New Poll - Delight for Salmond

The Daily Tory-graph is seemingly trying to paint the latest polling information as bad news for Salmond. I (surprise, surprise) disagree entirely.

• Holyrood voting intentions put the split for first/second vote as follows:

SNP (Holyrood) - 36%/37%

Labour (Holyrood) - 31%/28%

Lib Dem (Holyrood) - 15%/13%

Tory (Holyrood) - 13%/13%

This shows the SNP are holding on to their commanding position as Scotland's favourite party, with clear day light between them and Labour.

• The Westminster election voting intentions is as follows:

Labour (Westminster) - 34%

SNP (Westminster) - 30%

Tory (Westminster) - 17%

Lib Dem (Westminster) - 14%

The SNP snapping at the heels of Labour in UK voting intentions is incredibly good news. It shows the SNP have significantly increased their reputation across the nation attracting confidence and respect through their work in Holyrood.

• 38% say Alex Salmond is to "blame" for the rows between London and Edinburgh. 35% "blame" Westminster.

This is very misleading I think, and is probably caused by a badly worded question. There is a link between this statistic and the SNP's support. Alex Salmond is generally being seen as standing up for Scotland and defending their interests; the recent quotes from Scottish public personalities in the Sunday Herald and Scotland on Sunday backs this up. So yes, Alex Salmond is causing consternation with his London colleagues but only because he is fighting our corner.

I doubt Salmond would be too concerned if this 38% increased further over the summer.

• "Support for Scottish Independence slumps" as 19% of people support independence with "nearly three quarters" (strangely no exact stat is given) in favour of keeping a devolved Holyrood. Let me just say first up that there's no sign of what question was used which is always an indication of partisan foul play.

That aside, and you can call me delusional here, but this part of the poll isn't so bad for the SNP. We are motoring away towards extra devolved powers, whether it comes with a 3-way referendum or not.

These polls can't change the fact that in a straight shoot-out between independence or not, the count is very close indeed.

And any moves towards Holyrood gaining more powers will only increase the numbers in favour of independence. The closer we get to owning all possible powers, the more likely the people will think "why the heck not, we can do this so let's go all the way".

So, in the SNP's first term at Holyrood they will deliver extra powers, probably including fiscal independence, and they'll come via the Calman commission, National Conversation and/or a simple referendum.

I'd say that's a mighty big step towards an independent Scotland whatever the erratic and partisan polls are telling us.

The Inside Man

It has come to my attention that a fellow Scottish blogger will be on this Thursday's Question Time live from London (City! City!).

Step forward Fred Barboo.

The line-up for this particular show is:

Des Browne (boooo!)
William Hague (hooray!)
Paddy Ashdown (come and 'av a go if you think your hard enuf!)
Richard Littlejohn (Who are ya!? Who are ya?!)
Saffron Burrows (she's got a pine, apple, on her head; she's got a pine, apple....)

Anyway, coming back from the football terraces and back into real life, it seems dear Fred is stuck for his second question. Well, not so much stuck as he's an incredibly bright lad, but he is open to ideas so wishes to spread the brainstorming far and wide to increase his chances of being called upon by the legendary David Dimbleby (the referees a w*****r!).

Hence this post in gathering ideas for a question to ask the panel. Not that the flagpole that is SNP Tactical Voting commands the greatest of attention so, with that in mind, please do salute this post in the comments section if you get the chance so we can be stronger together. (United! United!)

And if you do happen to get asked the question Mr Barboo, do us a favour will you? Yes, that's right, altogether now...

"Freddy, freddy, give us a wave, give us a wave, give us a wave......"




EDIT: Can you tell I'm excited about the Man Utd vs Barcelona showdown tonight?

EDIT 2 : If Saffron Burrows turns out to be someone other than the tall one from Steps or the lead singer from M People, then I apologise for suggesting that she has a pineapple on her head. Those who have seen Skinner and Baddiel's Fantasy Football League may understand.

Living with a Rhino

I can't tell you what living with a Rhino is like but my flatmate has bought a punchbag and is charging around his room like there's no tomorrow. Unfortunately for me, my tomorrow begins at 7am but banging walls and restful sleep don't tend to go hand in hand so it's back to the internet for a bit before I decide on either (1) toughing it out or (2) kicking his ass.


And I'm glad I did come back online as this YouTube video must be the most entertaining minute and a half out there on the web right now. There's a lot of solid gold videos on that website but this, really, is quite something.... Wendy Alexander interview



Anyway, now that I've safely passed it on, I'm off to bed to try counting sheep.






(Exactly, are you crazy!? I'm not going to go picking a fight with a rhino. Especially one that is practising its boxing skills. I'm British, I can patiently put up with anything pretending it's not happening...)

Vote Labour, get SNP....!?

I know, call me crazy, but this is almost true...

Maybe not "get" SNP but you could well be helping them out.

Picture the scene, going into the next Westminster election and Labour are on 31% in the polls and the Tories are on 40%.

Voting anomalies mean that the split of seats is still tight. Cameron has romped home in the countryside but Labour have still scraped some close victories in key marginals. Peter Snow's swingometer is going into overdrive and a narrow win for the Tories is looking likely, but they're about 20-30 seats shy of a majority.

Nick Clegg has been banging away for weeks about how he won't share power, the Lib Dems are not a mere "annex" to another party. (thanks to Two Doctors)

So all eyes are turning to whoever the 4th largest party at Westminster party will be and with the awesome gains the SNP are making across Scotland, it is clear that they may hold the balance of unbridled power for David Cameron, the Prime Minister in waiting.

It's hard to say who is more excited though, David Cameron or Alex Salmond. The scent of an independence referendum is swirling in Salmond's nostrils but a few more Tory gains off Labour would see it slipping through his fingers as the Tories would have a wafer thin majority on their own. No need for a coalition. Consequently, no independence referendum to dangle in front of Cameron.

Up and down Scotland, the glee that many Nationalists had in seeing Labour MPs kicked out of their seats is turning to distraught as they realise that, had those Labour MPs actually won their seats, then the SNPs 23 seats would have actually made them coalition partners with the Tories who have a majority in the single figures.


So, with that in mind it is perhaps prudent to consider (*my hands are shaking as I type this*) Labour Tactical Voting.

The rationale is - given how poorly Brown is performing at the moment, he may need SNP support to close the gap to the slim Tory victory that the SNP craves.

So if you're in any of the following constituencies where the SNP have (arguably!) little chance and want independence, give some strong consideration for voting Labour to increase the chances of a tight finish between Cameron and Brown.

Edinburgh South

Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale

Stirling

Dumfries and Galloway

Edinburgh South West

Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock


Remember: Vote Labour, help the SNP.

(You'll probably need to say it over a few times before you truly believe it...)

Having a laugh?

For some reason, it took Wikipedia to tell me who is involved in the Scottish Constitutional Commission and I nearly fell off my chair when I saw John Loughton is involved. For those not in the know, John Loughton is the 21 year old who won Big Brother recently.

I was particularly interested in who would be included given that George Reid, ex-Presiding Officer of the Holyrood Chamber, was passed over by the UK Labour party, reinforcing the message that this is a Westminster review and Wendy has little say in it.

George Reid has immense knowledge of the Holyrood process, devolved powers and the Scotland Act. He is respected across the political spectrum and to be passed over for being "too nationalist" is a missed opportunity and a cheap trick by the Labour party.

But to then bring John Loughton into the fold, a man(?) whose experience in Politics is extremely thin, also shows very poor judgement.

I can just picture the sympathetic smiles, bordering on understandable condescension, from the remainder of the working group as John says his piece about how Scotland's constitution should be shaped. It will be similar to the cringing I myself do when reporters go into schools and interview kids on the BBC News.

Further to this, what can be said of John Loughton when, upon being asked which party he would like to join in the future, his reply was "whichever party makes me the best offer".

Nice. Good to see he has his principles in place.

So not for the first time in the past year, the Labour party have stuffed up again.

Scottish Futures Trust

I decided that of all the things that I would do this weekend, looking into the detail of the Scottish Futures Trust vs PFI/PPP debate would be one of them.

Well, what with a beautifully sunny Saturday and Sunday to also contend with, it's no wonder that it's late Sunday night that I get around to looking into the fascinating topic of public sector finance. I should say, of all the texts I read, I found this page particularly useful.

Thankfully, it didn't take long for me to work out which of the two options are better. The Scottish Futures Trust possesses significantly better value and less complexity compared to PFI.

I know there's been a lot of fuss over SFT recently but that seems to have focussed more on a lack of detail rather than anything being inherently wrong with the plan. Given that SFT will last for decades and we have to stick with PFI in the short-term future anyway, I think it's best that time is taken to do the planning properly rather than quickly so of course there are gaps given the SNP have only been in the door a year. But as a general theory, I personally feel SFT is best by far.


Scottish Futures Trust involves the Scottish public investing their savings in guaranteed Scottish bonds held by the Government and a rate of interest (expected to be 4%) set tax-free. This is basically the equivalent of an ISA with RBS or HBOS. The money raised will then be used to fund public sector building.

PFI involves the private sector building schools and hospitals in the short term with capital and interest payments due to them from the public purse over x number of years. This is the equivalent of buying a new car and paying it off, with interest, over the next 5 years or so in installments but on a much, much grander scale. It's safe to say interest has been, and will be, a lot higher than 4%.


Let's bullet point here to drive home just how much better SFT is:

• The wastage of PFI contracts is estimated to be 10% of the total PFI cost. This is the equivalent to £2.1bn pounds. In other words, with SFT, we would have an extra £2.1bn to build schools and hospitals. Let me be clear. Of all the PFI contracts that have been signed off, £2.1bn goes from the public sector/taxpayer to the private sector EXCLUDING builders/suppliers costs etc.


• The incentive to save within the Scottish population with this tax-free scheme would help in reducing inflationary pressures and ensure a more stable Scottish economy.


• With PFI, the risks are held by the public sector with the rewards mostly held by the private sector. With SFT, both risk and reward is held by the taxpayer.


• £3.5bn pounds is paid to the private sector to insure against any risks. With SFT, no such insurance is required.


• SFT could match PFI's advantage of immediate finance if the public understood the rationale and backed it with their savings. The unmistakable socialist aspect of SFT would consequently create a stronger sense of community if we were all in it together. PFI is business-friendly and not a socialist option.

The main opposition I have seen to the Scottish Futures Trust involves two main areas:

(1) Is Scotland allowed to raise finance in this way?

(2) Would current/looming PFI contracts be scrapped?

For (1), quite simply, the Government should be able to do what it likes. It's the Government for goodness sake. The only impediment of course is Westminster and the only justification they would have for blocking the Scottish Government's plans would be partisan and based on petty politics. Ultimately, they would be unable to get away with it.

For (2). Of course it would be nice to save some of that £2.1bn but this is why the SNP has accepted that some PFI will have to continue in the short term. I don't think anyone is proposing that schools are left half-built for a few years while SFT gets sorted out.

We can grudgingly absorb the costs of PFI in the short term and move towards SFT in the medium to long term.

This moves us fairly quickly to a position which is best value for the taxpayer while also providing the best facilities for the education and health services in the short, medium and long-term.

Piece of cake really.

Leith Museum

I asked a very good friend of mine which area of Edinburgh is her favourite, particularly given she had been in the city for less than a year.

I expected Stockbridge, New Town or Royal Mile to be the answer so I was rather surprised when Leith was the answer after not very much deliberation.

And yet, why not?

It has the stunning centrepiece of the Shore area, the attractive Commercial Quay strip, the busy Ocean Terminal complex, the classy Malmaison, Martin Wishart and Kitchin establishments (2 Michelin stars between them), the King's Wark, Shore, Waterfront to name but 3 pubs which are amongst the best in the city and, of course, it has the tram system on the way which, though expensive, will look very nice down there.

The only thing that Leith really lacks is a cultural centre, a hub where the area can boast of its tangled history and heady intrigue.

So it's with delight that the campaign to have a Leith Museum in the somewhat neglected Custom House has taken a step forward with staffing, expertise and resources being allocated to the project by Edinburgh Council.

I have the joy of living right beside this beautiful building and it's a shame to see the only use it has is for people to lean against it while waiting for a bus.

I often imagine it well-lit, busy with tourists and even with a coffee shop or bar on its rooftop to help finance the project.

I'll be 'holding my thumbs' that the newly-formed group advancing the campaign for the museum has every success in getting it up and running soon.

Gordon on the ropes

The latest poll from YouGov has the Tories 18 points ahead of Brown's listless Labour party.

This poll was taken during the days of the 10p tax shambles so probably captures the full impact of Labour's dithering in recent weeks. And don't the numbers show it...

For full results (including some interesting comments that Lib Dems could take over Labour if they got their act together) do read the full story at Political Betting.


At this rate, the SNP will need a heck of a lot more than 20MPs to make much of a difference to the balance of power at Westminster!

A spoiled lot

I read with some interest that the writer of My Rambling Thoughts is considering not voting in the London Mayoral elections or spoiling her ballot paper.

This reminded me of the equally baffling decision taken by other regular bloggers not to vote in the Holyrood election last year, despite discussing the campaign in such detail for the few months before.

This logic has always confused me. Of course there is not always going to be a parliamentary candidate that gives you goose bumps, that makes your knees tremble every time he/she speaks. But there will always, and I do mean always, be somebody who you agree with more than the rest of the field.

Standing in a constituency must be a tiring, painful affair. Relentless canvassing, a requirement to know policy detail on a range of issues, self-induced pressure not to let the party down and a disruption to one's personal life that must be thoroughly frustrating. (Not tonight love, you'll squash my rosette.)

Of course there are many snouts in the trough, parties obsessed with PR and all these family members employed by MPs looks decidedly dodgy too but overall British politicians are a force for good and in it for the right reason. To assess any line-up in your constituency and decide that none of them are worth your precious time to go and tick a box by their name is actually quite insulting.

I think too many people in the UK expect too much of elected respresentatives. And if the standard is so low amongst our politicians, then maybe some of the nay-sayers should stop carping from the sidelines and stand themselves. Julie McAnulty and Duncan Thorp spring to mind and some of the abuse and sneering they attracted for having the gall to try making a difference was shameful.

The clash of ideas at Holyrood this term has been impressive with almost every area of our devolved remit being discussed by all parties in the space of a year. We like to poke fun at them from time to time but these are lawyers, accountants, economists; thoroughly capable people doing their best for Scotland.

Every party has a different view on each specific policy area and for people to be unable to reach a conclusion on who would serve them best, or even serve them least poorly, shows a shockingly lamentable inability to frame one's own thoughts and think logically about how a democracy works, and needs to work, in order to prosper.

Imagine trying to explain to a Zimbabwean or a North Korean or an Iraqi that you live in a free country, can vote for anyone but you still can't be bothered or noone impresses you enough to place an X by their name.

They would either laugh in your face or punch you.

Now this...

... is bloody brilliant.

Walk to work day/week/month ?

I was reading with some mirth that tomorrow is "walk to work" day. Since I live a good 4 miles from where I earn my crust, i didn't see that happening somehow.

Well, my mirth turned to frustration when I saw the Lothian Bus page.

It seems they are not running any buses across Edinburgh from Monday and, quite frankly, this will leave many people (myself included) completely stuck.

Four miles here and then four miles back? I'd better get some training in over the weekend!


So once again my sympathy for striking workers hits a new low. Their actions are irresponsible and negotiation without such drastic action should always be preferred.


Surely an employment tribunal is much, much prefereable as the courts could set a fair deal rather than bring a country to its knees.


Still, that said, a day off on Monday would be nice....


EDIT: It seems that just as I posted this article, the Lothian Buses changed their front page. It has said "No buses will be running from Monday" but it seems this may no longer be the case.

Perhaps it's a tactic by the clever SNP Government to force a deal to be made sooner rather than later.

Plan B

Well, I did my best to draw up where the SNP would bring their 20 MPs from come the next election. I did so and consequently I was skewered as easily as a haggis kebab by my blogging colleagues.

Scottish Tory Bory ripped my Dumfries prediction to shreds.

Iain Rubie Dale and Stephen Glenn ganged up on me from a Lib Dem perspective with some reasonable points on the Lib Dem and Tory smash-and-grab tactics in Scotland.

Even an anonymous Nationalist blogger sent me the following:

I can't say anything about the 20 seat projection on the basis that I think it is bollocks and I can't say that on my blog or I'll get in bother, and I won't lie and say it will be easy - so here's my take: it's bollocks.

A Scottish Parly election is a different animal from a UK one. People are far more likely to vote SNP in SP - indeed if you look at some of the 21 seats won last year you'll see massive swings - Edin East, Gordon, Stirling. What made the difference was the big-hitters we had standing - Kenny, Alex, Bruce Crawford. If you look at some of the folks standing this time round, I'd be willing to wager now they will not get the job done. Mainly because the strong folks the SNP have are already in Holyrood or Westminster. The electoral map of Scotland was redrawn for 2005 then re-coloured in 2007. 2009/10 will be different again, but it WILL NOT have 20 yellow constituencies. 15 - at the very most. And even that is at a push in places the SNP are not strong.

So it seems it is indeed "back to the drawing board" for me and my tactical voting ways and for that reason I have amassed a master plan, a thing of beauty that will bring SNP MPs raining down on us like there's no tomorrow. Well, not any kind of tomorrow that could fairly be described as summery anyway.

I admit, it's a little bit tabloid but where Arnie Schwarzenegger, Martin Bell and (less so) Lloyd Quinan have gone before, the SNP can follow too.

Yes, that's right, The Celebrity Candidate.

It's a bit of a Bobby Dazzler, no!?

Let's look at who we could have, aside from the wonderful George Kerevan standing in Edinburgh East:

First up, Elaine C Smith. She ticks all the boxes. A huge SNP fan, genuinely popular across Scotland, hard-working, funny, could single-handedly pierce the Glasgow heartlands and she's sexy as hell. Well, ok, she might not tick every box. But parachute Elaine into the right Glasgow constituency and it'll go SNP.

Sean Connery - How could you not vote for Sean? He's the best Bond ever for crying out loud! Well, Daniel Craig is better in my humble opinion but that's beside the point. Connery used to work as a lifeguard at Portobello Swimming Baths but he was actually born in Fountainbridge so let's put him into Edinburgh Central. He'd capture the imagination of the hefty student vote in that constituency at least. I could actually change my voting area and would definitely put a cross against Sean's name too (sorry Daniel, still love you buddy).

Tommy Sheridan - I've been thinking about this one for a while, ever since the SSP scuppered a few seats for the SNP back in 2003. Since so many people swither between the socialists and the nationalists, why not just let Tommy into the SNP? Goodness knows he needs the money and you know he'd get a hard-on from all the attention (though what he does with said hard-on could be pretty damaging!). He is a fan of independence and, I think, would seriously challenge for Glasgow Pollock (or whatever the equivalent Westminster seat is).

Rosie Kane - yeah, maybe not

Iain McWhirter - If recent Sunday Herald columns are to be believed, Iain is a dyed-in-the-wool Nationalist already so presumably wouldn't take much convincing to get on board the independence bandwagon. He could agree to a secret deal and undermine Gordon Brown and Labour every Sunday from his lofty position of Top Political Journalist. If he hasn't done such a deal already (now that's a thought that's going to fester!)

Sir George Mathewson - Hailing from the same constituency as Gordon Brown, this would be a gargantuan battle. Ex-chairman of RBS going up against the guy who robbed 5.3 million poor people. Could be interesting...

Brian Souter - The main problem with Brian Souter isn't his religious views, or Section 28 or his funding of the SNP's Holyrood victory, it's merely that he comes from Perth and the SNP already have this constituency. (Claims that we are merely borrowing it are wide of the mark I am sure!) But I get the impression First Bus does a great service up in Aberdeen so maybe he could have a crack at Aberdeen North which the SNP aren't too far off the pace with. It's just a shame we don't have a bible belt here in Scotland or it would make placing one of Scotland's leading businessmen so much easier!

John Smeaton - What's that noise? Sounds like someone scraping a barrel or something… Anyway, I'm sure you can picture it. On being asked at hustings what John's take on the current economic downturn and rising inflation would be, his simple response of "Whit? The Credit Crunch? Ah'm no havin' it. I'll set aboot ye!" would bring wild whoops from the cheerings masses as they wave their "We Love Smeato" flags. A guaranteed winner whichever constituency was lucky enough to have him but there is concern that he'd topple Salmond as leader of the party.

The McDonald Brothers (either one) - From their X-Factor performances they showed a necessary resilience in elections and they clearly appeal to the Scottish electorate (who from England is going to vote for Flower of Scotland and Proclaimers week in, week out!). Their impish grins would bring in the grannies and teenagers alike. And even if they get hammered, at least getting a band in for the election night party won't be difficult.

I could go on and on.

Yes, as a tactic, it is cheap, tacky, low-brow, scurrilous and just downright shameless. Which is probably why it appeals so very much.

Shame of MEPs expense cover up

I'm always a bit sceptical turning to The Metro for my news but if this story is correct then it is really quite outrageous.

In short, MEPs have been illegally using public money to make private contributions into their pension funds. And now they have voted to block an audit report that would have stated so.

Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies calls it right when he calls the move "shameful" and bringing "discredit and dishonour upon the entire parliament".

Let's think of this logically: An audit is conducted to provide the stakeholders with information on how their business or interest is performing.

In a private business, if an audit was blocked from the shareholders there would be the most violent of outrages.

And yet, this is exactly what is happening here. We are the stakeholders and we are being prevented from seeing how our European Parliament is conducting itself.

I urge people to try to find the list of who voted against making this audit report publicly available and badgering your local MEP as to why they voted as they did if you disagree with their stance.

Well that didn't take long

Yes, the Edinburgh tram scheme has already slipped back by £30m.

And with another 2 years until they are up and running who knows how many zeros the final bill will have on the end of it.

Remember this is the tram system that only a minority of Edinburgh residents wanted due to a perfectly good bus system being already in place, but the unionist parties pushed it through Parliament anyway against the SNP's will

Labour, Lib Dem and Tory MSPs.... get ready to hang your heads in shame.

Move over Darling, we want Clarke

I've just read with interest the latest poll from ICM/Guardian.

There is the headline stuff about the Tories being 5 points ahead of Labour which is just about perfect for a draw given the voting anomalies surrounding rural and urban constituencies that means the Tories need an even larger lead than Labour would to win a majority.

A draw, of course, means a hung parliament, and means real power for the 20+ SNP MPs.

But I think this somewhat expected result of a 5 point lead for Cameron hides a fascinating statistic. Only 35% of Tory voters back George Osbourne as Chancellor. This is quite remarkable.

I could easily look up how long he has been in his position as Shadow Chancellor but I'm lazy and it's safe to say it's been a very long time. And only 35% of his own party rate him? How long does someone need to make an impression!?

Particularly given the trouble Labour is in right now and the credit crunch rumbling on, it's time for David Cameron ditched his posh chum George and brought in either Kenneth Clarke or David Davies to really put the pressure on Alastair Darling. They need a genuine big hitter who can guarantee gathering attention and journalists around him like flies around a jobby. (I accept that's a rather unfortunate analogy but I still find it amusing after all these years.)

The result of the very election itself may well depend on such a simple tactical move.

After all, "Move over Darling, we want Clarke" is a rather catchy line for a billboard. It doesn't quite work with Osbourne since even his own party don't want him.

destiNation Unknown

Via Julie Hepburn's Bid for Freedom blog, I have learned of a new webspace called destiNation. I've only flicked through it for a few minutes (need to get some kip soon!) and this line, I think, sums up best what it aims to achieve:

"destiNation aims to provide an online space for articles and commentary from a pro-independence perspective – free from the chains of constitutional limitations"

To me it looks like a very slick, very well presented uber-blog in favour of independence, there are some well knon Scottish blogging names in there but I wont' spoil the surprise of who they are.

Why not just have a look and see how it unfolds?

I know I will....

Twenty's Plenty

Ok, here we go with part 2 of how and where the SNP will pick up their 20 seats at the next election.

Part 1 is here and involves the SNP winning Banff & Buchan, Moray, Angus, Dundee East, Dundee West, Perth, Western Isles, Ochil, Aberdeen North, Kilmarnock, Gordon and Linlithgow.

Good to see that Calum Cashley, SNP candidate for the tricky constituency of Edinburgh North and Leith, agrees with me on a lot of seats.

So, 8 more seats, and given the impending implosion of the Lib Dem vote and existence of SNP heartlands as evidenced by the Holyrood election, I think they will be won here:

Edinburgh East - An interesting choice for some perhaps but current Labour MP Gavin Strang is stepping down and this is the constituency of Kenny MacAskill who is doing a robust and thoroughly effective job as Justice Secretary so I suspect the balance of power will shift going into this one if Labour pick a relative unknown. They selected Norman Murray for the Holyrood election which was frankly bizarre so another selection like that would be great.

Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale - SNP are sitting in 4th place after the 2005 election. They got 9% of the vote. I think they're going to win here.

I know immediately that STB will (literally?) scream blue murder at this prediction and given he soundly whooped my ass in the Alex Fergusson vs Alasdair Morgan prediction of Galloway and Upper Nithsdale, he may lay claim to understand the South of Scotland better than I.

With boundary changes and a strong feeling that David Mundell won't stand again for the Tories I think this constituency is up for grabs. Much like the similarly shaped Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale, this could well become a 4-way tie for all the parties.

Glasgow Govan - Anytime the SNP have a historic night, then Glasgow Govan goes to the Nationalists. Margo McDonald won here in 1973. Jim Sillars won here in 1988. Nicola Sturgeon won in 2007. These are big names and whether the SNP have a big enough profile in the locker is a valid question but given this constituency is to be broken up into 3, the SNP's awesome backroom machine can work out the area they stand the best chance of picking up a seat and go for it.

Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey - Given the SNP were 12,000 votes away in 2005 this one that may seem optimistic but the SNP were 3,000 votes away in 2001 and I don't think Danny Alexander, the current incumbent for the Lib Dems, has enough clout that those who voted for him the last time won't be persuaded elsewhere.

Stirling - Before the Holyrood election I don't think I even would have considered this one for the SNP but Bruce Crawford's victory shows that the mood in this area has changed dramatically. The Tories temd to make a strong showing here but given Anne McGuire's poor performances this term as an MP I don't see her winning. And a Tory victory seems even more remote than an SNP one so I see this one going to the good guys.

Falkirk - I'll be totally honest, I'd love the SNP to win this one. Actually, to be more specific, I'd love to see Eric Joyce lose this one.

The first time I saw the Labour MP on tv was on the night of the 2005 election and he'd just won the seat. Granted, he had a right to be pleased but there was an arrogant smugness to Eric's general demeanour that just didn't sit right with me.

It has continued apace and I just don't take to the man when he's being interviewed. Add to this that he is regularly at the top of the Westminster expenses list and I have to conclude that there is a whiff of sleaze around him.

Falkirk should not be an expensive constituency to run or travel to London from.

With the SNP sitting second from 2005, and a fair chance the locals feel the same way as I do about Mr Joyce, I suspect this could be a not-so-surprising win for the Nationalists.

Glenrothes - I don't think we are yet scraping the barrel and the SNP are in second place so perfectly placed to pick up protest votes. Even still, overcoming the 10,500 vote majority will be tough for whoever stands here.

Argyll and Bute - The scene of a great win for the SNP in Holyrood, with Jim Mather taking out George Lyon in 2007. This could be replicated in 2009/10 with Alan Reid making way for the SNP challenger. Labour and the Tories each attracted 10,000 votes last time and if the SNP can eat into those figures and add it to their existing 7,000 then they can take top spot. Alan Reid's 16,000 votes will surely crumble given the change in mood in the area.

I also believe the SNP have made the most convincing efforts in the Calmac debacle in this part of the country and that will count for a lot.

So there we have it, 20 seats. And there were others that the SNP have at least an outside chance of taking and yes, it would be a struggle to win them all, but the optimism alone of aiming so high can carry the SNP into victories they hadn't dreamed of only recently.

Do not underestimate the power of a nationalist with the swirling scent of an independent Scotland in their nostrils.

Yet more reasons to be cheerful

It has been highly entertaining watching the unionist party hacks and press researchers try to find ways to chop the SNP down to size after their conference at the weekend, despite the nationalists enjoying a 40% public rating, a confidence-building series of independence polls and an army of well-known Scots from various backgrounds queuing up to compliment Alex Salmond and his cabinet in the Scotland on Sunday.

Amongst these public figures are well known unionists and labour backers who, albeit grudgingly, have said that the SNP are doing "surprisingly" well.

So with this in mind, the various blog entries smack of desperation and even a delusion that I am simply amazed hasn't worn off yet. I agree there is a place for effective opposition, even in the face of a good policy for the sake of playing devil's advocate, but an opposition without the "effective" adjective is reduced to someone just having a needless moan.

Top billing - Matt's Mic (who, to be fair, did an awesome compering job at the Obama rally).

Matt (Labour) seems to be swinging rather wildly at the SNP's track record hoping something will stick. 1,000 extra police, reduced class sizes and efforts to help first time buyers of homes incur his rather odd wrath. The more amusing complaint is the dumping of the student debt which he is waiting for as "promised" by the SNP. Of course, the fact that the SNP are in the minority and no other party supports this policy (including Labour who I believe Matt works for) then I guess there'll be a bit longer to wait to halt those student loan payments.

Two Doctors (Green) make a similarly odd choice of protest by focussing on Salmond's "make Westminster dance to a Scottish jig" line. Similar to the Labour/Lib Dem administration of 8 years, I don't understand why this Green party member is ashamed of fighting for Scottish interests? I'd go as far to say that the main reason for Salmond's tremendous popularity at the moment is down to the fact that he's taking Westminster head-on in areas where past administrations have just lied down to Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's wishes.

Scottish Tory Boy (umm, Tory) moves into even more bizarre territory by trying to claim that Alex Salmond is trying to stage a revolution! Despite the SNP's constant insistence that they have no problem with the Queen reigning over an independent Scotland, Tory Boy is concerned that a (somewhat trivial) picture of Alex Salmond on a fake £20 note suggests something more sinister. Perhaps the SNP should also be charged for counterfeiting?

Thankfully, the small (PR-conscious?) band of Lib Dem bloggers have seen sense and know that there's no point throwing mud when it just won't stick. There are no disparaging stories from their end of the blogosphere.

But to the rest I would say keep going, Mondays can be a difficult day but your light relief is certainly helping me keep a smile on my face...

Salmond's Top 20

After Alex Salmond's breathtakingly amazing speech at the weekend (I've not actually seen it yet but I'm sure it justifies such praise), I thought I would look into his objective of winning 20 seats at the next Westminster election, expected to be held around this time next year.

Researching the various seats and the chances that the SNP candidates possess in these constituencies takes me back to the joys of pontificating on the Holyrood election last year. I think it's time the SNP Tactical Voting cranked up a gear and dug into the boundary changes and candidate assessment a bit more so watch this space.

For now though, here is how the SNP can reach this magical number of 20 seats:

Already in the bag

The SNP currently hold 6 seats at Westminster. Alex Salmond (Banff and Buchan), Angus Robertson (Moray), Stewart Hosie (Dundee East), Michael Weir (Angus), Pete Wishart (Perth) and Angus MacNeil (Western Isles) make up the rather male looking line-up. I think it's safe to say that these wins will be replicated with increased majorities at the next election, so that's 6 in the bag.

The marginals

The SNP are lying in a distant 4th in a surprisingly high number of Westminster seats across Scotland but thankfully there are plenty of seats where they are banging on the door of the incumbent in 2nd or 3rd place and with only a small number of votes to make up.

I think I should add at this point that the Lib Dems were the protest party in 2005, particularly in Scotland with the immensely likeable Charlie Kennedy at the helm (I suspect Nick Clegg will have less of an effect up here). So if the SNP continue their impressive run for the next year, and Labour continues to flap around wildly, I would fully expect the Nationalists to get the alternative vote from disillusioned Labour voters and those who are unable to back the government but don't want to vote Tory. In other words, expect large swings from Lib Dem to SNP and small swings from Labour to SNP.

The remaining 14 seats will have to come from a mix of seats where SNP are 2nd, 3rd and 4th with a bit of emphasis placed on the Lib Dem swings to the SNP, my best estimate is that these seats would (will!) be the following:

Ochil - A current Labour majority of 688 over SNP with Gordon Banks the sitting MP. The strong 3rd-place finish of Liz Smith for the Tories makes this a bit trickier but it should still be easy meat for the SNP. Annabelle Ewing stood in 2005 and I expect would do so again.

Dundee West - A great win for the SNP in Holyrood could easily be replicated here, though they wouldn't have local favourite Joe Fitzpatrick standing this time. The Labour incumbent is James McGovern and he has a 45% to 30% lead over the SNP as it currently stands. I still reckon it would go SNP's way, especially as the SNP already hold the West of the city and won here so convincingly in the Holyrood elections.

Aberdeen North - Frank Doran is the incumbent Labour MP here and the SNP and Lib Dems basically tied for 2nd. (In other words, the SNP came 3rd but not by much!). Given the Lib Dems were so strong in 2005 due to their Iraq War stance and the SNP were relatively weak, I would expect large swathes of Labour and Lib Dem voters to move to the SNP, particularly as the north is one of their heartlands. The strength of Frank Doran's local popularity may well be a factor but, currently, I cannot legislate for this. I would expect the SNP to field a strong candidate in this constituency.

Kilmarnock and Loudon - Des Browne, the Defence Minister (and sometimes the Scottish Minister) is the MP here. He does have a convincing 8,700 majority but SNP won this same area at a cantor at Holyrood so there could be a scare here for Des. Increased fury at a never-ending Iraq War could well spell the end of Des Browne MP.

Gordon - Alex Salmond's constituency as an MSP will surely hold a lot of sway with the voters when it comes to Westminster. Currently held by the Lib Dems' Malcolm Bruce, I can envisage a large enough swing for the eminently thoughtful Scots and Independent superstar Richard Thompson winning this seat for the SNP.

Linlithgow - This one would have to go SNP if the Nationalists are to get their 20. Deaspite the 11,000 majority enjoyed by the Labour incumbent Michael Connarty, what concerns me more is the Lib Dem challenge of Stephen Glenn who, going by his blog, has a tireless approach to getting the Lib Dem vote out here. Again, a strong SNP candidate should be able to challenge. And win.


So that's part one of where I think the SNP will get their 20 seats. 6 in the bag and 6 pinched from Labour/Lib Dems. My reason for doing this in two parts is not a sign of my lacking confidence or struggling to find another 8 seats but merely that a lunchbreak only goes so far here and I'll have to work out the rest later.

There are still plenty of seats left where the SNP are sitting in 2nd place and, consequently, have more than a fair chance of winning and the above seats don't really cover the true SNP heartlands in their entirety where I am sure the SNP can coast to victory too.


So I'll be back soon to finish off the Top 20 with the last 8. For now, any disagreements or scoffing over my thoughts, then by all means make them public in the comments field...

"Strong American ties"

Well, if that's the case then Gordon Brown must be wearing a cheap Chinese one.

Let me explain...

The inevitable Easyjet delay here at Edinburgh Airport has meant I'm sipping Wetherspoon beers while watching BBC News 24. As luck would have it, I get to see Gordon Brown give a live speech in Boston, as introduced by Ted Kennedy who boasted of those strong ties between the UK and America.

Well, on comes Gordon and as if the cheap turquoise colour of the tie wasn't bad enough, the knot of the neckwear is pulled out towards his left shoulder much like the classic cheeky schoolboy look. There are bound to be photos and let me just say, it's a far cry from a classy presentation...

The speech, of course, isn't much better. His eyes are glued to the paper that was no doubt given to him about 15 minutes ago. If he does dare to look up for 2 seconds to make eye contact with the audience he then loses his place and there's this awful, embarrassing pause.

For example, "the relationship between America and the UK is strong and there is no power in the world that can keep us..... (*about 6 seconds*)....... apart."

Painful stuff.


Further to this, someone thought it would be a good idea to throw in some jokes. We can only guess when the punchline comes when Gordon looks up, his shoulders shaking slightly and a big grimace on his face. No doubt in his mind he thinks it's a big cheesy smile.


I heard a line today that Gordon Brown was put on this planet to remind us how good Tony Blair was. On this evidence I have to agree. At least when Tony talked of those transatlantic ties you didn't look at his chest and immediately think £2.99 from BhS.

Where is the love?

It was a good question that the Black Eyed Peas and Justin Timberlake joined up to ask and in my best Hugh Grant impersonation I can say quite confidently that love, actually, is all around.

First of all, we have a touching bond between Ewan Aitken and Malc in the Burgh. This stems from Ewan's incredible story of a friend who confounded doctors by beating a tumour against all the odds. Malc's fraternal comment has led Ewan to open up his links page to non-Labour bloggers for the first time.

For me personally, I asked a question of the mighty Doctor Vee (the detail of which I can't share but it's fairly inoccuous). The good doctor went out of his way, above and beyond and positively showered me with information, going miles past what I had hoped from him, and that in turn made my decision a much easier one.

There was an unlikely Tory / Lib Dem love-in as Scottish Tory Bory learned just how much Lib Dem blogging there is going on out there.

Kezia Dugdale threw an arm around the Cyber Nats by agreeing that a 3-way poll (including the independence option) is the way forward in Scotland's constitutional debate.

And Wendy Alexander showed some affection to Alex Salmond by not wanting to push him too hard on his first day answering FMQs after the recess.

So, as the Desiderata line goes, do not be cynical about love, for in the the face of all aridity and disenchantement, it as perennial as the grass.

I haven't the first clue what that means, but it's still a rather lovely line to finish a Friday posting I think...

Test

Best laid plans

There is an interesting poll sitting on the Sunday Times website showing a clear majority of Scottish readers preferring independence over the status quo.

Kezia, quite correctly, makes a mockery of the suggestion that 88% of the Scottish population wish independence. The poll may not necessarily have been hijacked by these mysterious 'Cyber Nats' referred to in the post but any poll that doesn't stop you from voting more than once and doesn't consider the demographics of a nation is a light-hearted one at best and a scurrilous coup at worst.

Kez's post also goes on to try to make light of a recent TNS poll that showed that 41% of Scots are in favour of independence. The argument goes that if more options were added to the poll then this 41% would decrease. Although I'm not convinced that such polls can be so easily dismissed the logic does make sense.

Unionists, of course, want the poll ratings for independence to be as low as possible and Kez so far has brought the figures down from 88 to 41 and even lower still. Not bad for a lunchtime of blogging! But of course her employers are going a lot further than that. If the option of independence is not even being considered by the constitutional commission, then perhaps they can convince the public to just forget all about it, then the poll ratings would be 0% for all they care.

Is this a two fingers from the Unionists to the 41% who have expressed interest in Scottish independence?

Well, perhaps not. And I am in the unsettling position of not only seeing what the unionists are doing but almost (almost!) agreeing with them.

A straight yes or no question on independence is what the SNP are dreaming about but there is not a snowball's chance in hell that that will come to pass. As Kezia even admits herself in her own comments field, a 3-way poll is the way forward if we're going to put this to the people. And I agree with Sir Tom Hunter, let's stop faffing around and just have the blasted poll so we can move on.

And once that poll happens, for all that we think that the SNP are winning this battle at the moment and taking the higher ground by considering all options, they will come unstuck once the results are declared.

Of course we all know the result will be for more powers devolved to the parliament from Westminster. We should be so certain of this that having a poll in the first place is almost unnecessary but of course democracies don't work that way.

So we'll have the poll in a couple of years and we're going to get fiscal autonomy, broadcasting and, I don't know, a separate team at the Olympics or something as a result. Three years of constant haranguing and expense for a result we can predict here and now. And could have predicted a year ago too.

So how will the Unionist's Constitution Commission and the SNP's National Conversation look come 2010/11?

Well, sadly, the SNP will look like they've been flogging a dead horse for a few years and wasting money at a time when Swinney is desperate to save every penny, euro or dime within reach. The zeal for independence will have clouded his better judgement. Or so it will look.

The Unionists can rather smugly claim to be 3 steps ahead in the whole debate with independence safely tossed on the scrap pile for a generation and they can continue working on what extra powers Holyrood needs while the SNP flap around trying to look respectable in time for the next election.

The Unionists want this 3-way referendum, they must do surely, they simply can't lose. Maybe they are playing a very clever game just waiting for the absolute perfect time to have this referendum to ensure the SNP pain is felt most sharply.

Of these plans I sense the Unionist's could well be the best laid and the SNP's is destined to gang aglae...

15 year old boy pretends to wipe snotters on Cameron

Well, it could have been worse for you Dave, the wee guy could have stolen your dinner money and given you a wedgie.


Video is here. As the teenager admits himself though, it's not really that funny.


Probably best to watch this video of Nakamura's wonder strike against Rangers from tonight's game instead. Now that's definitely not worth sneezing at!

The Nanny Returns

I have just now learned that the Scottish Government is considering quotas for HMO properties. In other words, the Government thinks they have a right to decide how many people may live in a particular private home. A protest website has been set up here.

The most maddening aspect of this is, it is the SNP who are trying to bring it forward and I thought they would have learned from New Labour's fiasco that was the 'nanny state years'. Further to this, Swinney is trying to make £600m of efficiency savings yet the SNP think this is a venture worth pursuing?

It is entirely possible that if these rules had been in place in 2001 then I wouldn't have been able to share in the most fun flat that I've experienced. Six of us shared a place in Buntsfield, that soon increased to 7 as the box room was emptied for a friend's use and we regularly had one or two people crashing in the living room. Good times indeed at the height of our student days. The kind of flat where you worked hard and played hard.

Actually, that's not true, we didn't do nearly enough studying, we were as quiet as fieldmice (regularly found in the kitchen) and we played Risk most nights which is actually a good example of why university education shouldn't really be free but that's beside the point.

This needless meddling surely cannot be allowed to get off the ground. The reasons put forward by those in favour are that too many people living in the one area can harm local services and harm diversity.

This simply makes no sense. I currently live in Marchmont, the hub of student activity and I have seen many, many flats that break the HMO rules. But the area is teeming with people from different backgrounds, local shops are always full of shoppers and the Meadows is as busy a place as one could hope for given our cold Spring.

Of course these new rules would not impact this too adversely but my point is there is no problem with the current set up, the main thing these new rules would do is break up homes and stop big groups of students from having a fun year or two living together.

So hopefully this option is being considered and will quickly be dropped. But for now, disapproval can be registered through the link above.

It's worth noting that it won't be voted for in the Chamber. Ministers will simply adopt the rules when they believe the time is right.

The H word

I spent about an hour last night having a fabulous debate over one of my recent postings. Unfortunately the start of the phone call involved my friend almost wanting to lynch me given the first line of this post in question. Since it took me about 70 minutes to assuage my friend's fears that I'm not some sort of fascist I thought I would take the time to deliver the same defence on here in case similar readers were put off, and some of them decided to return.

Put simply (and with the blood issue to one side), I count myself as "a little bit homophobic" as I am aware of gay people more than a reasonably liberal person should be, I notice them more on the street/stare too long at such couples holding hands/etc etc, but that extra awareness does not come with prejudice, suspicion or judgement of any kind.

Maybe I am holding myself to a higher standard compared to others and I've actually got nothing to worry about but I believe that to be truly free of prejudice be it racism, homophobia or ageism is to see other people entirely based on criteria that we all share. At the forefront of a liberal's mind when talking to anyone should be are they happy, friendly, worried, whatever and not do they wear glasses, are they a bit camp, tall, do they have ginger hair etc.

I freely admit that I fall a little bit short of that self-imposed ideal and for that reason I count myself as a little bit homophobic, a little bit racist and a little bit of everything else that may contribute to prevent old people, disabled people, short people and other 'minorities' from being truly equal.

It is discriminatory but if it's not acted on or shown in anyway then I at least like to believe that it is not harmful.


As a separate issue, I also think that full homophobic views have a right to be respected just as much as any other personal views. Arguably, a homophobe offends a gay man just as much as a gay man offends a homophobe. And while a quick dismissal of the full-homophobe is tempting for most of us, it's not going to solve any of the underlying problems.

The main group I consider when thinking of homophobes are the religious right whose views stem from the Bible, their faith in a God and a belief that we will one day be judged with the vast majority of us perishing in hell for our 'sinful' ways. There is a perfectly good chance that this regularly mocked and abused group will have the last laugh from their heaven if our judgement day does actually come to pass. Thankfully, I don't see this world or the next world in the same way as they do and my fears of languishing in hell for the rest of my days are not as potent as they once were.

Personally I have mixed feelings on the classic Christian belief system, I guess attending a Catholic school and then attending a Protestant Sunday School at weekends would do that to anyone.

I do believe there is a God or higher being and that this life isn't the last one for us but I also believe the Bible was written by mere mortals and is therefore fallible. Consequently, in my view the more extreme philosophies, particularly the inability to accept homosexual lifestyles, need not be followed by Christians. I also cannot envisage a Hell with the much wailing and gnashing of teeth. For me, this merely produces a fear which fuels the belief system that many Christians are unable to shake off.

So, I suppose all in all, respect is the key. A Christian's faith stops them accepting homosexuals while a homosexual's understandable desire for equality reduces the likelihood they can accept a Christian view. This impasse can only be solved with an understanding of the other side's history and way of life.

But then, I'm preaching to the converted here as, given the complex views and various outlooks on the numerous blogs I've read, narrow-mindedness and premature judgement has been something of a rarity.

Doers and talkers

I read this morning that John Swinney thinks he can go even further than the £530m of savings and crank it up to £600m through efficiency and doing things smarter (or doing less better, remember that one!)

I applaud the sentiment but Swinney has to be careful he doesn't get pinned as a 'talker' rather than a 'doer'. This term of parliament is nearly a year old and ti's getting close to the stage where the SNP will be judged on hwhat they have done and not on what they propose to do. Basically, blaimg the last liot will start to wear thin if they're not careful.

These efficiency savings have been talked up a great game and I am all for them as there is far, far too much waste in the public sector but I did get the impression that the first attempt to tackle this was a bit of a botched job, particularly the SportScotland fiasco. I personally think the SNP did everything right but there's no doubt it was a bit of a PR nightmare with Dougie Donnelly and top Scottish athletes tearing strips off the SNP every chance they got.

So with regard to these efficiency savings I back Swinney all the way but it was the words of Derek Brownlee, Tory Finance spokesperson, that resonated most strongly.

Sadly, the Scotsman didn't merit his quote to be worth printing and I left the metro on the bus but I think it could be reasonably summed up as 'we've known Holyrood has been wasteful for 8 years, glad you're on board now hurry up and get on with doing something about it'

Fair enough really, but I fully expect Swinney will walk the walk just as well as he talks the talk.

The wonder of sleazy-jet

What with Global Warming now acknowledged to be something stronger than a myth, I was braced for 2008 to be the year that cheap flights ended.

My heart agrees that we need to fly less for the sake of the planet but, selfishly, I can't help but cling on to the hope that travelling with Ryanair and Easyjet for pocket change will go on for a few years yet.

I was delighted therefore when I booked tickets to Stockholm yesterday. They cost me £10 out the way and £20 back the way. Bizarrely this is pretty much the same price as an overnight Megabus to London.

Infact, I've paid for flights to London, Paris and now Stockholm this year and not one of the legs of the journey has topped £30, even after tax.

And who knows, with the new rule that airlines are to be taxed on the number of customers on board and not the number of flights, there is scope there for the no-frills airlines to bring prices down even further. Even, dare I say it, flying for free.

And why not, what's £10 to a large company like Coca-Cola or Microsoft if they can exclusively advertise their products during the flight.

I've wondered this for a while. Could a company sponsor a flight, covering the costs of half the passengers tickets in exchange for unashamedly plastering posters of their products and soundbites throughout the taxi, take-off and landing?

I'd sign up for it. But for now, a tenner to get to Sweden sounds pretty good to me and I'll just have to find another way to massage the guilt of my sizeable carbon footprint.

There won't be blood

You know, I'll be totally (and somewhat unnecessarily) honest with you, I'm a little bit homophobic.

I've never raised a pitchfork in anger or levelled seething abuse anyone's way. I can watch Will & Grace, read Matthew Paris and listen to Elton John without the slightest hint of awkwardness (well, except during Candle in the Wind as it's a pretty awful tune).

And to be fair, I think the Hate Crimes legislation often championed by Kezia is perfectly valid and same sex legislation coming through now is long, long overdue but even still, I can't deny that the sight of two people of the same sex kissing and holding hands has always struck me as weird and, forgive me, a little bit wrong.

And after having read the detail of the news that LGBT campaigners are to meet with the Scottish Government today to ask for a lifting of the ban on gay and bisexual men giving blood, it seems the statistics are also somewhat against the LGBT group.

According to Gerard Gogarty, head of service quality at the National Blood Service, gay men can be up to ten times as likely to contract HIV than others in heterosexual relationships.

Consequently, and speaking in general terms, there is a higher risk involved in allowing gay men to give blood.

So my philosophy is, if it's not broke, then don't fix it. Is there a national outcry for more blood? Are there horror stories of people lying helpless in operating theatres due to a lack of donors?
Not that I've heard of.

I don't think people have a human right to give blood but people do have a right to receive blood which is as safe as possible from contamination and if being safe rather than sorry involves banning a higher-risk section of community from donating then so be it. There would be a case for allowing an increased level of risk if demand for blood was exceeding supply but, as I say, I don't see this being the case at the moment except, perhaps, around the festive season.

So in my eyes, it should be a fairly clear cut case. On scientific, biological and risk-averse grounds, there is insufficient reason why gay and bisexual men should be allowed to give blood.

And to further damn their case, the views expressed by the LGBT campaigners on the BBC and in the papers this morning amount to little more than a tantrum rather than reasoned debate.

Rob McDowall of Equal Rights Now shows a lack of depth in his argument with this quote:

"Being gay doesn't prevent me from paying tax, using public transport or working. Why should it prevent me from giving blood?"

Well Rob, the question of STDs and HIV is completely irrelevant when it comes to catching a bus or filling in a self-assessment tax form. Unfortunately, it is entirely relevant when it comes to blood donation and, as the National Blood Service say themselves, gay men pose more of a risk than straight men. So maybe it's best to just gather up your toys and put them back in the pram.

But, despite all of the above, no doubt there will be a clamour amongst the political parties for the sympathy of the pink vote. Indeed Ross Finnie is already on board with a rather empty soundbite:

"I remain very concerned at the continuing blanket discrimination against gay men who are debarred for donating blood. I am disappointed by this narrow minded attitude"

He doesn't dare quote any detail or address the statistics. Just a convenient line to show the Lib Dem's are on the side of the LGBT group and then he can move on without actually getting involved.

And I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone suggests that Brian Soutar is linked to all of this too.

So I do hope the campaigners today don't feel like the forwarding of their 1300-strong signed petition to Parliament is a waste of time. But I do hope they leave empty-handed.

Median Joe

As if politics isn't boring enough for your average Jo, politicians are now having something of an argument over statistics and which of the mean (i.e. average) or the median should be used when assessing the impact of the proposed Local Income Tax on Scottish households.

As tedious as the confrontation may be for some, I admit to being interested in such debates and John Swinney is absolutely correct to insist the Tories should use the median instead of the mean when assessing the impact on a typical Scottish family.

There weren't many classes during my MSc in Statistics that really enthused me but the subtle differences between the mean and the median was one of those rare hours.

Let's take a simple, if somewhat contrived, example:

Say you had 10 people.

One earned £10k a year, 8 of them earned £40k a year and one of them earned £20m a year.

The average salary for the population is £2.033m.

The median salary is £40k.

Which figure do you think makes more sense to sum up a typical salary for this group of ten people?


Lies, damn lies and statistics but I hope you'll agree the Tories are being a wee bit sneaky here....

A Great Day

I was stopped in my tracks this morning as I walked down the ever-decaying Lothian Road.

I was pleased to see one of the empty shops is being taken over by new management. My pleasure turned to delirium when I saw a Philpotts is opening up in Scotland.

For 10 weeks while living in Birmingham I feasted on Philpotts for breakfast and lunch way back in 2004. Upon seeing the name again my taste glands immediately kicked into action and dared once more to dream of the thick, crusty doorstopper sandwich, slathered (and I do mean slathered) in chicken, bacon and avocado filling. Cranberry sauce, salt and pepper could be added for extra flavour.

My jaws hurt as I tried to get this non-sensically large sandwich into my mouth but once I succeeded my eyes invariably rolled into the back of my head as the joyous wonder of the Philpotts sandwich took over.

Do make sure and try one...

Protecting our own

I read with interest the current ScotRail case whereby union members are insisting that the Scottish Government awards the contract to build 120 new carriages to Bombardier, a UK company based in Derby that has many of its suppliers based in Scotland.

The other main company vying for the contract is Siemens, a German company which builds trains in Czech Republic.

I am not so blinkered that I think we have to close our shores and look after our own no questions asked. Globalisation is here and if we don't embrace it with smart importing and exporting then we truly will be the Eastern Bloc, dependant-style country that many already see us as.

But for this instance, unless there is a wide difference in terms of cost or quality, then I don't see there being much problem with the contract going to the UK company. And for those who see England as just as foreign as Czech Republic, the fact that Scottish companies supply Bombardier should appeal to their nationalistic reasoning.

I suspect inside of the European Union we can't just blindly award contracts inside our own borders every time. Anti-competition rules may well come into it but still, the logic that has the French public buying Peugeot and Citroen almost exclusively should be applied here.

I hope to see Bombardier awarded this contract. And if they are not, it will be interesting to see why not...

St Andrew's Square

To be honest, I don't really know who deserves the credit for this one, whether it is the new SNP/Lib Dem Edinburgh Council or whether it is the Labour council from the term before.





But the new St Andrew's Square area is bloody lovely and I take my hat off to whoever planned it, built it and/or cut the grass.





My friend on Saturday must have been hoping I would just shut up as I said for the fifth time "this is soooo nice!" between sips of coffee in the tranquil cafe just along from the water feature.





And it is too. If you happen to be nearby, I strongly suggest you amble on through...

PS A prize for anyone who actually knows who the person is at the top of the column?


EDIT: It transpires it was Labour Council who are responsible for this fine addition Edinburgh City Centre so (through gritted teeth) good job Ewan Aitken and Donald Anderson...!

Baillie on the rocks

Maybe Jackie Baillie was just having a bad day, maybe the quote from her is from before the news actually broke or maybe she's just lost the place entirely.

But, seemingly in response to the news that a TNS System Three poll has found more people in favour of independence than against it, Jackie chose to say:

"There is no doubt that the vast majority of Scots don't want an end to the Union, and the SNP are well aware of that. Scots want to walk tall in the Union, not walk out."

This woman is one of Scottish Labour's supposed big-hitters and main players, she is the party's Chief of Staff, and yet she can't see that the state of Scotland and their views on independence, their approach to standing on their own two feet, making decisions and opinions on their own, is changing.

"Vast majority" suggests in excess of 70-80% of the population. Such phrases can simply no longer be used with regard to the independence question. It's on a knife-edge right now with both sides in the low 40s and competing vigorously for the remaining 20%. And momentum is flowing in only one direction. Scotland is moving unmistakably towards being an independent state.

And Jackie Baillie, with gaffe after gaffe, is speeding up the process.

Yet maybe we shouldn't be too surprised. A brilliant story that shows how out of touch Ms Baillie is, even with her own party, is this one:

A senior Labour MSP contacted Jackie Baillie to inform her that he would not be attending the debating chamber that day as he was meeting with the Prime Minister.

Jackie Baillie's reply was "we'll see".

Does this woman think she is more important than Gordon Brown? Does her love of power stretch to bossing around her own MSPs when clearly they are needed elsewhere? Wendy Alexander, in her time of trouble, is making the classic mistake of drawing on her closest allies to get through a rocky stage. The only problem is, these trusted allies are creating more choppy waters than they are calming.

Long may it continue too.

Baillie? Make mine a double...

An unfortunate state of affairs

I read Calum Cashley's latest blog entry last night and I thought it was something of a poor show to be honest. There is an event planned for later today (which I hope to get to) where Obama supporters in Edinburgh are going to have a bit of a rally, get some US Politics chat going and make a video collage that'll be sent to Barack Obama's campaign as well as go on YouTube. No problem there right? Sounds like a good day out for those who are into that sort of thing?

Well, it seems Calum disagrees. Somehow US Politics is not any of our business (even if the US are cocking up our economy, environment and human rights via Guantanamo Bay).

But no, the main bone of contention is the vitriolic attack on Kezia out of nothing other than spite or partisan politics. I don't know, maybe Kez took the last scone in the Parliament canteen and Calum hasn't quite got over it yet.

I left a comment on Calum's blog and I hope it appears at some point but, given there's a chance it may not, I thought I would register my disapproval here.

Incidentally, I admit there is a chance I've been conned by Obama and his supposedly insincere approach to his campaign, but I think he is almost the perfect choice for America right now. A young optimistic man with his principals in place that everyone, seemingly, can unite behind. At home and abroad he has the potential to really make a difference and start the dawn of a new prosperous age, not just for the rich West, but for the whole planet.

Further to this, the attack of insincerity on Obama looks rather ridiculous alongside Hillary and her claims to have been hailed with sniper fire on a visit to the Balkan regions and also her claims that she was a crucial part of the Northern Irish peace process.

An added twist to this unfortunate encounter is that Calum will be standing in Edinburgh North and Leith, the constituency where I vote and was proud to vote for Davie Hutchison in last year.

Sadly, if this type of low-brow chat continues from Mr Cashley, my Tactical Voting will be brought closer to home and have to be used in a way I hadn't personally envisaged. Yes, the Lib Dems (currently second in the constituency) will be getting my vote.

Polling Power

For some reason this past week has seen a deluge of polls hit us with news on the views of who yous want to peruse on the Holyrood pews. (I know, there's no end to my rhyming talents)

This all makes me rather wistful for the real SNP Tactical Voting days when polls were fast flowing and the SNP lead jumped up and down, but ultimately the polls correctly predicted that the SNP would win by a small margin, even if they didn't quite predict the Greens downfall. I guess the good people of Scotland decided that an SNP administration at Holyrood was more important than Global Warming.

Anyway, as I managed to miss most of this recent polling news I thought I would bring all the results together on the one page:

Holyrood - Constituency / (List) vote

YouGov
SNP - 40%/(33%)
Labour - 32%/(30%)
Tory - 12%/(13%)
LD - 13%/(12%)
Other - 4%/(13%)

Independence

Scottish Opinion

41% in favour of independence

43% against independence

YouGov

65% in favour of a referendum

Westminster

YouGov

Labour - 35%

SNP - 31%

Tory - 17%

LD - 12%

Other - 4%

ICM (UK Wide)

Tory - 43%

Labour - 32%

LD - 18%

Others - 7%

This is a very rosy picture for the SNP while the Labour rose appears to be still twisting in the breeze.

The reliability of these polls has been called into question in the comments of an earlier post but there is a consistency in recent polls which cannot be denied and YouGov and ICM are as unbiased a polling company as you could hope to find.

If these companies don't have their integrity intact, then they don't have much, so to that end they can be trusted a great deal.

And also, with regard to the Scottish Opinion survey on independence, they asked the same question as was asked in August when support was only 31%. There is no denying that Scotland is finding the idea of independence more and more attractive as the SNP continues to lead the country.

When I 'came out' as an SNP fan a couple of years ago I was roundly mocked by my nearest and dearest. Of my family, it is now only my sister who would not vote for independence and she admits quite happily that her only reason is because she's "a fearty". Ironically, of the rest of my family, it was only my sister that actually voted SNP in May!

What a prime example of the election in May 2007 not being a referendum on independence and a further blow to the theory that a unionist majority in Holyrood equates to a unionist majority in the general population.

So as the SNP's one year anniversary of being in power approaches, one has to wonder if they could have dreamed of being so close to their ultimate victory. One final heave and you've got to think they're just about there...

It's Time

No, don't worry, I'm not single-handedly kick-starting the SNP election campaign about 2 years early. I am referring to the suggestion that it must be time that we took the increasingly sensible move of pedestrianising Princes St.

I have just returned from Barcelona which has as its centre-piece La Rambla. A largely pedestrianised thoroughfare linking the Place de Catalunya (think a sexy George Square) to the Shore area (think what Edinburgh Council would like Leith Docks to look like).

Everyone I have spoken to since my return has mentioned La Rambla and with good reason. Chock full of cafes, bars, street entertainers and tourists lazily wandering around, it is a real highlight of anyone's visit to the Catalan capital.

So why not do the same for Edinburgh?

We would have a picturesque tram or two snaking through the street, continental bars replete with outdoor seating, some serious Euro-style posing and, who knows, maybe even a squeezing out of the tartan tat shops if attractive, tasteful bars and restaurants are allowed to open on Scotland's most famous street.

The main advantage would be the squeezing out of cars in the city centre without having to resort to the patently unfair congestion charge. George St or Queen St could be for buses only during peak times, keeping the maroon double-deckers out of the way of the castle as tourists sip their lattes in the summer sun.

I've lived for Edinburgh for 10 years now and for almost all of that time a cobbled Prines St has been something of a delightful dream for me.

I think 'it's time' to make that dream a reality...

There's always one

It's been a torrid week for China and their staging of the Olympics. It seems people are lining up to take a kick at them over their human rights abuses and their treatment of Tibetans.

Germany: Chancellor Angela Merkel has decided to boycott the Opening Ceremony.

France: Nicholas Sarkozy has decided to boycott the Opening Ceremony. Protests were seen on Paris streets and the Olympic Flame was extinguished twice.

Poland: Prime Minister Donald Tusk announced his boycott of the ceremony on Thursday saying "The presence of politicians at the inauguration of the Olympics seems inappropriate, I do not intend to take part."

Czech Republic: President Vaclav Klaus has reversed his earlier decision to attend.

Great Britian: Gordon Brown will not be attending the opening ceremony. Though, apparently, that was his plan all along. Fierce protests were seen on the streets of London.

USA: Numerous high profile American politicians have called for a boycott of the Olympic opening ceremony.

Tibet: The Dalai Lama suggests they are causing cultural genocide

Japan: Various Japanese bodies, including the manufacturer of shot puts at the last 3 Olympic Games have opted to boycott.


Meanwhile, New Zealand sign an economic trade deal with China.


Cheers Kiwis, nice to know you're backing us up on this one!

Having it both ways

From Scottish Tory Boy I have learned that a recent YouGov poll has put SNP support up at 40% and, perhaps more dramatically, support for a referendum on independence is sitting at 65%.

A constant argument used by the unionist parties is that, as they have a majority of MSPs between them, then their views represent the prevailing view of the country.

Well, that theory is now blown out of the water.

Labour, Tories and Lib Dems may well make up 61% of the debating chamber, but if 65% of the Scottish population clearly want something, then it is an MSPs democratic duty to seek ways to make it happen.

Bona fide reasons for voting down the SNP's white paper on an independence referendum are diminishing as the date draws nearer...

2012 Olympic boycott starts here

I think it's despicable that London have been awarded the Olympics in 2012 and there is a litany of reasons why we should boycott this event:

- The UK, financed under Gordon Brown's watchful eye, conducted an illegal war in Iraq, killing thousands of innocents in the face of international disapproval all based on 'known unkowns' and dodgy evidence

- Britain has shown tacit approval of human rights abuses at Guantanamo Bay by not using their "special relationship" with the US to close it down.

- Britain is commited to rebuilding its arsenal of nuclear weapons despite signing up to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which obliges the country to disarm.


- Money is being taken from youth groups, charities and sports bodies up and down the land to fund the event with no evidence that a future benefit will be realised for these bodies.




So forget Beijing 2008 for the moment and sign up now to boycott London 2012.


My point in this distinctly tongue-in-cheek post?

Well, as much as I think David Milliband and Gordon Brown need to show some backbone and come out with a clear position with regard to our relationship with China, the protesters and those in favour of a boycott of Beijing 2008 have to be very careful of hypocrisy.





EDIT: Well, upon hearing the news that Gordon Brown is boycotting the Beijing Games but wasn't planning on going in the first place, I have decided to take the tongue out of my cheek as I, similarly, didn't mean to put it there in the first place.




So now that my post is vaguely serious, I thought I had better back it up with something.




So, to that end, please feel free to sign my petition - http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Boycott2012/DUHlaMBwBrtKAwVjpvAgq9a

(Please note that it first has to go to the "Number 10 team for approval". Personally, I don't fancy its chances)

For the record, my petition is highlighted in italics in this post.