constituencies has been sufficient to persuade the government that it is handling a policy about as popular as the Forestry Commission sell-off.

There was an incredibly strong reaction to the consultation on closures, which was extended by six weeks, and now the Commons Transport Select Committee has taken up the case too.

MPs from the committee are actually in Stornoway today taking evidence. When their report is completed the Transport Department consultation will open again briefly and then Ministers will come to a conclusion.

Despite the "speculation" I doubt if the coastguard service will be untouched by the rationalisation process. Hopefully the contract to keep the emergency coastguard tugs on the western and northern appraoches will also survive the review process.

Westminster misses constitutional tremors

2011-05-18T12:46:00.005+01:00

Two worlds. While Alex Salmond is delivering a fine inaugural speech laying out his vision for Scotland Westminster is all a froth over the immediate future of Justice Minister Ken Clarke.

Clarke made some very ill-judged comments on rape sentencing and different types of rape in a radio interview this morning. He has been digging himself further and further into the mire in subsequent television interviews. One of the biggest beasts in the jungle may just have sounded his own death knell.

At Prime Minister's Questions, just gone, Ed Miliband hammered David Cameron on the issue. Labour is coming from the right on crime and justice and making the government look as if it is all over the shop.

Miliband will get the clips he wants on the evening news but he made one major error himself. By asking if the Justice Secretary would still be in his post by the end of the day he virtually guaranteed that Ken Clarke would not be sacked.

In a very bruising Prime Minister's Questions Cameron did get one reference to the Scottish situation.

James Gray, a Home Counties Conservative and a Scot, asked if all voters in the UK will have a vote on Scottish independence.

Cameron said it would be a vote for the people of Scotland and not the rest of the country.

History is being made at Holyrood and Westminster barely notices the constitutional ground moving underneath its feet.

Moore finally shapes up for referendum fight

2011-05-18T11:40:00.003+01:00

Big day up the road with Alex Salmond being sworn in as First Minister, unopposed by anyone. (except my erstwhile colleague Magnus Gardham who really ought be sworn in as the official opposition while the Labour Party is in intensive care).

Scottish Secretary Michael Moore has chosen the day to challenge the First Minister to name the date and name the question for the Independence referendum.

In an interview with the foreign news wire Reuters (oh, the irony) Moore says the Scottish economy will be damaged by the uncertainty around the constitutiona question.

He's hardly quick out of the blocks. Last week, when Scottish journalists here in Westminster questioned the Scottish Secretary he ducked a fight with Salmond and left the timing and the question of an Independence referendum entirely to the SNP government.

Moore went further and said that he did not accept a referendum campaign had already begun - despite the pro-independence SNP winning a stunning 69 seats just a few days earlier.

He said: “I don’t accept that, it is for the First Minister and the Scottish Government to bring forward their proposals. We are commited to the Scotland Bill ,enhancing devolution, enhancing the responsibilityies of the Scottish parialment and giving it significant new powers.”

Now there's been a turn around, perhaps based on the whispers that Moore is not the best Lib Dem Scottish Secretary to take the fight to Salmond.

Heres' the Reuters story:

LONDON (Reuters) - The government urged the Scottish National Party on Tuesday to set out the timing and wording of a planned referendum on Scottish independence quickly to avoid possible damage to the economy.

The pro-independence SNP won a majority in the devolved Scottish parliament earlier this month, the first party to do so, and pledged to hold a referendum on independence within five years, some 300 years after Scotland and England were united.
Michael Moore, Scottish Secretary in the British coalition government, told Reuters a delay in formulating the question to be asked, and the referendum itself, would create uncertainty for Scotland and the rest of Britain.
"The Scottish government has to be very clear, very quickly exactly what they mean by independence," he said.
"Is it full independence, is it independence-lite? They need to recognise that the longer there is uncertainty about what they mean by independence, or the prospect of it, the greater uncertainty this causes across the United Kingdom."
"That ultimately is not good for Scotland's economy, and for my part I think they have got to take account of those concerns.
"They have got to be able to justify exactly what it is they are asking the people of Scotland to decide and why they should wait to decide that for a number of years."
Alex Salmond, the SNP leader and first minister of Scotland, plans to delay the referendum until late in his five-year term so as to turn the surge in his party's popularity into stronger support for breaking away from Britain.
In 2014, Scotland should gain prestige from hosting golf's Ryder Cup and the Commonwealth Games -- and it will be the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn, a significant Scottish victory in Scotland's wars with England.
Moore, whose Liberal Democrats are the junior partner in a Conservative-led coalition government in London, said he would oppose independence. But he said his party was more sympathetic than the Conservatives to the idea of a more federalist system.
"My view is that there is plenty of space within the United Kingdom for us to have the appropriate levels of devolution according to what the different parts want," he said.
"There isn't a majority anywhere in the United Kingdom for Scotland being independent, and that is why I and all my colleagues are pretty relaxed about what we are doing with devolution, without being complacent."
The Scottish and British governments are currently concentrating on the Scotland Bill, which would change the way the Scottish parliament is financed. The SNP wants to amend the bill to give Scotland greater power to tax and borrow.
Moore said the coalition was willing to look at bringing forward capital borrowing powers by a year to 2012 and would listen to the case for increasing the amount Scotland could borrow from 2 billion pounds, bearing in mind Britain's deficit reduction constraints.
He said businesses would be entitled to feel uncertain about what Salmond planned for taxes such as excise duties, and said Britain was best served by a single corporation tax system.

2011-05-17T15:30:00.002+01:00

After a short break from the coalface I'm beginning to think that the Scottish Labour party should be left alone to pick over the bones of its staggering defeat in the Scottish election.

Before leaving the subject I'd point anyone interested to the submission by Tom Harris MP, which he has published on his own site.

All I'd add, once again, is that Labour's problems are not uniquely Caledonian. The party faces the same task of reforming itself at a UK level too.

Peter Hain has started that process on the Love Labour, Change Labour website today.

Here's how the suggestions Tom Harris makes were sent to The Daily Record:

The next leader of the Scottish Labour party should be elected by ordinary members, with MSPs and MPs taking a back seat.

The "one member, one vote" idea has been proposed by Glasgow South MP Tom Harris who is urging fellow Westminster MPs not to use their disproportionate influence when choosing a new Scottish leader.

Harris is the first Westminster MP to back a call by former First Minister Jack McConnell for Scottish Labour MPs to voluntarily give up their vote in the contest.
The move is an attempt to stop the nationalist jibe that the Scottish leader is chosen by "London Labour" and ease the tension between Labour’s Westminster MPs and Holyrood MSPs.

In his submission to the party review of its devastating defeat by the SNP Harris also recommends that the new leader be in charge of the whole party in Scotland, and not just the Labour MSPs at Holyrood.

This would make Scottish Labour stand alone from the UK party - an idea that echoes a call made yesterday by party elder statesman Henry McLeish, who preceded McConnell as First Minister.

McLeish said Scottish Labour had to have its own brand and identity and should be taking on the SNP by developing policies that are "embracing pride and patriotism and wrapping them in the Saltire".

Harris recommends that to keep the link with the UK’s "team Labour" that the Scottish deputy leader be a Westminster MP rather than an MSP.

The Scottish leader is currently chosen from votes in three "electoral colleges" - one for ordinary members, a second for trade unions, and a third made up of MPs and MSPs.

As there more Scottish Labour MPS (40) than MSPs (37) the Westminster contingent wield more power.

Harris argues that the electoral college be abolished and replaced by a simple one member, one vote election.

Harris said: "This would bring Labour into line with every other mainstream party and would give ordinary members influence beyond what they have had until now. MPs and MSPs would have a vote of the same value as every other member, as would any trade union member who is a member of the Labour Party."

A root and branch review of the Scottish Labour party is to be carried out by Jim Murphy MP and Sarah Boyack MSP over the summer.

Harris said that the review has to focus on voters and on Labour’s own vision for a devolved Scotland.

He said: "We need to stop seeing devolution in terms of its effects on politics and the political parties, and instead embrace it as mechanism for benefiting the people of Scotland.

"We need to stop defining ourselves against the SNP and start defining ourselves, once more, as the people’s party."

David Cairns - a love Labour's lost

2011-05-10T23:29:00.008+01:00

Hard to let the long day end without reflecting on dear David Cairns, the Greenock and Inverclyde MP whose death has been announced, aged just 44.

His good friend Tom Harris has written a fine obituary over on his own site.

Other people knew David better but my lasting memory will be standing with him in Greenock, just less than a decade ago, as he pointed out the houses and streets that had been wrecked by their inhabitants' addiction to heroin.

He wasn't making a point about the scourge of smack, although that was implicit, he was persuading me of the necessity of Britain's war in Afghanistan.

The Afghan heroin trail,that wound its way out of the valleys through Turkey and Europe, found its end user point in his postcode, in the town he grew up in.

David,as he stood there explaining that connection, displayed a great skill, not possessed by many politicians. He was weaving a remote, geopolitical issue into a vivid narrative that could be understood and seen in the ordinary lives of the people he represented. My article virtually wrote itself, thanks to him.

Perhaps it was his background as a trained priest that gave him this ability to communicate so well. Maybe that's what gave him a feel for what people were thinking and gave him a sense of moral purpose.

Certainly he was brave politician. He did not just whisper the truth about the Labour party, he spoke it, and with his name attached. And when he resigned as a Scotland Office Minister over Gordon Brown's handling of the party and the government in 2008, when it was still not too late, no one could seriously accuse him of betrayal.

Though the Brownite machine attempted to destroy him, he remained loyal to the party, after he saw the last chance to change leader was gone. He was Labour in his heart, and no one could take that away.

He was clever and witty and always had a good laugh, and he stuck me as a thoroughly decent man. Just the kind of person politicians ought to be.

He had a massive majority in his Greenock and Inverclyde seat, some 56 per cent of the vote. That was reduced to a Labour lead of just over 500 votes over the SNP in last Thursday's Scottish election. The by-election will be will be a test of both parties but none of that will be his concern. Beanneachd leat, a Dhaibhidh.

Labour review to dismantle Hadrian's wall

2011-05-10T18:19:00.006+01:00

Labour has decided to go for a hasty post-mortem of the party’s disastrous Scottish election performance.

A review panel, jointly led by former Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy MP and Edinburgh MSP Sarah Boyack, will produce an interim report on the way ahead for the party by June.

This runs counter to earlier BBC reports that three MPs - Murphy, shadow Scottish Secretary Anne McKechin and Stirling MP Anne McGuire would review the aftermath of the biggest defeat in Labour's history.

The prospect of Westminster politicians raking the ashes immediately put noses out of joint in Scotland. Ex-MSP Pauline McNeill was quick out of the blocks with a defensive statement, demanding that London leaving the Scottish party alone.

McNeill, who was defeated by the SNP in Glasgow Kelvin, said: "There is a perception, not always the reality, that Scottish Labour always looks to London and I think that Ed Miliband appointing three MPs really should be left to the Scottish Labour Party."

To do what precisely? Scottish Labour lost and no one thinks the rump of MSPs left in Holyrood will have the answer as to why that happened.

But Pauline's reaction to the early speculation on the review is telling in itself. The very gulf between Scotland's Westminster MPs and Holyrood MSPs is part of the reason the party lies beaten and bruised, and Scottish Labour MSPs have to accept that.

No one accuses the London wing of the SNP of running Scotland when Angus Robertson comes from Westminster to take charge of the Scottish parliament election campaign.

No one bats an eyelid when Angus, and the other Angus (MacNeil) are seen in Edinburgh on a Thursday afternoon, liaising with their colleagues in the Scottish parliament, getting a feel for the issues, the constituencies and their opponents' weaknesses long before an election gun is fired.

Yet some Scottish Labour MPs are proud to proclaim that they've never darkened the door of the Holyrood parliament. Others among them report that no welcome mat would be put out by their Scottish colleagues in any case, that they are not wanted, despite their election-winning experience.

The complacency is not universal, of course. You can't accuse Murphy or Boyack of being political parochialists.

But it is ironic that one of their first tasks in saving the party (and the UK) is dismantling the Hadrian's Wall that Scottish Labour politicians have built to divide each other.

Speaking of complacency, can it be true that a Scottish Labour MP did a "Gordon Jackson" and took a holiday in the middle of the Holyrood election campaign?

Jackson, the eminent QC and former MSP for Glasgow Govan, was posted missing during one of the Scottish election campaigns. (He increased his majority, and Labour will look back on these days with nostalgia)

A final report on the reform of the party structure and how the Westminster and Holyrood Labour politicians work together in future will be finished in August.

Labour leader Ed Miliband, and the next leader of Scottish Labour, will consider the final recommendations.

Here, I predict, is the first sentence of the Scottish Labour review that will catch Miliband's eye. "If Labour does not find a message to reconnect with the Scottish electorate, then the UK party's prospects in the next general election look very grim indeed."

Labour MPs begin the post-mortem

2011-05-09T18:54:00.004+01:00

I understand Alistair Darling was the star turn for Scotland at the parliamentary Labour party meeting, just finished.

The former chancellor dismantled the Scottish Labour defence, deployed since last Friday, that the SNP majority was due to a mass switch of Lib Dem voters to the nationalists.

That analysis is far too simplistic, said Darling, the party had to recognise that it was hemorrhaging some of its core, working-class vote to the SNP. That has been happening steadily since 1999.

The question is what to do about that? Ed Miliband, I understand, did not address the issue directly but rather blamed Labour's Scottish debacle on organisational failure, which he vowed would not happen again.

He did, however, acknowledge that Labour had not offered the Scottish people a vision to match the SNP's optimism.

Miliband is in charge of a review to find out why the Scottish party, with an uncharismatic leader and a weak message, did not perform at the polls. I hope he reads the result of the inquiry closely.

UK Labour and the "Ed Gray" question

2011-05-09T15:13:00.007+01:00

We'll be wading through the wreckage of Labour's profound defeat in Scotland for weeks and months to come, but I'm immediately struck on my return to London that there is nothing uniquely Caledonian about the problem the party faces.

In the afermath of the SNP victory I spoke to a recent English arrival in Scotland who professed that he had little knowledge of the Scottish political system, and was hardly interested in politics at all.

"But, how could anyone vote for Labour with that leader?" he asked rhetorically. I let the pause grow longer, expecting another voter to run down Iain Gray's poor, bruised personality. The new arrival contined: "I mean Ed Miliband, who would vote for him?"

Then, I understood, that it's infectious - the UK Labour party has an "Ed Gray" problem.

Left of centre parties across Europe face a question of what they stand for, and how they deliver the message of their core values in this age of austerity.

There will be lots of lessons for Scottish Labour from the election, but these same hard questions have to be faced by the party at a UK level too, if my reading of the English local election results is right.

If parties don't make a clear offer to voters, and if their leaders don't match expectations of the electorate, traditional supporters cast around for what else is on offer.

I repeat,there is no evidence to suggest that what happened to the Labour party in Scotland is a one off. It could be the beginning of a pattern, and that might be one of the most profound lessons of Thursday night.

The Parliamentary Labour party meets this evening to pick over the election results. The MPs will be addressed by Ed Miliband, we'll be outside listening for the sound of desks being banged in support of the leader.

Death of Scotsman on the Thames

2011-05-09T14:15:00.006+01:00

Back at my desk in Westminster, with all the expected ribbing from colleagues about David Cameron's border controls being applied to migrant Scots to massage the figures down.(Really I'm more worried about being declared an undesirable alien in the old country).

The profound changes in the Holyrood election don't seem to have sunk in to the body politic on the Thames yet, though a senior Lib Dem I just spoke to said that they would have to be thinking pretty smartly about the Westminster government calling an Independence referendum to box Alex Salmond in.

"The Tories are keener than us, if anything," said the MP, indicating that the two parties are trying to feel their way towards concensus on the issue. The Con-Lib Dem relationship is, he claimed, marching on with the result fo the AV referendum being so decisive that the issue is dead and gone for a generation.

Interestingly, the tug of war between the SNP and the Coalition in Westminster will keep us Westminster corrs in stories for some time. Look, there's Angus Robertson just now, firing off a letter demanding an early meeting with Liam Fox over defence cuts in Scotland. Mmm, plus la change.

But the most symbolic change on my arrival back at my desk is a facsimile A3 copy of the Scotsman newspaper. I'm still to find out who is behind the photocopied, black and white version but it transpires that the Scotsman is no longer circulated in London.

In an age of declining circulation perhaps I should not be so surprised. After all, the Scotsman is following the Herald's retreat from London in 2008. Scottish MPs have access to the Herald's online version and the House library prints out a facsimile copy for the Commons tearoom.

But the death of the Scotsman on the capital's news stalls leaves the Daily Record as effectively the last Scottish newspaper circulating in London on a daily basis.

When Andrew Jaspan launched the Sunday Herald in 1999 he briefed us that we would work on it in print for ten years, and by then the whole paper would migrate online. How we laughed, how right he was.

Let me tell you about my brother...

2011-05-04T11:25:00.015+01:00

Kenny "Leather" Stephen with the comrade brother, Donald Crichton

I met an old friend at Central Station, Glasgow, this morning who looks likely in the next 48 hours to become an SNP MSP for the South of Scotland region.

For most of us election day is a cross in the box, but for the candidates it is to be a life-changing experience, the end of a long campaign, the kernel of an idea, or perhaps the culmination of a career ambition.

It is, as my brother Donald said, the longest job interview of his life, in public, with the result broadcast to the nation.

Donald is standing for Labour in Na h-Eileanan an Iar, the Western Isles constituency, where the SNP lead with over 600 votes. He is coming from behind, but he is marching like General MacArthur back up that beach with his claim for Labour.

Domhnall has worn out the shoe leather and the handshakes in this campaign, almost matching the efforts of his totemic footsoldier, Kenny Stephen, the wispy-bearded warrior who has taken the Labour message from door to door, from Butt to Barra, over the last six weeks.(Who would have thought Labour would get a endorsement from ZZ Top?)

The Labour Party doesn't need my endorsement, but I can't let this week pass without backing my comrade brother.

So who is he, this boy from Point, that peninsula of Lewis that has forged Labour politicians in a red line from Malcolm K, to Calum Macdonald and Alasdair Morrison?

Though he's just turned 40 my brother has been a butcher's mate, a cobbler's boy, an apprentice joiner, a public sector administrator, a political officer, a mature student, and now a health service official.

He has a breadth of life experiences that make the hinterlands of some political candidates look like very narrow furrows indeed.

It's his own experience of having his joinery apprenticeship interrupted, when a local building firm went broke in the late 80s, that directly informs his (and Labour's) number one campaigning priority - to create work for young people at home.

He is rooted in the island he grew up on, the place we call home. While he has lived in Britain's cities he thoroughly and instinctively understands how the islands tick, how their people are threaded together in common cause and face common challenges.

He shares the frustration of many others in seeing time and opportunities to improve the chances for the islands slip away without proper political leadership at a national level, while the population ages and the schools empty. I think, if elected, he would be quite determined to remedy that, to fight for the place and its people.

Of course, he is a socialist, if growing up in a household and a community that fostered the values of equality, of fighting poverty, and creating opportunity for everyone defines you as a socialist.

He's not a nationalist, small n or big N, and not for tribal party reasons. Like me, like many, he does not want to create divisions where none exist, he does not believe that to be constructive or progressive 21st century politics. Others are entitled to their opinions but stronger together, weaker apart, is his plain approach to question of national identity.

As he said himself at the beginning of this long campaign politicians should use the powers they already have to alleviate and improve the lives of their constituents. That's why he's in the game.

He is a realist, a pragmatist, I don't think he will wish problems away, or ignore issues in the hope that they will disappear, or promise solutions that cannot be practically delivered. I think, if elected, he will roll up his sleeves and work with everyone, for the islands.

He is is deeply wedded to the idea of public service, following the example of my late father, John Crichton, and his life-long involvement in community politics.

I think that's really what has driven Domhnall to seek office and has sustained him on the long road to this week's ballot.

He shares his father's passion for wanting to improve the lot of his community, impatient to get things done and prepared to stick his neck out to do so. Domhnall's slogan is the right one for him; it is "a time for action".

He's a Christian, and has been from his teenage years. Sometimes in the Hebrides that appellation sets you apart from fellow islanders. But Domhnall, as far as I can see, is embraced by all parts of the community and maintains a wide circle of friends from all walks of life.

We sometimes disagree on interpretation but not really on principle, and he is refreshingly modern in his approach to life. He's never expressed a judgmental view on my life choices, which are quite different from his. I can't see him treating anyone else any differently.

Most of all I am convinced that he's up to the job. This has been a long life's voyage for Domhnall but he has approached this campaign with relish, he makes an easy, confident, connection with people, and he has a conviction that he has embarked on this endeavour for the right reasons.

There is always a choice at elections but I think that with Domhnall there is something different on offer to the constituency. Domhnall's values are informed by the place he comes from, and he embodies the best aspects of the islands.

I think he will stand for jobs, for Gaelic, for the cultural and technological initiatives, and for a spirit of optimism that is needed to move the islands into their next stage of development.

When it is boiled down I think he'll make a good political representative because his ethics, his Labour values, inform what he does. His approach, his instinct, is to stand for everyone, while his main opponents really stand for only one thing. He is just the right man for the job, my brother.

Obama gets his man and claims his legacy

2011-05-02T12:48:00.001+01:00

President Barack Obama said on taking office he told the CIA that the death or capture of Osama Bin Laden was to be the agency’s number one priority.

The death of the al-Qaeda terror chief will make the President, who was being written off as a one-term wonder, an almost unbeatable force when he comes up for re-election next year.

Obama was elected in 2008 on an agenda of hope, but found himself governing in the deepest economic recession the US has seen in a generation.

A week ago the under-pressure Democrat President was facing barely disguised racist demands to produce a certificate proving his American birthright.

He duly did so but emphasised he had more important matters to consider. No one will be asking Barack Obama to show his US birth certificate ever again.

The spontaneous patriotic reaction to the death of bin Laden and Obama’s political craftsmanship in weaving his imprint onto the story have propelled the President into another league.

The raid on Bin Laden took 40 men and lasted 40 minutes, but will set the political weather for years to come.

Obama was also elected to wrap up the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which, for many Americans, were directly linked to the terror that was visited on sacred US soil in New York and Washington ten years ago.

Terrorist attacks will continue, but the death of the perpetrator of 9/11 will bring to a close a long decade pockmarked with the caskets of US service personnel being flown home from far afield.

The troops can start coming home, and that means British troops too.

George W Bush said bin Laden was wanted dead or alive. Yesterday it was another president that changed the talk into action. America has got it’s man, and Obama has a staked a claim to a first term legacy.

"Are you up for my man?" - parkies tackle riot litter

2011-05-02T12:29:00.005+01:00

I crossed Kelvingrove Park in Glasgow very, very early on Saturday morning, on the way home from a wedding celebration (not that wedding, an Island wedding).

In the aftermath of the Kelvingrove riot to mark the Royal nuptials the previous day the place looked as if the gods had emptied their binbags over Glasgow.

This wasn't just the ordinary, post-party dump on the "beach", the grassy, sunlit slope below Park Circus, it was chaos from one end of the park to the other.

There were carry-out bottles in the trees, in the shrubbery, in the fountains. The bins were heaving, as Malky would say.

"The rest of the country has a party, and we have a riot," said my nephew, reflecting on the shame the city felt about the combination of alcohol and violence that spoilt what was, for the most part, a wild time in the park.

But you can't repress Glasgow's spirit for long. This Youtube clip of the parkies who had to clear up the mess is going viral and, if you pardon the strong language, provides an hilarious riposte to the depressing footage of neds throwing bottles at police officers.

Salmond eyes the indy referendum prize

2011-04-27T11:34:00.005+01:00

What's happening in Scotland, all my Westminster lobby colleagues are asking me as the polls show the SNP pulling ahead of Labour for Holyrood.

These days Scottish politics only ignites interest in Westminster when it looks like independence is back on the agenda.

The latest poll of polls put through the Weber Shandwick www.scotlandvotes.com calculator, shows that is just what could happen.

The poll calculator puts the SNP on 60 MSPs, 13 more than in 2007. Labour would take 43 (- 3), Conservatives 12 (- 5), Lib Dems 8 (-8), the Greens 5 (+3) and Margo Macdonald would also retain her seat.

If these results were replicated on election day the SNP with the pro-independence Green and Margo Macdonald would have a majority, 66 MSPs, in favour of independence, allowing a referendum to take place in the next five years.

The usual riders apply to this poll as any other. Labour are still confident that their vote is holding solid and that they have the advantage in the all the battleground seats they have targeted.

But the SNP see a trend of Lib Dem votes splitting two to one in their favour with the remainder going Green.

That pattern of voting would take Alex Salmond back into Bute House, the First Minister's Edinburgh residence, in just over a week's time.

A independence referendum with a Tory government in Westminster and the wind in the SNP's sails is as good as it could get for Salmond, even though polls consistently show a majority of Scots against the idea of independence.

An early referendum bill would be a dream come true for the SNP. It would also help distract from the squeeze on public services that the Holyrood government, of whatever hue, is going to have to enact.

John Reid held hostage by opposition forces

2011-04-18T12:15:00.002+01:00

He invoked the spirit of Churchill, he claimed common cause with the voters of Britain, but no matter how much John Reid tried to dress up his support for David Cameron this morning he ended up looking like the Prime Minister's stooge, temporarily taking Nick Clegg's role as the bulletproof vest while the Coalition partners stake their differences on AV.

This was beyond Stockholm Syndrome or the hapless parade of downed US spyplane pilots by the North Vietnamse, Dr Reid actually enjoyed the applause of the Tory audience.

Reid insists his support for the No to AV campaign is above party politics but he is one of the sharpest Scottish political minds - he knows that the immediate consequence of a No win in the AV referendum is deeply political.

A No vote means a victory for David Cameron, whom Reid stood shoulder to shoulder with this morning, and a humiliation for the Labour leader Ed Miliband.

I wanted to ask if that is what Reid wanted, and how the people of Motherwell looking at morning television images could only think that their former MP has switched sides.

If his appearance was to prove himself as capable a statesman as the current Prime Minister, it fell down on that too. He looked a diminished figure, the "attack dog" joke at his own expenses, lapped up by a room full of Tory party workers.

The former Home Secretary argued that there was more at stake than mere party politics. Cameron, who was delighted to have another senior party cadre hostage, knows there is more at stake too.

His premiership is at stake, and so are the chances of the Tories being in power for a long time. Cameron looked very happy leaving the stage. I return to the question - why does Reid want the Labour leadership to lose this one?

Tartan Army not racist, but some Scots are

2011-03-29T16:07:00.006+01:00

Mixed news for Scotland's reputation as a tolerant nation this afternoon.

First, the good news, the Tartan Army has been cleared of any suggestion of racist behaviour following the banana-throwing incident during Sunday's friendly match against Brazil.

The good old Daily Record reports that a German teenager was responsible for throwing the offending fruit when Brazil was awarded a penalty (dive!) during the game at the Emirates Stadium on Sunday, Arsenal has said.

Brazil forward Neymar, who scored both goals in his side's 2-0 win, complained after the match that he had been the victim of racist abuse, a claim strenuously denied by the Scottish Football Association and the Tartan Army fans' organisation.

The banana was retrieved from the pitch by team-mate Lucas Leiva during the game.

An Arsenal statement today read: "After consultation with the Metropolitan Police, Arsenal Football Club can confirm that a German teenage tourist has admitted throwing a banana onto the pitch during the Brazil v Scotland international friendly at the Emirates Stadium on Sunday."

And the bad news...Racist incidents in Scotland have increased by 10% in a six-year period, new figures show.

Statistics released by the Scottish Government showed there were 4,952 racist incidents recorded by the country's eight police forces in 2009/10, compared to 4,519for the 2004/05 period.

Race hate victims were most likely to be of Pakistani origin, with 48% of all those targeted in 2009/10 classed as Asian. The vast majority of race hate perpetrators - 96% - were classed as white British.

The majority of victims, 75%, were men. Men and women aged 26 to 35 were most likely to be targeted. Most incidents, 32%, took place on the street but they were also likely to take place in a private house, 19%, or in shops, 18%.

Of the perpetrators, most were men aged 16-20 followed by men under the age of 16. Girls aged under 16 were most likely to commit racist acts, followed by those aged 16to 20. About 47% of all perpetrators in 2009-10 were aged 20 or under and around 23% were under the age of 16.

Semi in Swansea looks like Nazi dictator

2011-03-29T12:57:00.003+01:00

Can you imagine being the picture editor walking into the Daily Mail news conference with this little story tucked under your arm?

Who are we bombing Libya for?

2011-03-29T11:41:00.005+01:00

Big day in Westminster with up to 40 governments attending the London conference on Libya.

The Prime Minister is greeting US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton about now but,just as importantly, he is due to meet Mahmud Jibril, who handles foreign affairs for Libya's rebel National Transitional Council.

Earlier Foreign Secretary William Hague also met with Jibril, whom he invited to London but not to the conference.

Jibril is the de-facto Prime Minister of the National Transitional Council in Libya, already recognised by French President Sarkozy as the legitimate government of the country.

He was a Gaddafi government minister until recently, and as head of Nedb (National Economic Development Board) he promoted privatization and liberalization of Libyan econony and looked after US and UK investments in the country. He is, in that respect, a man we have already done business with.

While the question of what will happen to Gaddafi, and whether he will be offered an exit route, is dominating the morning agenda less is being asked about would replace him.

There was a sobering piece in the Guardian yesterday by Simon Tisdall which raised some awkward questions about the transitional council and the ragtag army that is racing down the road towards Tripoli.

He quotes various experts on the tribal and religious make-up of the Gaddafi opposition. Here's one of the key passages:

Eastern Libya also has a different religious tradition from the rest of the country and this was reflected in the rebels' transitional council, argued Andy Stone, a columnist on the Nolan Chart website. "This is no Solidarnosc movement," he said (referring to the Polish trade union-led anti-communist movement).

"The [Libyan] revolt was started on February 15-17 by the group called the National Conference of the Libyan Opposition [an umbrella organisation founded in London in 2005]. The protests had a clear fundamentalist religious motivation and were convened to commemorate the 2006 Danish cartoons protests which had been particularly violent in Benghazi." (The 2006 protests had turned into an anti-Gaddafi demonstration).

Stone went on to claim that much of the eastern Libyan opposition to Gaddafi was rooted in the region's strong Islamist tradition which resulted, for example, in a large numbers of eastern Libyan jihadis taking part in the Iraq war (second in number only to Saudis) and support for the al-Qaida-affiliated, anti-Gaddafi Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, many of whose members had fought in Afghanistan.

"It is these same religiously and ideologically trained east Libyans who are now armed and arrayed against Gaddafi. Gaddafi's claim that all his opponents are members of al-Qaida is overblown, but also not very far off in regard to their sympathies. Anyone claiming the eastern Libyans are standing for secular, liberal values needs to overcome a huge burden of proof," Stone wrote.

British diplomats, Tisdall notes, counter that it is overblown to claim that the rebel movement is dominated by Islamists. Most Libyans, like most people all over the world, are secular and tolerant says a former British diplomat quoted by Tisdall.

Let's hope he's right. It would be bad news to be bombing the road to Tripoli on behalf of al Qaida.

Yes to AV will wipe away Cameron's smile

2011-03-29T09:31:00.006+01:00

It's an old trick, if you're throwing a party always hire a small room and invite double the number of people it can hold.

As a result it was so packed at the launch of the Yes to AV campaign in the Methodist Central Hall in Westminster this morning that the audience had to practice synchronised breathing.

I stayed long enough to confirm the platform line up - Ed Miliband for Labour and Charles Kennedy for the Lib Dems, who now regains his proper mantle as a Lib Dem that the public recognise and, more importantly, like.

Caroline Lucas for the Greens was there, Shirley Williams and other leading Lib Dems also attended. But cross-party unity on the issue was somewhat undermined by the absence of Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg.

Miliband has refused to share a platform with Clegg, advising him to lie low during the campaign so as not drive voters away. That doesn't help one of Miliband's core messages - not to turn the AV vote into a referendum on Nick Clegg.

It first instinct of many Labour voters is to use the AV referendum to kick Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems for joining the Tory cuts.

AV is the price Nick Clegg demanded for joining David Cameron. Opponents say a Yes vote would help the Lib Dems rebound back from their current low polling.

The Lib Dems might recover somewhat but their leader is already beaten by the betrayal of so many promises. Clegg is political husk looking at single figure support in UK and Scottish opinion polls.

Apart from agreeing that Elvis is the King, you would rarely find Iain Martin, Daily Mail's new columnist, and I reading from the same political script

However, his column is spot on in identifying the danger for David Cameron in a Yes vote in the referendum.

As Iain explains, Cameron is against a fairer voting system and every No vote makes his PR grin even wider.

But a Yes vote means the Tory party wakes up on the morning after the referendum realising they have changed the British constitution - just to please Lib Dem coalition partners they regard as political toe rags.

Tories will take out their anger on David Cameron who, if there is a yes majority, will become a serial loser.(He didn’t win them the general election either).

A Yes result would make life uncomfortable for the Tory leader. Having "sold out" on the voting system Cameron will find it harder to keep the lid on simmering right-wing discontent in his own party. The plotting will begin, the coalition will creak, Cameron will be looking over his shoulder for the knife in the back.

More importantly the Prime Minister will be on the wrong side of history.
Ed Miliband, who backs a yes vote, will look at the Lib Dems and ask them just why they are in bed with the Tories when really Labour represents progressive politics.

A Yes vote is a winner for Labour, and exposes the divisions in the Conservative LibDem coalition.

The fisherman's wife and the cruel sea

2011-03-25T18:46:00.006Z

The highlight of yesterday's Westminster Hall debate on the coastguard station closure plans was undoubtedly a speech by Sheryll Murray, the Conservative MP for Cornwall South East.

The wife of a Cornish fisherman, she made an impassioned plea against the closures, drawing on her personal experience of living in fear of the ocean for 25 years.

Then, with terrible irony, came the news this morning that her husband, Neil Murray, has died in an accident aboard his trawler.

Murray, an experienced fisherman, was apparently drowned while fishing alone on "Our Boy Andrew", 24 miles off the Cornish coast.

His wife's words in the Westminster debate, uttered while he was on his last voyage, stand as heartbreaking testament to the danger of the sea and her own bereavement.

She concluded her speech:"The sea can be the most beautiful place in which anybody can spend their time, but it can change quickly-believe me, I know after living for 25 years in fear of seeing the sea change overnight or within hours. One thing my experience has taught me is that we must have respect for the sea at all times. If we lose that respect and believe that we can beat the sea, we are finished.

"While I welcome the extension to the consultation period, when the Minister looks at the responses, I urge him to ensure that he does not lose respect for one of the most dangerous but beautiful elements in the world. If he does, not only will he let down fishermen's wives such as myself, the wives of sailors and other users of the sea, such as our young people, but he will let down the whole nation."

Osborne's budget draws Scottish battlelines

2011-03-23T17:53:00.003Z

The dust is just beginning to settle on the budget but the Scottish battle lines are already drawn.

Osborne's fuel duty stabliser has meant to keep the lid on rising petrol prices, an unenviable task, and it has been roundly slated by opponents for being ineffective against his own VAT rise and inflation.

The idea of a stabiliser, originally an SNP plan, was that the Treasury itself would take the hit from reducing pump prices as it collected more revenue from the rising cost of oil barrels.

Osborne decided not to do it that way and instead he hit the North Sea oil companies with a £2bn tax on their rocketing profits. There is a stabiliser element - if the price of a barrel goes below $75 the tax won't be collected.

The effect has been sensational with predictable anger from oil and gas producers, who claimed the tax hike on their production would damage a vital UK sector.

The move also threw a spanner in the SNP election machine that was primed to whine for a fuel stabiliser between now and election day in May.

Having been granted their wish the SNP’s John Swinney compained bitterly that "Scotland’s North Sea" resources were funding the fuel cut. Osborne's tax on oil revenues would be enough for a 50p reduction in petrol prices in an independent Scotland, sat some naive nationalist economists, conveniently forgetting that an independent Scotland would have little else other than oil revenues to fill the Treasury coffers.

Michael Moore, the Shadow Scottish Secretary, declared himself delighted with the SNP reaction. He said: "This shoots a fox the SNP was keen to run with. All the time we said we would listen as a government and we’ve been able to put in place a 1p cut in place of Labour’s 5p rise in prices."

As it happens, I had a chat with the director of a North Sea oil supply company this week. As long as oil is over $100 a barrel he reckons they have a licence to print money in the North Sea, giving Aberdeen and it's environs that soaraway spin that the rest of Scotland doesn't feel.

Whatever they are the oil companies are not the "squeezed middle" that Osborne, Miliband and everyone else is chasing.

Osborne also promised to look allowing Northern Ireland to set a different corporation tax to allow the Province to compete across the border with the Irish Republic.

That woke up SNP MPs who want Scotland to be able to set a lower level of business tax from the rest of the UK. Another debating point on the long road back to Holyrood.

Blair's Liberal interventionism vindicated

2011-03-23T17:41:00.002Z

A bit late to the feast with this one, but here is Dan Hodge's interesting re-assessment of Tony Blair's most controversial legacy - Liberal interventionism. It's over on the Labour Uncut site

Katy Clark, the lone voice against war

2011-03-23T14:08:00.003Z

Katy Clark MP, Labour North Ayrshire and Arran, was the only Scottish voice against the Libyan intervention in the Commons debate on Monday. Along with 12 other MPs she voted against the government motion.

Here's her contribution to the debate from Hansard . Not as articulate as a Galloway but she has the left analysis and the same "war and oil" sentiments as the former MP does.

Rafale vs Typhoon - welcome to the arms bazaar

2011-03-21T15:25:00.005Z

No matter how well intentioned the Ministry of Defence briefing this morning somtimes felt like it was descending into a powerpoint sales pitch for lazer-guided weaponry.

The generals told us how stand-off missiles, fired from miles away are "accurate to within four metres", while they emphasised the restraint and the intelligence of the British forces.

They were, incidentally, also more on the ball about the mission statement, to protect civilians, and not to decapitate Muhammar Gaddafi.

War is always good for business, I thought, as we went through the capabilities of the various instruments of destruction, and business is always in competition for orders.

I suspect from the arms industry's point of view one of the most, er, interesting commercial competitions over the skies of Libya in the coming days will be between France's Dassault Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon.

The Rafale is France's own version of Eurofighter, developed after the Eurofighter project nearly fell apart in 1985. Ironically, the French wanted a version of the jet that could take-off and land on carriers, something the British saw as un-necessary at the time.

Now, after a savage defence review that scrapped the Harrier fleet and mothballed the second Super-carrier, Britain is having to retro-fit the Super-carrier design to enable cat and trap landings and change the Eurofighter to fit.

We all expected the Tornados to be in action over Libya but, as far as I'm aware(I'm not a defence expert, mind), this is the first combat deployment for the Typhoons.

Each of the allied airforces will be out there to prove their gear is the is best in show.

If you're in the market for a multi-role combat aircraft Rafales cost about 70m Euros per unit, the Typhoon is about 90m Euros a go, and are available from the more reputable parts of the military-industrial complex.

Murphy - put Basil Brush back in his box

2011-03-21T14:50:00.003Z

The main news-managed story today should have been brilliant British restraint in aborting a Tornado bombing run on a Tripoli target because intelligence reports that civilians were in the area.

Hats off to the professionalism of the Tornado pilots on their 3000 mile mission and the bravery of the eyes on the ground, or the drones in the sky above Tripoli, or a combination thereof.

But no, today's narrative is the continuing incompetence of the donkeys leading the lions into war. First William Hague, and then Liam Fox, managed to send mixed messages on whether Colonel Gaddafi himself is a target for assassination from 15,000feet. Just what the UK needs to hold the Arab League into the shaky coalition against the Libyan dictator.

Bad enough that Hague messed up his words but for Fox to do it, only to be countermanded General Sir David Richards, Chief of the Defence Staff, is kind of unforgivable.

Richards was quite clear about Gaddafi being: "No, absolutely not. It's not allowed under the UN resolution and it's not something I want to discuss any further."

Now Shadow Defence Secretary Jim Murphy has weighed in big style, saying that Fox ought to be put back in his box. Murphy has just written on his blog:

"Perhaps it’s because I’m too well mannered but in all my interviews this morning on Libya I didn’t criticise any Government Ministers about some of their vague comments on Libya.

As most people will know, Labour supports the decision the UN has taken in resolution 1973 to protect civilian populations from Colonel Gaddafi’s terror.

We will be supportive but will also ask the serious questions that the country would expect the Opposition to be posing.

On my way out of one of my interviews I bumped into Sky News correspondent Sophy Ridge and I was more direct about some of Defence Secretary Liam Fox’s comments. She then tweeted that a Shadow Cabinet Minister had said that ‘Fox needed to be put back in his box’ – no prizes for guessing I was that Shadow Cabinet Minister.

Asked on Radio 5Live whether Colonel Gaddafi might be considered a military target, Liam Fox said “It would potentially be a possibility”.

I support the Government’s decision on Libya but I think Liam Fox’s comments are irresponsible in many ways. His view that the aim of our military effort is to bring about regime change is outside what is a very broad UN resolution. It is wrong but also counterproductive at a time when we are trying to maintain a broad coalition including Arab opinion to talk in such a way.

I agree with US Defence Secretary Robert Gates, who said, “If we start adding additional objectives then I think we create a problem”.

Gaddafi is a tyrant, but it is up to the people of Libya to decide what happens next in their country and not for any single foreign government. Our government needs to have one clear policy on this."

The case for war - the small print

2011-03-21T14:37:00.001Z

Downing Street has just issued the Attorney General's note on the legal basis for military action against Libya. Here it is:

HM Government’s note on Legal Basis for deployment of UK forces and military assets
21 March 2011

Following the Prime Minister’s statement to the House on 18 March, this note sets out the Government's view on the legal basis for the deployment of UK forces and military assets to Libya.

Under the Charter of the United Nations the Security Council is the organ conferred with primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. In carrying out its duties the Security Council acts on behalf of Member States of the United Nations, who agree to accept and carry out its decisions in accordance with the Charter. Among the specific powers granted to the Security Council are those provided in Chapter VII of the Charter which is concerned with action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression.

Security Council resolution 1973 (2011) of 17 March 2011 is annexed to this document.

In this resolution the Security Council has determined that the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya constitutes a threat to international peace and security. The Security Council has adopted the resolution as a measure to maintain or restore international peace and security under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, which provides for such action by air, sea and land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Provision for a No Fly Zone is provided for by operative paragraphs 6 to 12 of the resolution. Operative paragraph 8 authorises Member States that have notified the UN Secretary-General and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, acting nationally or through regional organisations or arrangements to take all necessary measures to enforce the ban on flights established by operative paragraph 6.

Operative paragraph 4 of the resolution also authorises Member States making the notifications so provided, and acting in co-operation with the UN Secretary-General, to take all necessary measures to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory.

Operative paragraph 13 of the resolution, in substituting a replacement operative paragraph 11 in resolution 1970 (2011), further authorises Member States to use all measures commensurate to the specific circumstances to carry out inspections aimed at the enforcement of the arms embargo established by that earlier resolution.

The Attorney General has been consulted and Her Majesty’s Government is satisfied that this Chapter VII authorisation to use all necessary measures provides a clear and unequivocal legal basis for deployment of UK forces and military assets to achieve the resolution’s objectives.

How Gaddafi fared in the last raid on Libya

2011-03-18T16:05:00.002Z

Muammar Gaddafi has narrowly escaped being blown to bits by American bombers once before, when Ronald Reagan launched an airborne attack on Libya from US airforce bases in the UK.

After the Libyan leader was blamed for ordering the attack on the West Berlin disco that killed two US servicemen, Margaret Thatcher gave permission for 22 F-111 aircraft to take off from RAF Lakenheath and RAF Upper Heyford in England to exact revenge.

The raid on Libya on the night of 15th April 1986 was denied overflight rights by France, Spain and Italy as well as the use of European continental bases, forcing the US bombers be flown around France, Spain and through the Straits of Gibraltar, adding 1,300 miles each way and requiring multiple aerial refuelings.

Gaddafi was forewarned by the Italian government and escaped the assassination attempt in the nick of time.

But his regime created a propaganda campaign about civilian deaths, including claims that Gaddafi’s “adopted daughter” had been killed.

Many of the US precision bombs did miss their targets, and Gaddafi emerged a strengthened figure, outlasting Thatcher, Reagan and three subsequent American presidents to date.

The one part of the event that could not be made up was that Libyan surface-to-air missile fire brought down one of the attacking F-111 aircraft, killing its two crewmen.

Cam heads to Scotland's khaki election campaign

2011-03-18T13:01:00.006Z

Cameron is heading to Scotland this afternoon, before going to Paris tomorrow for a meeting with French President Nicholas Sarkozy and members of the Arab League.

The Prime Minister's speech to the Scottish Tories in Perth will be all about Libya, kicking off another khaki election campaign for Holyrood.

In 1999 Nato airstrikes against Serbia overshadowed the first Scottish parliament election, prompting Alex Salmond's "unpardonable folly" comments, after which the late Robin Cook declared him "unfit to lead".

In 2003, as Scots went to the polls, the Iraqis were throwing their slippers at fallen statues of Saddam Hussain. It looked as if the war was over and it was barely beginning.

There was a reprieve of sorts in 2007, although UK troops were still involved in engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Today, as the UK is poised to take action against Gaddafi, Alex Salmond, now Scotland's First Minister, has welcomed the UN no-fly zone.

“The fundamental principle of international intervention is that it must be done under the authority of a United Nations mandate, and therefore I welcome the agreement of a ‘no fly zone’ with the clear legal underpinning of a Security Council resolution," he said, just now.

It is unlikely to be the last word on the subject in the seven weeks between now and the election result. It might be a khaki election, but it won't take the parties long to point out that there isn't much khaki left in Scotland after the Strategic Defence Review.

(I hear several returning officers, including the Western Isles, don't intend to hold their count until the Friday morning, so it will be seven weeks this afternoon before we get a total result for the Scottish parliament.)

Enter Prime Minister Cameron - the war leader

2011-03-18T00:45:00.007Z

David Cameron will stand at the dispatch box today as a war leader, a changed man. He inherited conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, but now he has taken the personal step to commit British forces to the frontline in another foreign field.

The beginnings of conflicts are fraught affairs and, as the old generals say, once you start bombing it's difficult to know where things will end up. Foreign conflicts have overtaken many British leaders in the past, in the recent past even, so this is a moment of personal danger for Cameron too.

After a very shaky political start Cameron has emerged ahead of the curve at the end of this week. His early insistence on pressing for a no-fly zone looked like the over-reaching ambition of an international amateur and the drafting of a UN motion, without the usual diplomatic daisy chain of phonecalls, looked almost designed to fail.

However, Cameron now looks like he has what he wanted - whether he wanted it or not. There is, Downing Street is saying, the possibility of a vote in the Commons today but you would expect, with a UN resolution in place, that the disgruntled Tories will fall in behind the leadership and that the opposition will be supportive.

Cameron will be unable to say exactly what will unfold over the next few days but he will be emphasising what Libya is not - it is not Iraq, it is not boots on the ground, it is not unilateral action outside the United Nations.

But if British lives are lost, in what the right-wing will say is a war that is not in British interests, then he could be in great trouble.

Eleven months into his premiership, exactly eight years to the day from that fateful Commons vote backing the invasion of Iraq, Cameron now really has to prove his mettle as a Prime Minister.

The Ipsos-Mori polling yesterday appeared to elevate Cameron above party politics - people like him but not his party - and that's where every Prime Minister wants to be. Finally finding his footing on the international stage, in the midst of what seems like an escalating international situation, might be the making of him.

But the domestic blowback of action in Libya could be massive. People will be stretching for the trigger of the fuel hose first thing this morning, and a spike in petrol prices might only be the first effect of the Libyan crisis. An unraveling of the Strategic Defence and Security Review could also be on the cards, given the amount of cut-threatened assets we are throwing at the situation.

The sheer uncertainty of the world viewed through the prism of 24-hour news could shake consumer confidence and economic recovery. The next quarter of economic figures come out the Wednesday before the Royal Wedding, which tonight feels like a distraction from grave matters rather than a focus for celebration

Meanwhile Barack Obama - hope, remember that - has come out of this week looking like a vacillating world policeman. It was only when the US finally threw its weight behind the UN resolution that things really began to move with, for diplomatic stage, very rapid speed.

Maybe the US felt it was more productive to hold back, so that there could be no anti-American coalition or maybe Obama was trying to get the US back to an era where it spoke softly and carried a big stick, but it seemed that America spoke with several diplomatic voice in the last week. From today, all the world leaders will be judged by actions, not words.

Lossie Tornados to the front as Harrier pilots mull p45

2011-03-18T00:22:00.006Z

Time to fill the petrol tank, it looks like we're going to war against Libya.

We could be waking up tomorrow morning to the sound of gunfire, or at least the effects of precision-guided British weaponry being deployed against Colonel Gaddafi's surface to air missile batteries.

It remains to be seen if the dramatic adoption of "no-fly/any necessary measures" UN resolution will have any practical effect on Gaddafi's ground assault on Benghazi. But there appears to be little doubt about who will be delivering the hard message to the Libyan dictator.

Tornado ground attack aircraft, from the closure-threatened RAF Lossiemouth , are almost certain to be the first British assets used in any military operation against Gaddafi.

The Tornado GR4s, or their brother squadrons from RAF Marham, could fly from a military base in southern France or from RAF Akrotiri, in one of Britain's sovereign base areas in Cyprus, according to the Guardian's well-informed Richard Norton-Taylor

British aircraft and French jets could be in action in the next few hours, with Arab nations backing them and Nato forces and US aircraft in the next wave.

The Tornados have proved themselves in other conflicts but it was unclear whether the newer Eurofighter Typhoons would take part in an operation.

Two Nimrod RAF Reconnaissance aircraft from RAF Kinloss, granted a temporary reprieve from being literally cut to pieces in the defence cuts, will provide high level air cover and tankers would provide air to air refuelling.
(Correction - these are not from Kinloss, as Moray MP Angus Robertson has pointed out in a call from outside RAF Lossiemouth in his constituency)

Britain has two ships off the Libyan coast, and submarine-launched cruise missiles could be used to take out the Libyan air defences too. But where is the Ark Royal when you need her, or the Harrier pilots now mulling their P45s?

With a "hot war" in the offing the immediate political focus has to be on the mission and those putting their lives on the line. But to the sound of the thundering hoofs of war, these defence cuts decisions look pretty hasty.

Clegg cast as creature but Balls gets the monster part

2011-03-14T13:14:00.005Z

The biggest theatre sensation in London just now is Danny Boyle's stage production of Frankenstein. Each night actors Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Lee Miller alternate the roles of Victor Frankenstein and the Creature in a fantastic show.

Depending on which night you go to the National Theatre on the South Bank you get a different interpretation of the doctor and the creature as they vie for supremacy.

So, as we waited for curtains up on the first joint Ed Miliband and Ed Balls press conference this morning, we wondered who would play the part of leader?

They appeared in almost identical stage costumes, the purple tie of the senate. Each used his turn in answering the questions to talk as if he were the boss. Depending on when you looked up from your notes on reducing VAT on fuel or re-imposing the banking tax it was clear that Ed was in charge - whichever one of them was speaking.

There was no doubt who labour had cast as the creature though. Ed Miliband took quite a swipe at Nick Clegg. He advised the Lib Dem leader to "lie low" if he wants to secure a "yes" vote in the AV referendum on May 5th.

Miliband said he would share a platform with anyone who would help him win the AV campaign. But he won't share a platform with Clegg, "because I don't think he will help us win the referendum".

There was meant to be a joint Labour, Lib Dem and Green event in support of the AV campaign this week but when Clegg tried to elbow in on Charles Kennedy's gig Labour called off. Labour spinners were gleefully describing Nick Clegg as a toxic brand in the AV campaign.

This performance looked as if was all going according to plan until Ed Balls decided to revert to monster mode and he claimed George Osborne would go so far as use the Japanese earthquake as an excuse for growth being downgraded.

According to the script, Ed Balls said: "The whole point about being Chancellor is to anticipate unforeseen events, to err on the side of caution. It won't be good enough if George Osborne stands up next week in the Budget and says the reason he has to downgrade his growth forecast is the cold winter, or the Irish bailout or because of the spike in world oil prices or the aftermath of the Japanese earthquake. If he had taken a more cautious approach to reducing the deficit and also acted to sustain growth then our economy would not be so vulnerable now to these unforeseen events."

Pointscoring and politicising the tragedy in Japan while the rescue efforts are still going on to find survivors has caused a gasp of predictable outrage from the Tory instant response team.

Oh dear, I don't think the Ed and Ed show will get the reviews that Danny Boyle had.

BTW: Frankenstein is sold out but my top London tip of the month: Go along to the NT at about 5.30pm with a good book. The second floor box office opens for returns at six pm, by which time there will already be a dozen people queuing. Be patient, keep the faith, and you might get great seats. We did this on the evening the play was getting rave reviews in all the London papers and managed to get in.