The Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy will soon address Parliament to discuss further powers that are planned to be devolved to Scotland after the next election, if Labour win. Needless to say, given that Labour are distinct second favourites to form the next Government and Cameron has already ruled out further changes to devolution in the next term, we in Scotland should not be holding our breath that we will have control over these extra powers any time soon.
To be fair to the current Government, when Labour came to power back in 1997 there wasn't even a Scottish Parliament and without its installation the SNP wouldn't have had the chance to prove its considerable worth to Scotland. Labour has delivered on devolution and, if anything, reviewing the Parliament's powers after ten years is probably too soon rather than too late so the UK Government running out of time to implement these changes is, on one level at least, understandable and acceptable.
However, the Scottish Government has helped the UK Government out by preparing draft orders which could be used by Jim Murphy to immediately transfer these powers if he so chooses. It is clear that if the Scottish Secretary is serious about boosting Holyrood's remit then he would sign these order papers before the next election, if he is merely posturing for electioneering purposes then he won't sign them. It is, surely, as simple as that.
Although there is an ironic air of 'Bring it on' to the SNP's offer, if there is any justice in the media a journalist or two will properly grill Jim Murphy on why he won't be signing the order papers that would immediately transfer these powers now that Labour has made its decision.
Meanwhile, the Tories have been sidelined during this whole issue. With only 1 Scottish MP, it is perhaps unfair to blame them for not getting involved but Cameron isn't going to win support north of the border by ducking debates on Scotland's future. It remains an alarmingly stark contrast to have the Tories over 40% in the polls in England & Wales and rooted to sub-20% levels in Scotland.
Are the Tories suffering in Scotland because of Goldie or Cameron? In truth, it's probably a mix of both. David Cameron visiting Scotland will no doubt continue to feel like a foreign head of state on tour once he is Prime Minister. The platitudes will sound nice and fuzzy and Scots will smile and shake his hand but it's obvious there is little connection to the man up here.
Annabel Goldie on the other hand is popular, very popular infact, but she does not embody aggressive, ambitious progress for the Scottish Tories and with her as leader, the party can expect to continue their sub-20% position in the polls. Tory Bear is right, it's only so long before the frustration amongst the 50+ Scottish PPCs who once again have no chance of winning the seats they are contesting boils over into action.
So the Tories are uselessly sitting on the subs bench and Labour are kicking Scotland around like the political football we have become while our economy continues to lag behind the UK, our health statistics go through the roof and our constitutional arrangement from Barnett formulas to borrowing powers stay stuck in a quagmire.
Meanwhile, in Wales, there is a right old brouhaha kicking off with Labour and Plaid Cymru falling out and falling in again as the delicate manoeuving over a possible (even probable) referendum on powers for the Welsh assembly takes shape.
Richard Thomson, SNP PPC for Gordon, has an excellent post on the implications for Wales and Scotland.
How could there be a referendum in Wales and not one in Scotland? It's a good question. We can add that to the growing list of questions for Mr Murphy I suppose...
Salmond vs Trump
13 minutes ago
12 comments:
The Tories aren't popular in Scotand because they are Tories. Nothing to do with leadership. Annabelle Goldie is the best asset they have - for two reasons, firstly because she is very likeable and secondly because she is very Scottish. They would be off their heads to get rid of her. True, she has not made the Tories electable in the sense that they could ever win a majority in Scotland but she has made them much more electable than they were.
Jeff - Given that the SNP don't agree with 39 out of 63 recomendations from Calman,isn't the reason why the SNP want some powers transferred now, is so that that they can veto the rest as pact of their pact with Cameron?
By god, giving Scotland the right to ban air guns!
That'll quench the nationalists fervour.
Jeff,
This is the perfect occasion for a comeback.
A co-ordinated campaign to demand those 'orders' be signed for a start.
Then, a ruthless and ferocious campaign about Britain's insolvency. In this way, we can argue that Scotland needs the powers to protect itself from London bankruptcy policies and that those on offer from Labour are useless against 'depression'.
Presenting independence as the answer to the 'Depression' should be our top priority. I'm sure the SNP can mobilise public opinion through blogs, press releases, 'business leaders', councils, international economists etc.
A campaign can be mounted that leaves Murphy battered and bruised. Send it homewards to think again..
Jeff I read with interest the link about what is going on in Wales.
Interesting stuff.
Labour have got themselves stuck in a self made pincer.
Jeff
As someone once said in the Scotsman comments,
With devolution we get to ban air guns, with independence we get to ban Trident.
Voters should realise that voting Labour in Scotland will be a wasted vote at the next UK general election. If Labour were really serious about granting further devolved powers to Scotland then Labour could grant then right now but cynically choose not to in the full knowledge that they are going to be in opposition for decades after the next UK general election. So instead Labour hope to try and win as many seats in Scotland as is possible, but the indisputable fact is that 80% of the seats in the UK are in England and this is where the election will be won and lost. So any talk of Labour delivering extra powers for the Scottish parliament after the next election is little more than a cynical spin to try to hang onto as many seats in Scotland as possible in the face of an overwhelming Tory majority. Fact is that only one party can take on the Tories and win for Scotland and that party is the SNP.
Indy,
i don't think "The Tories aren't popular in Scotand because they are Tories" really gets to the nub of the issue somehow. They used to command 50% support up in these here parts and there's still a very strong conservative element to Scottish life.
I guess competing with 4 parties rather than 3 in England makes it a bit harder.
I still think, despite the handicap of being Tories, they should be very disappointed with 18% poll showings.
And the more I think about it, they've made a fairly abysmal attempt at coming up with a big idea for Scotland in, well, years now.
Thomas,
you're letting the cat out of the bag there.
We agree on 24 recommendations (according to your good self, I haven't counted). Why not press ahead with these sooner rather than later if Jim Murphy is serious in what he said today?
It's smart politics. But at least admit it's politics and admit that Labour doesn't have a pressing desire to see a single extra power ceded to Holyrood.
I'm with Alex Porter, the next few weeks should be dominated with these orders that Murphy could sign any day he wished. A relentless campaign would put Labour well and truly on the backfoot.
Who wants to start the Facebook group?
"With devolution we get to ban air guns, with independence we get to ban Trident."
Fabulous comment there Dubbieside, I hope to be hearing it (and no doubt shamelessly using it) again and again as May 2010 approaches!
Jeff
Alas the airgun comment was not mine, I wish it was.
Jeff.
When the Tories won 50% of the popular vote in Scotland, people voted along... ah... sectarian lines (with the Labour party picking up the predominantly catholic vote). They began to lose votes in Scotland when they became more obviously a centre right party, particularaly when Heath started them down the road of what became known as Thatcherism. Of course the Tories were also avowed "One Nation" at that time, something they have discarded from their make-up
Post a Comment