Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

WMOTW – Halloween special

Oct 28

Posted by Jeff in Holyrood | 18 Comments

Why was the skeletal motion feeling lonely? Because it had no body to sign it.

Yes, it is seasonal themed jokes folks. Pile in.

The reason? Well, a rather spoo-oo-ooky motion left by Christine Grahame this week. You’ll scream in horror if you don’t faint in shock at its bloodcurdling ghoulishness:

Motion S4M-01168 – Christine Grahame (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (Scottish National Party) : Whatever Happened to Halloween?
That the Parliament notes the Americanisation of Halloween, whereby guising has become a commercialised trick or treat event with pumpkins, and urges the Scottish Government to take steps to bring back the tumshie.

Americanisation? Are we now living in Howllywood? North (or South) Scarolina? Are we all eating Boo-berry Pie? Is Glasgow now home to the (forgive me) Vampire State Building?

And what’s tumshies all about?

I really do have no idea what Christine is getting at, but, well, is that maybe her point?

Halloween for me is dooking for apples, more monkey nuts than you know what to do with, tin foil and toilet paper for a costume that the effort doesn’t ‘really’ justify and telling insufferable jokes in front of patient neighbours.

It is not trick or treating, it is not toilet papering and it is not about making money but are these things even present in Scotland let alone endemic? Is the SNP MSP creating a phantom issue here?

The SNP will be fighting their battles on many fronts but they should be seeking sanctuary in holidays (St Andrew’s Day to one side) and not adding them to their list of grievances.

So, what does this motion and a vampire have in common? They both suck.

(h/t @DuncMcKay)

Occupy the European bailout

Oct 26

Posted by James in Economy, Europe, Governance | 8 Comments

IndignadosToday sees yet another round of hand-wringing across the Eurozone, driven by another round of hand-rubbing by the markets. When will it end?

We’re told that all it takes is a decisive move, that sufficient taxpayers’ money can be thrown at bank balance sheets to stop all this instability. It’s clearly nonsense. As Matt Taibbi pointed out yesterday in gorgeous detail, these bailouts are an endless series of ways to break the rules in favour of the rich elite, and it’s no wonder the peasants are revolting. Europe’s bureaucratic bailout merry-go-round is basically the same scam, just in more languages.

If the moral hazard is withdrawn and the value of your investment is never allowed to go down, and the traders and hedgies get offered a bet to nothing backed up by public money, they’ll just stop asking for more and threatening whoever’s next in line? Really? If the banks get offered a voluntary “haircut” only on their government debts, but the hedge funds can buy those debts and extract the full value, they won’t get together and make that deal? Really?

We know that austerity isn’t the solution to government debt. Greece’s economy fell 7.3% over the year – it’s not a technical recession, it’s a collapse. The previous link to the BBC shows what the vulture funds and multinationals are making from it too: woohoo! Cheap property in Kolonaki! Can I buy the lottery? Even the New York Times knows better than our current UK administration: “Mr. Cameron’s austerity program is the Tea Party’s dream come true“, and “unlike Greece, which has been forced into induced recession by misguided European Union creditors, Britain has inflicted this harmful quack cure on itself.”

Can political union save the economic union? Those of us who never believed a single currency could work across an economically diverse continent doubt that too. It’s just an even grander elite project to replace a failed elite project. The larger a state, the harder it is to change things. This is one of the reasons I favour independence: we need a radically reformed system of governance, and that seems almost impossible even at a UK level. Assuming political union could be delivered, the democratic deficit would feel even stronger to European citizens across the continent. The wrangle and tension that would come from making all taxation and spending decisions centrally, never mind all the social policy differences, make this pure fantasy.

Personally I agree with Frances Coppola on Liberal Conspiracy yesterday – the Euro is finished. Why any responsible First Minister would tell us so confidently that joining it is part of Scotland’s manifest destiny I have no idea. But before that there’s a choice of bailouts in front of the Eurozone leaders. The first option is to bail out the banks again, become the lender of last resort, and to prop up and vindicate all the traders who thought there’s money to be made here without risk. The second option is to go beyond the current guarantees and underwrite every deposit made by every individual and business in those banks, and tell the banks they’re on their own. A big society bailout, if you like, a bailout for the people who’ve suffered through these economic hard times, not yet another one for the people who made the mess in the first place. It’s not enough, but it would be a start.

If they go the right way, they will have redeemed themselves as Götterdämmerung for the dream of a United States of Europe approaches. If not, it’ll be time for the indignados and occupiers to take it to the next level, to turf a whole generation of corrupt politicians who put banks before people out and start again.

Will the SNP’s bristling new broom inadvertently sweep away independence chances?

Oct 26

Posted by Jeff in Parties | 73 Comments

As first posted at BPPA’s SNP Conference blog.

While the coalition Government is losing Ministers at a rate of knots, the Scottish Government is a veritable oasis of calm by comparison.

Liam Fox lasted 18 months as Defence Secretary, Vince Cable’s responsibility for media affairs lasted 7 months and David Laws lasted only 17 days as Chief Secretary to the Treasury. Chris Huhne is clinging onto his job by his fingernails after alleged speeding offences and it looks likely that there will be a controlled wind-down of Ken Clarke’s Cabinet position after numerous gaffes and controversies.

Meanwhile, up in Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon has been Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Cities since May 2007, Kenny MacAskill has been Cabinet Secretary for Justice since May 2007, John Swinney has been Cabinet Secretary for Finance since May 2007, Richard Lochhead has been Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment since May 2007, well, you get the point. In and around these high profile SNP high fliers, we have well established figures such as Mike Russell, Roseanna Cunningham, Shona Robison, Fiona Hyslop and Fergus Ewing who have held important posts, also since 2007.

Now, a cynic could say that the reason that the Scottish Cabinet is so consistent is because there are few individuals on the SNP benches who are ready to make the step up to replace them. When the rising stars of the governing party are Alex Neil (aged 60) and Mike Russell (aged 58), then one is inclined to agree.

So what?, one could reasonably ask. The SNP has a safe majority up to 2016 and the First Minister can put whichever bums on whatever Cabinet seats as he pleases. I would very much agree that devolved Scotland is safe in these eminently capable peoples’ hands for the foreseeable future but the problem for the SNP is that there is a referendum to be won around 2015.

An independent Scotland isn’t a novelty for a few years, it is a permanent change in how our nation is governed. The electorate will know that the current crop of Ministers will retire in the near future and will therefore consider who is in line to take over the reins of the Parliament of an Independent Scotland. We will still have the youthful Sturgeon, MacAskill and Robison for a good while yet of course, and there’s no reason why the SNP’s Aileen Campbell and Jamie Hepburn, to name but two of the Nat brat pack, shouldn’t fulfil their overflowing potential and shine as Ministers in due course.

That said, and this is where I stop naming names, the rest of the SNP crop can be far from impressive and are often derided as simply button-pushers in the Parliament, existing merely to serve Salmond’s every whim where stepping away from the party line is unacceptable. MSPs who are a bit too shouty on Newsnight, MSPs who get their billions mixed up with their millions, MSPs who harbour misplaced fears over gay marriage and MSPs who make jaw-droppingly erroneous allegations against the British Army and soldier deaths.

Is this Scotland’s fate for the decades to come? Where are the political leaders in their 20s, 30s and 40s that will save us from ourselves?

Not that the SNP has a lock on forming the first Government of an independent Scotland, but the talent on opposition benches, current and future, is similarly threadbare save for a few notable exceptions.

Alex Salmond’s ‘steady as she goes’ tactic has been necessary since 2007. The SNP were not going to be trusted by a sceptical public unless they could prove their competence in Government within a devolved Scotland before any referendum, and Salmond has probably known all along that he’d need two terms before a referendum could even be a realistic option.

To win a yes vote, the SNP has to defend many flanks from many opponents but will it be the soft underbelly of the next generation of SNP ‘talent’ that results in Scotland not having the confidence to go for it and ensures the Nationalist dream comes a cropper?

What does Yes-Yes mean in the independence referendum?

Oct 25

Posted by Jeff in Constitution | 173 Comments

Last week, I blogged on the problems that Devo Max may pose for Alex Salmond if he decides to include a 2nd question in the coming referendum. However, I managed to miss out one stonker of a problem that I wonder if the SNP has even considered. 

What happens if there are two Yes results and there are significantly more Scots in favour of Devo Max than independence?

The SNP will undoubtedly try to frame the first question of independence as taking priority over the second, much like in 1997, but the two referendums are not really comparable. 

Tax-varying powers was a clear bolt-on to the first question of whether Scotland wants its own Parliament but, as things stand, we will have no means of ascertaining the strength of preference on individual ballots between Devo Max and Independence.

It is safe to assume that those who vote Yes in the first question will also vote Yes in the second but what if a significant bloc, holding at least the casting vote, are really strongly in favour of Devo Max but only in favour of independence on balance? What then?

Of course, the solution to this problem is to have just a straightforward Yes/No on independence or to hold a 3-pronged referendum by STV. 

What is interesting is that the first of these suggestions is building an unlikely alliance ranging from Tom Harris through to Margo MacDonald and including many SNP members along the way, going by Twitter and the Sunday papers.

By charging forwards, Salmond has exposed a chink in the armour and if he has to backpedal to a one question referendum, then this debate really will be winner takes all.    

One thing’s for certain, the debate over what the result means, let alone what the question should be, is only just getting going. 

Tory Eurosceptic wolves have started pawing Number 10′s door

Oct 24

Posted by Jeff in Europe | 17 Comments

Despite it always being highly unlikely, I was rather hopeful that today’s vote would result in an EU referendum taking place.

I agree with each of the main party leaders that deciding whether we should be in the Euro at all would send a terrible message to the rest of the Continent at precisely the wrong time. The finances of Europe are a mess and weekend reading of the subject in the Sunday papers hasn’t left me feeling any more confident that 2012 will deliver brighter days, certainly not with Silvio Berlusconi in place as Italy’s leader at least. We shouldn’t be rocking the boat when it’s already so close to capsizing. However, we live in a democracy and poll after poll has shown that the UK at large is at best deeply sceptical of the benefits of EU membership so why not put that commitment to the test?

The reason I would like to see a referendum take place would be to take the opportunity to nail my blue and yellow-starred colours to the European mast, humming Ode to Joy as I go. Allowing the Scottish pro-EU silent majority to be heard loud and clear would be a tremendous fillip for our standing within the Union, even if (or should that be especially if) England chose not to.

It may not be clear at this stage whether joining the Euro will ever be a realistic prospect for the UK or an independent Scotland, we simply need to see what comes of these rounds after rounds of talks, notably whether fiscal union will take place and what form it takes. It is only fair that the SNP is allowed time to reflect on what happens next for the Euro before it outlines what its policy may be on joining the troubled currency.

Nonetheless, the European Union remains an important bloc that it is well worth Scotland being a part of.

The twin pillars of logic that underpin our membership are:
(1) Shared problems need shared solutions and
(2) free trade stops wars

World War Three isn’t going to start up in this continent, whether through a monarch assassination or the rise of a fascist, while all countries are in the same room having discussions, even if one felt the need to tell the other to ‘shut up’ recently. And climate change and transport and Defence and taxation and minimum wage are best fought at supra-national level, as well as being addressed within member nations. It’s a bit like two brothers trying to do the best for their family without talking to each other. Unthinkable really.

The only losers today will be the whips. Neither Labour nor the Lib Dems promised a referendum in their manifestos so the public cannot feel disenfranchised when the rebels are voted down but stifling democracy by forcing MPs to vote along party lines is always a sad sight and it is triply embarrassing that each of the Tories, Labour and (will they ever learn?) the Lib Dems felt the need to pull out the verbal cat o nine tails for anyone stepping out of line, representing their constituency and thinking for themselves.

Indeed, it is worth recalling Nick Clegg’s words from the last parliamentary term to see how much of a volte face this whipping business actually is (h/t Guardian):

The debate about Europe has been a thorn in the side of British politics for decades. Now the wound has become infected. Europhile and Eurosceptic trading blows about the Lisbon treaty in grand rhetoric that obscures the facts. If you’re pro-European, as I am, you’re accused of being a sellout. If you’re anti-European, like most Conservatives, you’re accused of being a headbanger. It isn’t new, but it isn’t edifying either.
It’s time we pulled out the thorn and healed the wound, time for a debate politicians have been too cowardly to hold for 30 years – time for a referendum on the big question. Do we want to be in or out?

Scotland in Britain in Europe is a powerful position for our nation to be in and is certainly more powerful than Scotland in UK out of Europe.

For now though, rightly or wrongly, we’ll have to satisfy ourselves with the Tories cracking at the seams over Europe once more. Not a bad consolation prize to be fair.