Gordon's two very public problems

Well, 6:49am on this frankly nonsensical evening that has seen no sleep but a lot of blogging.

Breakfast is soon to be delivered and the Sunday Papers have arrived in the offices. The most remarkable piece that I've read today is David Miliband's article in the Mail on Sunday discussing Britain's response to supposed Russian aggression.

What is remarkable however are the "Gordon Brown and I" references from the Foreign Secretary. It is a naked challenge to the Prime Minister's authority to talk about him in this casual manner. Do you think David cleared this chat with Number 10 before it went to press? I doubt it somehow.

Only slightly less shocking was Alastair Darling's well-publicised interview with The Guardian where he seems to have thrown in the towel already. Over-exaggerating how bad the economy is, saying voters are "pissed off" with the Government and even finding time to slag off Wendy Alexander as being "not likeable at all".

Alastair Darling has quite clearly 'loosened his tie' in this interview and real questions will be raised as to how interested he'll be to tighten it up again and get back in the game. He is in real danger of losing his Edinburgh South West seat to the Tories when the next general election comes by so perhaps Darling has one foot in retirement already.

Consequently, Gordon Brown has two major problems on his hands. A Foreign Secretary out of control and a Home Secretary giving up the ghost. And, like Alan Sugar at the end of any Apprentice episode, Gordon has to decide which one to fire because let's be honest, this state of affairs is unsustainable if Gordon's going to reverse his fortunes.

My advice? Sack Miliband. Right back to the backbenches for the boy wonder who has rebelled a little too far. Gordon's tough stance will be a message that he is the boss and he's not playing games any more.

For Alastair Darling, the man has unquestionable talent, he is generally unflappable and more often than not a safe pair of hands but the Chancellorship was a step too far for a man who has limited ambitions to begin with.

Gordon needs to reshuffle Ed Balls into Number 11, he needs to reshuffle Darling into Health/Transport/Education (giving him a rousing shot in the arm on the way), he needs to reshuffle Miliband out of the Cabinet and, for goodness sake man, you need to lead the charge into Glenrothes and show your party you still have a fire in your belly to fight a by-election.

David Miliband and Alastair Darling have been headaches not of your doing. But in shirking this campaign and not taking the debate to the SNP in your home patch, you are creating the mother of all migraines for yourself for no discernible good reason.

Perhaps Guido Fawkes is right Mr Prime Minister. Maybe you're simply bonkers after all.

Sarah Palin to be suspended for 2 months

Yes, now that we have evidence that Sarah Palin once fired a gun, I am sure it is only a matter of time before the Republicans follow the SNP's lead and suspend their VP Nominee.

Or will USA cultural factors, the fact Sarah's white and a relatively understanding American public/press contribute to the correct conclusion that shooting a gun is really not that big a deal....?

If only Jahangir Hanif had that kind of luck.......

Councillor Hanif receives 2 month suspension

Well, i suspect the usual suspects will try to kick dirt up over this story in the Sunday Herald but for the record I think that the SNP decision to suspend Councillor Jahangir Hanif for two months for firing an AK-47 assault rifle back in 2005 is fair. Infact, I think it is rather heavy-handed if anything. Not that that will surprise anyone who read my original post on this subject.

If (as Bill Aitken (Tory MSP) quite clearly believes) the councillor's conduct is so terrible that he has to go then the electoratre are free to judge him at the next election.

For now though, I think cultural factors and a racially charged media coverage are sufficient mitigating factors and this is most certainly not the type of action that should mean you lose your job and leaves you banished from a party you have worked with for a long period.

To be totally honest, I'm amazed this is even Sunday Herald's top story given how remarkably unnewsworthy it is.

Tom Foolery

A rather amusing exchange on Tom Harris' latest post:

Comment 7 (Chris Smith):

"Average waits in the NHS increasing despite all the money, creating millions of graduates with no jobs."

Comment 8 (Tom Harris MP):

Come off it, Chris, son. I don’t mind publishing critical comments but let’s not just start making stuff up just to fulfill our wishful thinking, boys and girls.

Comment 12 (Chris Smith):

Tom,
I do have proof of my claims

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7271772.stm

Average wait increasing from 41 to 49 days.

Makes you wonder if Tom really pays attention to what's going on in between blogging, watching X Factor and getting thoroughly gubbed in by-elections...

The Times it ain't a'changing

This flurry of late night blogging has been caused by the fact that I'm doing an 8pm to 8am night shift this evening. My role, along with many others, is to step in and investigate something if it goes belly-up. 4 hours in and nothing has gone belly up so it's pizzas all round and we're left to our own devices.

Naturally, my own devices includes browsing the Sunday papers once they get online. (Hence my last post though I'm still waiting for the actual Sunday Herald "News" section to filter through.)

So for now I turn to The Times and it is to my shock and horror that I see the following quote sitting in the sidebar:

This narrow-minded nationalism is crushing Scottish culture More...

My shock and horror stems from having seen that same headline for a week now. The article was published on 24th August 2008 and it's just about 31st August now.

So for 7 days that painfully smug-looking Jenny Hjul has peered out from the website with that headline that, to the casual browser, looks like a serious criticism of the SNP.

Now, if you actually click into the story (not that everyone would) you get a very different impression.

Edinburgh Council are transforming an old bus depot, a hideous hotel and a decaying train station in the near future and there are question marks over whether Edinburgh will retain its World Heritage Status if they do so.

Fair enough, but the main crux of the story has nothing to do with that headline. Neither Scottish Culture nor Scottish Nationalism is up for debate.

Indeed, when we finally get onto what the headline relates to, the writer seems to be concerned that Scottish culture as a whole is under-funded, an issue that constantly applies to countries across the world and is most certainly not restricted to 'Nationalist' parties.

It's lamentable that The Times look so sloppy that it takes them a week to update the links on their main Scotland News page, but it's even more lamentable that these same headlines are so utterly misleading.

Anyway, 23:45pm, time to see if SundayHerald.com has been updated yet...

The Three Labour-igos

A wickedly delightful opinion piece in the Sunday Herald today (tomorrow!) from Tom Shields.

Iain Gray manages to come across as simultaneously passionate and dull. He is also worryingly brooding in a Gordon Brown kind of way. Perhaps it's an east coast thing.

Andy Kerr has the demeanour and delivery of a conservative bank manager. The fighting talk was not entirely convincing. Managerial efficiency and not rousing rhetoric would be at the heart of any Kerr stewardship of party or country.

Cathy Jamieson comes closest to registering a charisma quotient. She was judged sufficiently interesting to be included as a character in Jonathan Watson's TV comedy programmes. She was lampooned as a shopaholic who thinks a cabinet is not a meeting of ministers but something you buy in Ikea.

No doubt Labour will flag this as more evidence of the Sunday Herald being an SNP Newsletter (as opposed to the newspaper merely telling it like it is) but either way, the full article is well worth a read.

UPDATE:

It gets better:

Brian Taylor: "You are fairly rude in the Guardian about a couple of colleagues - you think Wendy Alexander is unlikeable."
Alastair Darling: "I have got the utmost admiration for Wendy and the problems she went through."
BT: "But you don't like her very much?"
AD: "I didn't say that at all."
BT: "You said she's unlikeable - are they quoting you wrong?"
AD: "No, I have the utmost respect for her and I thoroughly enjoy her encounters whenever we have them."
BT: "But you said she's unlikeable?"
AD: "No I didn't."
BT: "You didn't say that, The Guardian are misquoting you?"
AD: "Brian, I have the utmost regard for Wendy and I will continue to have it and that remains my position."

The Guardian? Or Alastair Darling? I know who I believe......

More flak for Foulkes

Having just read some letters in today's Scotsman, I can't help but wonder if one of the letters was written after reading my blog. The points raised seem remarkably similar to some points I made a couple of days ago at least. What was I saying about blogging influencing the media on Friday?


Paying the bill for petty-minded MSP

DO George Foulkes MSP and his publicly funded staff have nothing better to do with their time than ask pointless questions about how many journeys First Minister Alex Salmond has made by train? I don't know which is more annoying, the pettiness of Lord Foulkes and his determination to find fault in the SNP Government, or the fact that as a taxpayer, I'm having to foot the bill for this nonsense.

Gavin Fleming, Webster's Land, Grassmarket, Edinburgh


Indeed, in the 2 or 3 days since I wrote that post, Lord Foulkes has wasted even more time and money with his "nonsense". Indeed, he asked 30 questions on the 28th August alone (see below for some examples).


Is there no way to stop this man!?




S3W-15851 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive which race courses the First Minister has visited since May 2007 and on how many occasions.

S3W-15844 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive which agencies it uses to deliver its international development programme, broken down by country and excluding Malawi.

S3W-15845 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive which primary schools have been visited by the First Minister since May 2007.

S3W-15846 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive which secondary schools have been visited by the First Minister since May 2007.

S3W-15849 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what changes it proposes to the 2011 Census questions compared to those in 2001.

S3W-15831 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what representations it has made to the UK Government about separate Scottish representation at future Olympic Games.

S3W-15832 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions ministers have had with ministers in the devolved administrations in Wales and Northern Ireland about separate representation at future Olympic Games.

S3W-15830 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive whether proposals for a separate Scottish Olympic team have been considered by any of its agencies or bodies with a remit for sport and what the responses have been.

S3W-15829 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions ministers have had with sport governing bodies about the First Minister’s suggestion for a Scottish Olympic team and what the responses have been.

S3W-15828 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will list for each sport that was competed at the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games (a) whether it has a separate Scottish governing body, (b) how much its governing bodies received from the Scottish Government or its agencies in 2007-08 and (c) how much its governing bodies are budgeted to receive in each year from 2008-09 to 2011-12.

S3W-15852 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive which hospitals the First Minister has visited since May 2007.

S3W-15853 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-13362 by John Swinney on 9 June 2008, what the particular responsibilities are of its most recently appointed Special Adviser and how these relate to those of Kevin Pringle and Stephen Noon.

S3W-15872 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S3W-15237 by John Swinney on 25 August 2008, how many of the 218 full-time employees in its directorates and agencies aged between 60 and 64 are men.

S3W-15854 - George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab) (Date Lodged Thursday, August 28, 2008): To ask the Scottish Executive how many complaints were referred to the Scottish Public Service Ombudsman about local authorities in 2007-08 and how this compares to the previous year.

Scottish sporting history

Did you know that the biggest scoreline in UK professional football was 36-0, a game won by Arbroath against a cricket team?

Arbroath were drawn against Bon Accord in the first round of the Scottish Cup which was played on September 12, 1885. Although Arbroath were only founded seven years earlier in 1878 they were already vastly more experienced than Bon Accord who were in fact a cricket team, Orion Cricket Club. They were mistakenly invited to enter the Scottish Cup instead of Orion F.C., an Aberdeen football club.

Note that they did play Orion FC a couple of years later and the scoreline was only 20-0.

For me, the best part of this 36-0 story though is this:

On the same day, 18 miles down the road in Dundee, Dundee Harp were also playing in the first round of the Scottish Cup against Aberdeen Rovers. Dundee Harp beat Aberdeen Rovers 35-0.

The story goes on that the referee actually thought the score in the Dundee game was 37-0 but a bit of confusion with the ref's secretary led to a more generous 35-0 score being entered. Who would have known that this minor decision has led to Dundee Harp missing out on their space in history forever.

Surely a mini-movie is on the cards soon?

Above the parapet

How do you think you would react if you found out someone had been plotting to kill you? You'd go mad right? Probably a determined zeal to find out who, why, where and when would take over and perhaps a blood-boiling ambition to exact revenge or see justice done.

I, on the other hand, would no doubt crumple into a blubbering mess and with snotty nose and red raw teary eyes ask "Why?! What have I done?" in a pitch that is far too high for any self respecting man.

Anyway, that, is very much beside the point. The real question is how does one react when you find out someone has been plotting to kill someone else?

And for me, sad to say, it seems I am somewhat ambivalent. In the past week there were two would-be assassination stories that barely registered with me.

Gordon Brown, father to 2 young ones and fairly recently married, now knows there were at least 3 young men who were intent on seeing him dead. How does one react to that?

And Barack Obama, perhaps soon to be America's first Black President, will be filling enormous venues between now and November 4th and, hopefully, beyond. Barack will now have to contend with the knowledge that there are definitely white supremacists actively plotting to have him killed. No doubt the Democrat nominee strongly expected as such but it must be jarring and unnerving to read in the papers some of the quotes attributed to these murderous racists.

So I am belatedly sparing a thought for the arguably needless peril these people put their lives under. I have no doubt that either man could clean up in the private sector, make millions and enjoy a much easier life.

And I also think it is a sense of duty that makes Gordon and Barack put their head above the parapet rather than a hunger for power. Unfortunately, in the world of Politics, it seems putting your head above the parapet can lead to something stronger than criticism being aimed your way.

Friday Blog Love

It was remarked during the mad, bitter days of the Glasgow East byelection that that particular contest saw the first Scottish election where blogging had had any sort of an impact.

Granted this impact amounted to a relatively limp story regarding the veracity of a claim made by Kezia Dugdale that Nicola Sturgeon had been thrown out of a Shopping Centre but, nonetheless, the first tangible link between inane internet chat and actual political relevance had been made.

Indeed Kezia was involved in another story from the campaign even if she wasn't named directly. It turned out Kez spent a lot of time with undercover Times journalist Brendan Perring who wrote this piece on the Labour campaign. This allowed Kez to, quite rightly, put her side of the story and shoot the article down to some degree.

Further to this we had regular updates on polling day from ASWAS and a surreal photo from the election count from Indygal

So, with so many of the political activists who are on the front line of campaigning being bloggers these days then one can't help but wonder if Glenrothes will see more of a linkage from what appears on blogs with what makes up the daily news.

I fully plan on taking part in a bit of canvassing or leafletting or spreading margarine on sandwiches for Team SNP and I know that in the last campaign there were appearances from J Arthur MacNumpty, ASWAS, Mark McDonald, Bellgrove Belle, Julie Hepburn, Jamie Hepburn. Jings, it was top blogger Indygal that was running the show!

For the other parties, Kezia as I said before was heavily involved and Scotland's favourite blogger, Tom Harris, did the rounds too.

With this particular election being a bit closer to home for Stephen Glenn, Scottish Tory Boy, Two Doctors and Malc in the Burgh, the number of footsoliders may even swell for this looming political battle.

So who knows what may lie ahead. I'm probably getting way, way ahead of myself here but since I believe it inevitable that blogging in some way, shape or form is destined to be an integral part of the political system in the future, there's no reason why someone in this blogosphere won't be creating the headlines rather than merely commenting on them over the next couple of months as the heat of the Glenrothes byelection battle begins to boil.

For now though, enjoy the weekend!

Republican VP - Who will it be?

Further to my last post, I guess it's only fair to mention the Republican side of the USA election campaign and what better than to start on their Vice President candidate who is due to be announced in the next few hours.

I caught a snippet of BBC News at lunchtime and their reporter (Justin Webb?) seemed to think it was going to be either Mitt Romney or Tim Pawlentry.

The rationale behind Mitt Romney is to shore up the religious right, the social democratic side of the party but, let's be honest, it's not exactly a group that's going to cross over to Barack Obama in their swathes. For that reason, I don't see Mitt Romney getting the gig. He is also prone to shocking gaffes like this.

Tim Pawlentry, I must confess, I know very little about but since the BBC admitted the same I don't feel too bad. Seemingly he is being picked as he is the same age as Barack Obama and to counter any downsides there may be in having such an old presidential nominee in John McCain. McCain being, as we all know, 332 years old.

The thing is, I would imagine picking such a young man to stand alongside the veteran Republican would actually draw attention to how old John McCain is, it would exacerbate the problem rather than solve it.

No, I've always thought the Republicans would pick a woman in order to hold on to that idea that they can take a lot of the Hillary votes off the Democrats. That voting block is an enormous part of the voting public and if John McCain can take even a slice of them over to his side then it could make all the difference come November 4th.

I personally think Kay Bailey Hutchison would make for an extremely attractive Republican Vice President. She is an ridiculously good public speaker, has incredible experience even by Senate standards and, as I say, most importantly is a female.

But I'll also be rooting for Sarah Palin so that Mike Smithson makes £650 out of it!

UPDATE: Announcement is due at 6pm when I will be drinking in Le Monde, all thoughts of Politics far from my mind. Oh, and if the Republican VP announcement is anything like the Champions League draw, you might want to add 45 minutes onto that!

Barack Obama - Half Way There

Given that I'm not an insomniac and I wasn't out partying till the wee small hours last night, I missed Obama's acceptance speech at the Democrat Conference. I'll be honest though, in the world of You Tube and constant news, I can't say I'm that cut up about it. Indeed, thanks to a suggestion by Holyrood Chronicles, I've had the chance to skim read most of the speech via The Guardian.

I appreciate these words of Obama's were written by some of the finest speechwriters on the planet but, well, I have a couple of criticisms.

For a start, the opening paragraph has a bit of a gaping flaw:

"Let me express my thanks to the historic slate of candidates who accompanied me on this journey, and especially the one who traveled the farthest - a champion for working Americans and an inspiration to my daughters and to yours - Hillary Rodham Clinton."

If I was a feminist I would actually be a bit put out by the idea that Hillary Clinton can only inspire America's daughters or the inherent suggestion that Barack Obama doesn't inspire females. For a country so keen to break down the racial bias, America should perhaps get working on the gender bias that's seemingly going nowhere fast.

My next criticism comes in all this "the next Vice President of the United States" and "the next First Lady" stuff. John McCain is doing it too but you can't both be right. I know it gets the crowd going and you can guarantee a lot of "whoops" but look how silly Al Gore and John Kerry looked after they finished runners up in the last 2 elections.

I can understand that if you keep saying you'll be the "next" something you can almost force it to happen. Alex Salmond managed it by promising a political earthquake in Glasgow East despite being faced by sniggers and sneering that he had no chance.

But even still, it smacks a little of arrogance so I'd much rather people stick to what they know.

That said, Obama is of course the real deal and I remain almost entranced by his dramatic rise to stardom and political importance. There are some great lines in the speech which, for me, sum up why I hope that Barack beats John McCain on November 4th:

"America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this."

"Now, I don't believe that Senator McCain doesn't care what's going on in the lives of Americans. I just think he doesn't know. Why else would he define middle class as someone making under $5m a year?"

"Our government should work for us, not against us. It should help us, not hurt us. It should ensure opportunity not just for those with the most money and influence, but for every American who's willing to work." (I'm guessing, if real life is like the West Wing, there was a lot of debate over that "who's willing to work" phrase!)

"And for the sake of our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, I will set a clear goal as president: in ten years, we will finally end our dependence on oil from the Middle East. Washington's been talking about our oil addiction for the last 30 years, and John McCain has been there for 26 of them."

"Now is the time to finally keep the promise of affordable, accessible healthcare for every single American. If you have healthcare, my plan will lower your premiums. If you don't, you'll be able to get the same kind of coverage that members of Congress give themselves. And as someone who watched my mother argue with insurance companies while she lay in bed dying of cancer, I will make certain those companies stop discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most."

"And today, as my call for a time frame to remove our troops from Iraq has been echoed by the Iraqi government and even the Bush administration, even after we learned that Iraq has a $79bn surplus while we're wallowing in deficits, John McCain stands alone in his stubborn refusal to end a misguided war."

"The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook. So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain. The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag. They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America."

There is still another 10 weeks of these speeches, 10 weeks of debating America's place in the world and 10 weeks of considering how America can fix its domestic problems. I for one do not expect to grow tired of hearing much, much more of the thoughts of Barack Obama and John McCain.

That's why I, SNP Tactical Voter, and the next husband of Maria Sharapova, approve this blog entry.

Will he or won't he?

I'm thoroughly confused. Has Gordon Brown lost control of the media to such an extent that even when he is the focus of the story it still gets reported all over the place?

The Daily Express reported yesterday that Gordon Brown had spent a week in Cowdenbeath* in order to prepare for directing the campaign.

However, in the Dundee Courier yesterday, we have an actual Labour quote which presumably trumps the Express:

A Labour spokesman said, "We are not sure where this story came from but, as Prime Minister, Gordon will be focused on running the country and the party will be focused on running the by-election."

So, that's it then. The Prime Minister has too heavy a workload to be running a byelection. Sorted out in yesterday's press, no?

Well, seemingly not. Today we have a huge story in The Times:

"Gordon Brown has come under intense pressure from Cabinet colleagues to break with prime ministerial convention and campaign in the crucial Glenrothes by-election."

"Gordon got the flak for Glasgow East even though he did not go there. He is going to get the flak for Glenrothes even though he goes and we lose. He might as well go," a Cabinet minister told The Times.

One MP said: "There's no question about it. He has to go and campaign this time because this is his home political territory. By going, he would lift morale. By not going, he would be sending a terrible message to Labour people on the ground that the seat isn't worth fighting for."

Gordon's even dithered so much on the question that he's left the door wide open for David Cameron to brazenly taunt him about it.

"I hope that Gordon Brown will rise to the challenge of campaigning in his own backyard, so that the voters can see for themselves the choices on offer," the Tory leader said. "It is time for him to stop running scared and to stand up and be counted. I will be in Glenrothes. Will he?"

Not quite Braveheart but close enough.


So what's it to be Gordon? Focussed on running the country or focussed on running a by-election? According to your spokesman, you'll be unable to do both and your cabinet are intent on you doing the latter...




*You can park underneath, that's the wonder........ of Cowdenbeath.

Glenrothes - The battle for third

Given the result of the Glenrothes byelection is in the bag already (so much so that Labour are already planning the date according to when they can bury the bad news rather than what date will actually increase their chances of winning), perhaps it is worth turning attention to the undercard of this political fight.

Lib Dems vs Tory or, on a more personal note, Harry Wills vs Maurice Golden (Crikey old bean, is that not the poshest face-off you've ever heard? Not that I'm suggesting there's a class culture remaining in the UK, of course.)

Personally, I think there will be a repeat performance of the Glasgow East byelection in the 3rd vs 4th battle aswell as the 1st vs 2nd. Lib Dems squeezed out and beaten into a distant 4th. They might hold on to their deposit this time though. Every cloud and all that....

The Tories may not quite be on the charge north of the border but they are on a gentle trot upwards and I think that with the pressure well and truly off them in regard to their chances of winning it releases them (in a strange way) to cast off the bow lines, be who they wish and say whatever the cat's cojones they want.

The Lib Dems, on the other hand, are constantly feeling the pressure. Afraid of their own shadow and constantly on edge. How else can one explain Tavish Scott's erratic performance on Newsnight the other day? Their burning desire to be Scotland's 3rd party and to eventually dislodge SNP's popularity is severely hamstrung by their distinct lack of policies and sheer aimlessness.

I suspect Harry Wills (for all his dubious experience) will be going into this contest somewhat punch drunk before it begins and perversely Maurice Golden will have a spring in his step.

So, what ho fellows, let the jousting begin in earnest….

Glenrothes Byelection - The Story So Far

The Date - October 30th (as first suggested on this blog almost a week ago) or November 6th.

This long delay in passing the writ from Labour is an interesting juxtaposition with the Glasgow East by-election where the writ was rushed through as quickly as possible as:

David Cairns and Gordon Brown claimed this rush was due to a need for the area to have their MP as soon as possible. It begs the question why the same does not apply in Glenrothes?

Regardless, it's Labour who gets to choose the date and they are clearly doing so to bury the bad news of an expected defeat in with the American elections. It kind of defeats the purpose when you know they're doing this ahead of schedule but so be it.

Labour - Candidate not yet selected. Due to be selected on Monday.

Lindsay Roy CBE - Strong rumour
Mark Hood - Rumour
Kay Morrison - Rumour
Claire Baker MSP - Rumour
John Park MSP - Rumour
Helen Eadie - Faint rumour
Ian Rankin - Faint rumour
Christine May - Ruled herself out
Alex Rowley - Ruled himself out
Henry McLeish - Ruled himself out
Dougray Scott - Unlikely

Gordon Brown has decided to take personal charge of the byelection but still will keep his distance from the campaign. I'm not entirely sure how that works but that's the mixed messages coming out of Labour at the moment.

I have to also wonder about Lindsay Roy's 'moral compass'. He moved to Inverkeithing High as recently as February in order to turn around falling exam results and unruly behaviour. I guess his sense of duty is not as strong as those in Fife would have hoped.


SNP - Peter Grant (leader of Fife Council selected)


Tories - As far as I'm aware, candidate not yet selected. UPDATE - Maurice Golden is their candidate. (Thanks to D Thomson)


Lib Dems - Harry Wills selected

I don't know much about the candidate but Calum Cashley has a great post casting aspersions on some of Harry's claims. It seems there's a few classic cases of Fib Dems going on there.


SSP - Morag Balfour


UKIP - Kris Seunarine


Previous result - 2005 (Westminster)

Labour (John MacDougall) - 19,395 votes (51.9%)
SNP (John Beare) - 8,731 votes (23.4%)
Lib Dem (Liz Riches) - 4,728 (12.7%)
Tory (Belinda Don) - 2,651 (7.1%)


Previous result - 2007 (Holyrood)

SNP (Patricia Marwick) - 11,920 votes (44.2%)
Labour (Christine May) - 10,754 votes (39.9%)
Lib Dem (Liz Riches) - 2,288 votes (8.5%)
Tory (Maurice Golden) - 2,003 votes (7.4%)


The Future

Everyone except for Malc in the Burgh is predicting an SNP victory so it is the Nationalists' to lose at the moment. They seem to have a safe candidate, another John Mason dare I say, and Labour need to be more decisive than last time in picking theirs.

The SNP abolished the bridge tolls in Fife and are well underway in planning the building of a 3rd crossing over the Forth. No doubt this will come up a lot when the army of activists work their magic on the streets of Glenrothes, an army that I plan on being a part of though more for the craic rather than any real pressing desire to break my way into Politics.

One serious note of caution for the SNP that I think is worth raising is related to this line which is fast becoming a mantra: "Last month people in Glasgow East voted to send a message to Gordon Brown - now it's the turn of Glenrothes."

I worry that, reading between the lines, the SNP are justifiably concerned that those in Fife will feel they don't need to give Brown a kicking as Glasgow East did it for them, that they can't bear to see Gordon take too much more abuse irrespective of the rising bills and stuttering economy.
It would be a difficult message for Labour to take to the voters but a wounded puppy approach might prove to be Gordon's best chance of victory.

Class Dismissed

"during the last twenty years or so, the once-fashionable and widely accepted view that class structure and class analysis provide the key to understanding modern British history and modern British life has been disregarded by many historians and abandoned by almost all politicians."

I find myself in agreement with the above line and I feel the need to mention John Major who most vocally pushed for a "classless society". And you know, by jove, I think we might have got there.

My day yesterday was perhaps a case in point.

7am - My commute involves a Lothian bus ride shared with a true Edinburgh mix of people, including a couple who were quite clearly recovering heroin addicts. Cheek by jowl the 22 picks up residents from the plush Waterfront developments aswell as the rougher council house neighbourhoods of Leith. If there's significant tutting or raised eyebrows or argy-bargy, I've not noticed it in the 4 or 5 years I've travelled that route.

8am - Stop in for a coffee to ease into the day and notice that our Deputy First Minister is there reading the papers and having a caffeine fix. I mention this to a non-political friend who works in this particular coffee house and she remarks that Nicola Sturgeon is "very elegant". (Her words, not mine.)

9am - 6pm - A typical working day; people of all backgrounds sit yards from me. Looking around here at lunchtime there are Scottish, English, Polish, Hungarian, Kiwi, Australian, Indian workers. Most, of course, are university graduates but by no means all of them and there are crisp public school accents intermingled with the thickest of Glaswegian/Manchester/Newcastle (arguably more 'common') accents. The huge differences in background is never an issue and are never remarked upon.

7pm - Head to Bruntsfield Links to catch up with my bro's (that's my brothers, I'm not in a gang). They're playing a bit of a pitch and putt. Golf, being for so long the preserve of the upper class, was clearly being enjoyed by anyone and everyone on that free 36 hole course.

9pm - Step into Ye Old Golf Tavern pub for a wee pint and to watch the end of the Queen of the South UEFA cup game. (It feels strange typing that.) Good mix of people; all different backgrounds and accents once again.

So that's a fairly arbitrary (albeit narrow) showing of why I have formed an opinion that class is dead.

I do think however there is one man who typifies the absence of class strata, that man is the French footballer Zinedine Zidane.

An Algerian immigrant, Zidane experienced the deepest poverty. His is the classic tale of the shoeless boy wonder who played his way out of the streets and into professional sport.

He went on to be France's and indeed one of the world's greatest ever football players, he mixed in the highest of circles, meeting with Presidents, celebrities and the upper echelons of French culture.

He also always had that red mist, that aggression that took hold in his youth when life truly was a battle and you had to fight your own corner. Red cards were as regular as spectacular goals for this sporting genius and of course his notoriety as a bruiser reached a peak after his world-famous headbutt in the World Cup Final of 2006. The man is fascinating, is he a footballing prince? Or is he a common thug blessed with natural talent?

While I'm on it, I always thought Zinedine showed a certain class in allowing the making of the documentary 'Zidane' (which, honestly, I still don't know is worth 5 stars or 1 star. Very bizarre film, but the music from Mogwai is ace.)

Anyway, me, my pitch and putt brothers and Zinedine Zidane aside, there are, of course, people who will try to maintain the class system for their own ends but they are a dying breed. The whole "Tory Toff" approach in the Crewe & Nantwich by-election spectacularly backfired and, as this was a supposed proposed pre-cursor to similar attacks on Boris Johnson and David Cameron, it is welcome to see that this tack has been quietly dropped by Labour.

Closer to home, the lack of class warfare in the Holyrood chamber is pleasantly notable by its absence. There's no talking down to others, there's no snobbery (inverted or otherwise) and there's no casual, small-minded disregard between fellow MSPs if they went to the wrong school or talk a bit funny. Well, we had the Socialists for 4 years but they were just a bunch of neds.

So although we may not have the luxury of any Zidanes at Holyrood, no natural, world-class political geniuses, we can also be glad we do not have the red cards, the French histrionics and, as yet, no headbutts.

Class is deid, long live the 22 bus.

Tales from the Parliament

Here's a great wee true story from the Holyrood corridors:

An MSP* was out walking/camping on one of the islands in the West of Scotland. When it started to get dark/misty - as it does in those parts - said MSP decided it was time to set up camp where they were and promtly put up tent, climbed inside and slept. When he awoke in the morning, he found that he had set up camp in the middle of a large round-about.

* (An MSP who will remain nameless until I cave in and say who it is in the comments section of course. Although, Highlands & Islands SNP MSP, not too many spring to mind really. Any guesses....?)

The real Olympic conundrum

There has been a lot of very good points raised with regard to this whole Chris Hoy debacle that the real issue is not so much about whether Chris wants to cycle for Scotland or the UK (it's abundantly clear he's happy with either) but whether Scotland should build a Velodrome for cyclists to train on.

It seems that this question has only arisen on the back of Hoy's 3 golds and if Team GB had finished out of the medals then there would be no chat on this matter whatsoever.

It strikes me therefore that with so many medals accruing to Team GB in cycling, be the competitors Scottish or English, we are doing rather well in this discipline and should perhaps focus our efforts and our resources on a sport in which Scotland suck at.

So, with cycling covered (thanks to our friends in Manchester), curling on the up and elephant polo out of the way. Who will join me in the campaign to have a Ski Jump fitted somewhere near Kirkcaldy? Or hurdles fitted down Princes St? Or perhaps even Beach Volleyball courts along the River Clyde?

Mark Lazarowicz's Second Class Stamp

My local MP is Mark Lazarowicz and Mark always seems to be doing a lot of good work in the area and organising local meetings etc. I can't say I've joined any of them as, by and large, they don't affect me but on the surface of it, he seems to put a lot of effort in and help communities with their concerns.

Take Post Offices. I read on his website that the Labour MP is launching a post office closure campaign. Apparently, per his own website:

"Following the announcement today of plans by the post office to close three sub-post offices in his Edinburgh North & Leith constituency, Labour MP Mark Lazarowicz has launched a campaign to highlight local community opposition to the proposals."

How lovely. Real action from a politician willing to stand alongside his constituents.

And of course, if the question of post office closures ever came to a vote in Westminster, Mark Lazarowicz would stand up for the good people of Edinburgh North and Leith, stare down the Government and vote to have these post offices saved from the cull.

What's that you say? There's already been a vote? Well, let's have a look shall we….

The motion was as follows:

This House -
- regrets the proposal to close up to 2,500 post offices;
- recognises the vital role post offices play in local communities;
- notes the concern and unpopularity amongst the general public of closing such a large portion of the network;
- has concerns that the access criteria laid down for the closures consultation do not adequately take into account local geographical factors and public transport networks;
- is concerned that the consultation period is only for six weeks rather than three months, as recommended by Cabinet Office guidelines;
- believes that post offices must move with the times in the services they offer and that options for business expansion and developing business opportunities with local authorities should be explored further; and
- calls upon the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform to instruct Post Office Limited to suspend the compulsory closure of sub-post offices while these issues are re-assessed.

Surely Mark Lazarowicz was chomping at the bit to back this motion. He'd get to assist in saving 2,500 post offices, including those same "sub post offices" that Mark seems so concerned about in his home constituency. He'd be a hero to all those Edinburgh residents who rely on their local Post Office for all manner of services.

Well, here is a list of the Labour MPs who backed the above motion in March 2008. Mark's name is not on the list.

Has there ever been a hypocrisy so blatant?

Playing to the masses

"good but with that black gllomy background i can never become a regular reader and i'm a nat"

Well, given the above quote from my last post and given that Iain Dale seems to think that the SNP are a "blue" party, I decided to change the colour of my background to, well, blue.

If Rangers beat Celtic this weekend you can count on it changing back!

Hoy back pedals

I really don't like the idea of Chris Hoy being kicked around like a media and political football but I couldn't help but be struck by the comparison in two recent news stories regarding the man.

First there was The Scotsman, twisting Chris' words in order to get a typically sensationalised headline of "Scottish team in Olympics would be ridiculous". As is so often the case with The Scotsman, once you read the detail you learn that the news story is more subtle than their tabloid headline suggests.

But now, via the Daily Record, we learn of Chris' real thoughts on the matter. And I will only lift Chris' exact quotes to ensure it is his faithful opinions we finally have:

"I feel a bit upset that I have been quoted as saying the idea of a Scottish Olympic team is ridiculous.

"If and when a Scottish team was put together, I would be delighted to represent Scotland in the Olympic Games.

"But before that happens, so much needs to be done for the athletes to be able to compete at the highest level.

"As a cyclist, there isn't a facility in Scotland where I can train throughout the year and that's why I have to base myself outside Scotland.

"I am proud to be Scottish, but at the same time it's not feasible to think we can compete as a nation without the right facilities."


Well, political football or not, that puts quite a different slant on things and should wipe more than a few smirks off anti-SNP faces from the weekend....

Questions and Answers

There are 129 MSPs in the Scottish Parliament and as one of the 5 million Scots that look towards a better future with them at the helm, I am happy for Holyrood to be a hotbed of ideas, of discussion, of effective administration and constructive opposition. Underpinning all of this is the need for quality parliamentary questions and open answers.

All MSPs, be they SNP, Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem, Green or Margo will ask questions. They represent constituents or regions and they need to fight these constituents' corners effectively and ask questions accordingly.

However, one man stands out from the rest, one man has taken questioning to a whole new and unwelcome level, one man is quite clearly wasting Parliament's resources for partisan ends, ends that are not in the interests of his Lothian constituents.

Step forward, George Foulkes.


It had always struck me that George's name appeared on PQs much, much more than once every 129 times. Indeed in my role as Crap Holyrood Chat co-author I noted he had asked 30 questions in the space of 11 days. Well this has now been trumped as George Foulkes managed to find the time to ask 26 questions on a single day. Yes, on 29th July 2008, George Foulkes and his staff (which extends to a rather extravagant 4 people) lodged 26 questions.

So, with all this rampant questioning going on, I performed an arbitrary search of MSPs to establish just how he measures up in terms of question rate. The results were quite startling:

(note that I tried to stick with MSPs who joined Holyrood in May 2007, the same time as Foulkes)

George Foulkes - 632 questions

Robin Harper - 487 questions (over 9+ years)

Patrick Harvie - 318 questions (over 5+ years)

Margo MacDonald - 309 questions (over 9+ years)

Ken McIntosh - 299 questions

Jamie Hepburn - 294 questions

Jackson Carlaw - 174 questions

Hugh O'Donnell - 153 questions

John Park - 133 questions

Aileen Campbell - 76 questions

Joe Fitzpatrick - 36 questions

Liz Smith - 27 questions


So, as far as I can see, George Foulkes has asked more than double the questions of any of his colleagues since May 2007.

To be fair, maybe George is highly incisive and has taken it upon himself to ask the difficult questions that Scotland needs answered, questions that will lead to world class schools, to reducing poverty, to combatting climate change, to fixing local finance issues and to getting the NHS back on track again.

Well, judge for yourself, some of George's 632 questions are shown here. And the first batch are only in the past month!

The kicker is, each of these questions cost money, they use up Parliament and Government resources that more often than not can be better used with getting on with actual work. I've been unable to find a reliable figure for what the average PQ costs in Holyrood but if we were to use Westminster figures then George Foulkes' questions will cost us £250,000 over the 4 years of this Parliament and I for one do not believe we are getting good value for money.

I honestly don't think I'm that cynical, I think most politicians of all parties get up and try to make the world a better place. But I've given up on George Foulkes. It is now abundantly clear that the man wakes up each day hell bent on nailing the SNP and he has decided that one way of doing this is to bombard them with unnecessary questions. But Scotland deserves better than that.

If Labour had any sense they would de-select Foulkes (or at least demote him) for the 2011 election but until then the Scottish Government and indeed Scotland as a whole will just have to put up with the time-wasting Lord and hope that one day he just goes away.

Top 40 Scottish Blogs

Ok, screw the modesty, I'm bloody delighted with 3rd spot on Iain Dale's much vaunted Top 40 Scottish Blogs. Many thanks to those who voted for me, I'll try and keep up the random witterings and scattered thoughts that have somehow seemingly stumbled into the "interesting" category of late.

Falling behind the mighty Mr Eugenides and the lofty Mr Harris is perfectly respectable and to somehow scrape past the fab trio of J Arhur MacNumpty, Kezia and Scottish Tory Boy to name but 3? Great stuff indeed.

I know people call this 'blogging porn' and a bit of navelgazing fluff but if it means more eyes looking north to the Scottish blogging scene in the same way that my eyes have checked out the best Green, Welsh and Libertarian blogs so far, then it can't be bad.

It's all about sharing ideas and explaining our views of the world after all.


But one final thought, why did Iain decide to colour the SNP blogs blue? Isn't he taking the 'Tartan Tory' tag a bit far there....!

£5,000 to become an MSP

Congratulations to Tavish Scott who is the new Liberal Democrat leader but it is the news that the Lib Dems have only 4,000 members that has really got me thinking.

Before I can get into the meat of what this post is all about I shall first briefly explain the D'Hondt voting system as used by the Scottish Parliament.

Holyrood consists of 129 elected MSPs, 73 of these MSPs are voted in by a standard First Past the Post constituency method in keeping with Westminster UK Elections. The first of two votes is used by the electorate to vote for these politicians.

The remaining 56 MSPs are 'list' politicians and they are voted in via an additional members system. Scotland is broken up into 8 regions with the second votes from the electorate in each region being used to 'top up' the first 73 MPs in a proportional manner. For example, the SNP have 36% of the SNPs with 31% of the vote. The Liberal Democrats have 12.4% of MSPs with 11.3% of the vote.

It's a flawed system, in several ways, and I am about to explain another reason why but I have already pointed out a clear way in which this d'Hondt system can lead to a farcical election and unfortunate, undemocratic tactical voting patterns. Sadly, it will probably take a shambolic election before anyone is moved to change it to something more suitable.

Anyway, moving on....

In 3 of the 8 regions, the Liberal Democrats have won a reasonably safe list MSP in each of the 3 elections that devolved Scotland has seen. For 2007, Glasgow region had Robert Brown ranked 3rd, Central region had Hugh O'Donnell at Rank 6 and West of Scotland had Ross Finnie ranked 4th.

These Lib Dem MSPs were the list members who were highest up on the party's field of regional candidates who hadn't won a First Past the Post seat. If you don't know who the first two are (Hugh and Robert) don't worry about it. Infact, it will merely serve to strengthen my upcoming point.

So, here's the rub.

The position of Lib Dem members on these regional lists is decided by the local party, the 500 or so Liberal Democrat members in each of the eight regions.

With that in mind, there is nothing stopping someone getting 499 friends together, paying them all to join the Liberal Democrat party and then getting them all to nominate yourself as the top member on a certain regional list.

Given that a list MSP has always been returned for Central, Glasgow and West of Scotland, it would be a safe bet that another one will be returned in 2011, especially as barely anyone knows who they are voting for specifically. The First Past the Post vote is about personalities, the Regional vote is merely about party affiliation.

So, for an initial outlay of 500 * £10/year subscription to the party, or a mere £5,000, you can get yourself a £53,000 a year job (with generous expenses) sitting on the backbenches not doing very much for the Liberal Democrats.

Better still, they could defect to the SNP.

You know what they say, if it's not broke, D'Hondt fix it.....

Lib Dem Philosophy

You know that old philosophical debate involving the question 'if a tree falls over in a deserted forest, has it actually happened?'


Well, if you take a forest, and there's noone else around, and a tree falls over, and it lands on a Lib Dem.

Would anyone care?

Tavish wins Lib Dem contest!

World keeps spinning.


(i really have no further comment on the matter, can't think of anything whatsoever. I mean, did he have any policies?)

Mike Rumbles to win?

I've heard from a very reliable and intelligent source that:

" Mike Rumbles & his wife were clapped into the Members' restaurant today. Suggestions that he may have pipped Tavish to the leadership remain unconfirmed, but the rumours are that that is in fact the case."

My oh my, after Glasgow East I didn't think the impossible could happen again. I'm sure we'll find out in the next few hours whether Mike has managed an unlikely win but this would spell disaster for the Lib Dems if it was split in two in such an awkward manner.

Could Tavish Scott quietly and obediently play along to Rumbles' tune?


No, I don't think so either....

Just to say...

I know there's a meme kicking around and I was kindly nominated by STB.

I'm generally not a fan of such things and, computer dinosaur that I am, I haven't the faintest what "meme" stands for. I just wanted to say I won't be filling it in so I hope noone's bitterly disappointed about not finding out where I was when man landed on the moon etc.

Somehow, I think you'll all get by....

Labour students - A disenfranchised lot

Labour students are the only affiliate that is backing Andy Kerr. The Labour student group has a block vote of 387 members. But how many took part in the final vote to decide which candidate got their nomination?

6 members.

Democracy at its finest ladies and gentlemen.

For more on Labour's grotesque 'electoral collge' voting system, I do suggest a read of Paul Hutcheon in the Sunday Herald.



UPDATE: I forgot to mention that of the 6, only 4 actually voted for Kerr. Iain Gray and Cathy Jamieson got one vote each from Student #5 and student #6. That equates to a mandate of 1.03% for Andy Kerr from the students.


PS Good luck to the Lib Dems in their vote for a new leader today. Apparently Tavish Scott is favourite but I wouldn't rule out Mike Rumbles just yet. Still, with one member one vote as their selection process, at least the Lib Dems can know it'll be a fair and democratic result.

Tram costs hit wrong pockets

OK, here's the deal with trams and me. I'm now (finally) fine with it, really I am. Two Doctors made some great points and I've made my peace with these over-priced, unnecessary chunks of metal that will get in the way of the best bus service in the UK .


I currently get the bus to work, I don't even own a car, I understand the need to get people out of their ozone-wrecking automobiles and into public transport but I'm there already so take my council tax, do with it what you will and leave me out of it.

But, incredibly, as I read in the Edinburgh Evening News today, it is me and my environmentally-conscious bus-commuting chums that are going to have to pay extra for these blasted trams, these trams that are chiefly being made to get people out of their cars, cars that I'm already out of, 'out of' being where I am relative to my mind.

You get the picture.


Why can't trams be financed by drivers? From the parking fines? From speed cameras? From road taxes? From the extra duty gained from petrol price hikes? From congestion charge schemes?


Frankly, it seems somewhat ridiculous that there was a referendum on congestion charges to raise funds for better public transport, drivers then vote "no" in their thousands, trams are forced on us anyway and then they make existing commuters pay for them rather than those unbudging, carbon-crazy drivers.


I'm not laying fault at any individual party's door but this financing plan is simply wrong and counter-productive by any standard.

Scotland and the Olympics

I like to blog about the big Scottish news story of the day but I just don't have it in me to get too excited about the question of a separate Scottish Olympics team, football or otherwise.

Gordon Brown wanting Scotland to be part of a Team GB soccer side, headed up by Scotsman Alex Ferguson, is dripping with political manouevring and so is Alex Salmond's insistence of a Scottish team for the Olympics going forward.

Of course a British football team once every 4 years will not spell the end of Scotland and its Tartan Army and of course Scottish athletes will continue to enjoy success whether they fly the Union Jack or the Saltire.

There's bigger fish to fry out there and so much more to concern oneself with, so for now, I'll take a rain check on blogging and go and enjoy my first Bank Holiday in a very long time.


Update: I thought this would happen. The SNP should only, only, only have let this whole news story come out if Chris Hoy was in favour of, or at least ambivalent to, the idea of a separate Scottish Olympics team. It seems Chris thinks the idea is "ridiculous" so this has to go down as perhaps the SNP's silliest error yet.

Thankfully it'll blow over in a few days.

Foodies at the Festival

I spent most of today attending the Foodies at the Festival event at Sheraton Hotel and I have to say I have left hugely inspired.

The remarkably wide spread of Scottish produce that is out there would surprise most people and it certainly makes a mockery of the "Scottish shelf" in Shandwick Place's Morrisons that has snowballs, macarroon bars, shortbread, fudge and jam. Tourists must wonder if we have any teeth left, particularly as our most famous culinary delight appears to be the Deep Fried Mars Bar.

But lo and behold, scratching beneath the surface and we learn Scotland is awash with organic producers, microbreweries, farmers, fishmongers, cheese shops, cooking schools and so, so, so much more.

I learned today that 40%+ of all processed food in Europe is eaten in the UK and I learned last week that toilets across Britain have to be made bigger, in line with Government regulations, because we, as a nation, are getting fatter. The 2nd fattest nation in the world, behind those slim-Jim Americans.

I don't believe in lecturing people on their diet and I don't believe in food snobbery but I do believe in passing on great experiences and fantastic ideas when I live or see them.

So to that end, a live cooking demonstration from Scottish chefs Martin Wishart (pictured) was my great experience and Slow Food is today's fantastic idea.

I live a hop, skip and a jump from the mysterious restaurant of Martin Wishart on The Shore and if I started saving up for dinner there today then I'd be looking forward to the meal in around April 2009. Indeed I walk past the Michelin Star restaurant every morning to get to the bus-stop and I occasionally salivate at the menu in the window while my breakfast of a plain bagel dampens in the August rain.

But today was so different. A mouthwatering plate of roast monkfish, buttered savoy cabbage, noilly prat and clams was simply yet expertly put together before our eyes by Martin Wishart as he was giving top tips about cooking techniques and Scottish stockists. He was also subtly plugging his book which was for sale for anyone stupid enough to fall for it. I now have a signed copy.

A good link from Martin Wishart to Slow Food comes in the form of Tom Lewis. A Scottish farmer-cum-chef who I also watched a demonstation of and is fiercely in favour of the philosophy of Slow Food whereby meat and veg is sourced locally and in season.

So, as I (dubiously) claimed earlier that I amn't a food snob and that I don't want to lecture people for having a crap diet, I will merely leave the following links: East Coast Organics, Well Hung and Tender, Olifeira Oil, Grow Wild, Damhead Organic Farm and Shop and Cooking Mania (cooking school for kids!)

For now, with my roasted squash, parsnip, grilled aubergine and mashed potato meal out the way, it's time to tuck into what is, officially, the UK's best sticky toffee pudding and another glass of top notch wine.

Cheers!

Seeing eye to to eye

If the leader of Labour refuses to have his Prime Minister endorse his leadership, what exactly does that mean for future relations between the two?

A strong, independent Labour party in Scotland is a good thing but a fractured UK Labour party may be even sweeter news for the SNP.

Let's not forget the Tories and Lib Dems are already split at the border.

Date of the Glenrothes By-Election

30th of October folks, a full 2 days before I go on my holidays so it works out very nicely for me.


Don't ask me how I know ;-)

Friday Blog Love

Partly since it's the long weekend coming up and, also not only because Kez warned of a blind partisan stance creeping into my blogging and also not directly linked to her kind gift of a video of Mags Thatcher getting her sexy hair done up, I've decided to say who I'd be backing for the Labour leadership.

For me, it wouldn't be a case of the lesser of 3 evils as so many are choosing to paint it. I think there's a clear winner, a worthy scrapper and one entrant who is making a bit of a tit of himself.

I'll start in reverse order...

(3) Andy Kerr

Originally I thought Andy Kerr would be a good bet for Labour. He could tap into the Jack McConnell Mark 2 template, a label which he apparently detests. But I think it could have played well. People might have harked back to old Jack and thought "well, he wasn't so bad, let's have more of the same" and vote for Andy.

But all this 'taking on Salmond' nonsense, 'I'm more more Scottish than you', "battle to the death" tosh is not very palatable and it's no wonder he is slipping out of the contest.

I could be cynical and suggest he was persuaded to enter a weak challenge just to show there had been more of a contest but I won't. This is a blog love post after all.

So onwards to Cathy Jamieson.

She's been exactly what I was expecting from the former Deputy Minister. Scrapping away with potential policies here and there, drumming up the left of the party and just generally making a lot of positive noise.

I've always thought that Cathy Jamieson as leader would only ever be able to take the party so far so for that reason I would struggle to vote for her. Of course, there's an argument that a caretaker leader is what Labour needs right now but that poverty of ambition is insufficient for any political party.

So, with that in mind, I'd be backing…..

Iain Gray!

Yes, the ex-Oxfam, ex-transport secretary has, I honestly believe, the potential to get Labour back on track.

My thoughts on this matter crystallised after reading this piece in The Scotsman. I thought it was simply excellent.

It focussed on the Labour party rather than going for cheap attacks at the SNP. It hit upon policies that I think could steer the party relatively quickly back into a strong position, chiefly by drawing on Labour's raison d'etre without falling back into old-skool socialism. They've also shown a canniness in focussing on Council Tax changes for pensioners before the Winter kicks in and this could harm the SNP by making them look sluggish and their policies ill-thought out.

The most common criticism levelled against Iain Gray is his lack of an X-Factor, his lack of oomph. But cometh the hour, cometh the man perhaps? Sometimes it is low expectations that allows an individual the freedom and the luxury of a few early errors. Of course Iain Gray would have to hit the ground running but he has 2.5 years until the next election so it's not exactly panic stations from Day 1.

And what would a Labour party led by Iain Gray mean for the SNP?

Well, once again I choose to refer to a football metaphor.

The SNP have been playing for a third of the match and the opposition has barely shown up. But if your opponents do suddenly find some form, find some chinks in the armour, find some creative, effective ways to attack then there is only one option.

You can't look back wishing for that time when you had it so easy, you can't claim foul play, you simply have to up your game, rise to the challenge and enjoy the match.

So I look forward to Iain Gray winning the leadership as I am sure he will. Labour will be better for it, the Parliament will be better for it and Scotland will be better for it. I just hope the SNP are better for it too.

New Blog

I happened across a new(ish) blog today and given that it is headed up by one Incorrigible Plagiarist who has left many a clever and thought-provoking comment on this blog, I would suggest adding this tome to your daily read.

I will link to one of his several blog posts here, picking one at random of course....



Enjoy!



(Shameless I know, but I honestly have no scruples.....)

Worrying search terms # 2,334

"where does Danny Bhoy drink in Edinburgh". (Danny Bhoy being a top comic on the festival scene this year. Saw him last week, very funny.)

So, Danny, if you happen to be reading this, I wouldn't leave your drink unattended tonight mate. Better still, just play safe, stay indoors and watch the Friends double-bill instead.....!

I like Margaret Thatcher's hair

Well, that's it, I'm fucked now.

You can't be Scottish, say anything remotely positive about Margaret Thatcher and hope to avoid being villified to within an inch of your life.

Take Alex Salmond for example, in an interview with bestower-of-awards Blog King Iain Dale, the First Minister is quoted as saying:

"The SNP has a strong social conscience, which is very Scottish in itself. One of the reasons Scotland didn't take to Lady Thatcher was because of that. We didn't mind the economic side so much. But we didn't like the social side at all."

Now, mercifully, I can neatly sidestep all of this by saying I'm a child of the 80s. I wasn't even a teenager when Thatcher took control of the UK so back then I would more readily associate 'macro-economic' with Meccano or Lego than I would with businesses going to the wall. To avoid Poll Tax I would say to people just stop buying poles. (not that this childish naivety has ever really left me of course, I still think the Iran problem can be solved by a round of golf and a few beers with Ahmanedjad.)

But I'm surprised Iain Gray was "astonished" by Salmond's words, if he shocks so easily then he might want to choose a more harmonious life and avoid being Labour's leader. I also don't think the "apology" that Iain believes is necessary is going to materialise.

It's also fairly bizarre that Salmond's words have been spun into him somehow being complimentary about Thatcher when he is quite clearly stating he disagrees with her on one specific area. "Alex Salmond 'didn't mind' Thatcher Economics" states the title in the newspaper but that is a far cry from being what the main thrust of the article discusses. Once again The Scotsman descends into tabloid trash.

I also noted it was Gerri Peev who wrote the story who I believe was the mastermind behind getting Barack Obama's colleague sacked for labelling Hillary Clinton a monster. Gerri seems to be somewhat monstrous herself on current form.

I don't know if I'd choose to sit down with someone who is so keen to leap on a stray sentence here and there and blaze it into a non-story at the expense of the actual, more relevant substance of what was being discussed.

But maybe I'm still just childish and naive.

Words

I don't what's been going on recently but I seem to have had word usage on my brain quite a lot in the past week or so. Are words being used properly or tossed around with reckless abandon, with no real forethought?


Maybe, finally, with this high-brow thinking I am turning into the intellectual I've always wanted to be. (Or perhaps I just need to remove a stick from somewhere it shouldn’t be.)


I've taken earlier umbrage with the word "hero" but another example of potential incorrect word usage is "pride".

Now I can understand being proud of yourself if you win an award, I can understand being proud of a loved one if you have helped them achieve a personal goal and I can understand a parent being proud of a daughter or son if they excel, even taking that pride so far as to propose a motion in Parliament in celebration of the event, for example.


With the Olympics on, the word 'pride' is of course cropping up here, there and everywhere. The crystallisation of my thoughts on this topic though stemmed from reading Tom Harris' blog.
"Hoy does us all proud" he cheers in the subject. But what exactly does the Labour MP have to be proud of?


Perhaps if Tom Harris had been the Sports Minister or directly supported the British/Scottish Cycling Team with time and money then that pride might have been well placed but, as it stands, I struggle to see the link.


Don't get me wrong, I have thoroughly enjoyed the Olympics but I'm no more proud of Chris Hoy than I am of Usain Bolt or Paula Radcliffe. I can understand the desire of politicians to want to align themselves with successful Olympic athletes but I do wish they would use words properly when they choose to do so.


Incidentally, there is no doubt that Gordon Brown will host a reception for the Olympic athletes upon their return to the UK. This is absolutely the right thing to do and as Prime Minister he should of course help to celebrate their success in this way and has a greater claim on being "proud" of what 'our' athletes achieved.

Moving away from the Olympics, but sticking with this rather odd word "Pride", I turn to marches and movements. Gay Pride being the most obvious example. What is it about a sexual orientation choice that makes one so proud?


Notting Hill Carnival and Mardi Gras in Sydney look like spectacular events and I'd love to go to either or both one of these days but to label them as Gay Pride Marches has always seemed an odd moniker for me. I'm not 'proud' to be a heterosexual, I just happen to be one. It makes much more sense to take pride in being bilingual than it would in being bisexual but, well, if it gives an excuse to get the tiaras and feather boas out then I guess there's no harm in it.


Taking pride in the country you were born is another fairly bizarre situation. Malc (of the Burgh) talks in his last post of our "proud nation". Again, where should this pride have generated from? Scotland has beautiful countryside, great people, a fabulous history, lots and lots going for it but I just struggle to see the transition from that to a personal pride that one should take from it.


Alexander Graham Bell will have been proud he invented the telephone, Robert Burns will have been proud of the poems he wrote (and no doubt the girls he bedded) and Adam Smith will have been proud of the economic philosophy he imparted on the world before he left us but should we future Scots be permitted to take a collective pride in what those have done before us, just because we happen to have been born in the same country a century or two later?


Regrettably, it escapes me.

Moving on to the next blog that has stirred up thoughts on whether we use the right words, I turn my attention to another prominent Labour blogger. It is perhaps apt, even ironic, that Kezia is female as the word I am taking exception to is one that I would have thought would have feminists burning with anger.


Basically, how appropriate is it to label a girl/woman as "feisty"?


Kezia chooses the adjective to describe Susan Deacon and I'm not quibbling whether Susan is or isn't but is "feisty" a word that ever has a place? When would a person be happy to called such a thing?


And I say "person" but let's be honest, it's a word reserved for females who have a drive but are looked down on in a condescending, patronising manner. They may be feisty, punchy or spunky but ultimately they lack real bite is what is being said. I have no doubt it was a word invented by men which is why I was surprised Kez chose to use it. "Tireless", "relentless", "committed", "radical" would all be more preferable alternatives in my eyes.

My final bone of contention is "in your own words". Such a useful phrase to use to throw an argument back in someone's face. The problem is, our memories are so poor that we never get the quotation exactly right so we end up putting words in another person's mouth. In the comments field of my blog I don't think I've ever been quoted accurately and it is more than a little bit annoying.

So, I don't know, "it's only words" as 5 wise men once said butI strongly suspect words will be a very important factor in Scottish Politics over the next few years so I besiege you all to to take more pride, show a little feist and use them properly.

Thoughts on LIT / Council Tax

I see Derek Brownlee, Finance Spokesperson for the Scottish Conservatives, has written a piece on "The Perils of Local Income Tax". I'm a big fan of Derek and he, along with the other 'Young Turks' of Gavin Brown and Murdo Fraser, shows the party is in very good stead for the generation to come.

But as much as I believe the piece lays out his thoughts clearly and concisely not to mention the refreshing change of an MSP actually debating policy and not tittle-tattle, I have to make some objections.

For a start, there's this misnomer that implementing LIT rules, whether local or national, would be complicated and time-consuming.

It would be relatively straightforward for small, medium or large business to implement LIT. The Government provides a PAYE computer package to those who don't have one already and you would simply add an extra field for each employee stating which area they live in. It is estimated it would require 10 seconds for each employee. Of course, there is an issue for Small Business who work without computers but surely it's safe to assume we'll all be online before too long.

I also don't see the 'obstacles' of 5% income tax increases and £280m efficiency savings as being anywhere near insurmountable. Scotland's share of the Barnett Formula has gone up 50% since 1999 so there must be some money to be saved somewhere.

I always got the impression Labour and the Lib Dems were pretty wasteful and the unrelentingly analytical John Swinney will comb out savings here, there and everywhere. Infact, for more evidence of how wasteful the Lib Dems are see the recent report that shows they are no longer a going concern and do not have the assets to back up their debts!

Further to this, the £400m that is so often touted as 'Scotland's Money' is quite clearly due to us whatever happens. Derek is correct to raise the point that the UK Government may hold the money back for political purposes but any objective person would clearly see that Scotland is due the money even if they change their council tax arrangements. If it comes to a court ruling, I don't think Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling would have a leg to stand on.

But my main concern is this, if Derek Brownlee and indeed anyone within the Tories believe they have a good idea then they are perfectly free to push it and win support rather than fall back on the easy option of aiming a kick at what they disagree with. 80%+ of Derek's piece is negatively disparaging the SNP's plans rather than positively pushing for what he believes is the correct course of action.

Don't get me wrong, as an opposition party (some would say the most effective opposition party) they are responsible for holding the Government to account but in this field I think positive action rather than constructive criticism is the best way forward. The best way to win political and popular support is surely to point out why your plan is so great rather than why another plan is so poor.

I've already said the Tories were right to shoot down Iain Gray's overtures of consensual politics as Iain was bringing nothing tangible to the table. But perhaps the Tories should now put their money where their mouth is, work out a detailed proposal on reforming the Council Tax, take it to Iain Gray/Labour/Greens/Margo and try getting it through the Parliament themselves.

It's clear there is not going to be a perfect solution to local taxation so we all need to focus on the few pro's each plan has as opposed to the more numerous cons and just get cracking with whatever the new system will be.