For Whom The Bell Tolls

It's been a busy weekend (one party, a visit to Stirling and a Scots Independent article which needed written in a hurry). However, in the meantime, here's an interesting article written by broadcaster Alex Bell for allmediascotland.com, on the curious approach of the Scottish press to the current election campaign.

This afternoon, though, the bell tolling may be for Defence Secretary Des Browne, who has the unenviable task of explaining to the Commons why he allowed the 15 captured Royal Navy personnel to sell their stories to the press. The decision was wrong on so many levels it's difficult to know where to begin. However, it's hardly the worst strategic choice ever made by this government, so it's hard to fathom why Tony Blair has allowed the pressure to build up on him in this way.


Maybe to shaft one of the Chancellor's allies before he departs this political life? Who knows, but it seems unlikely. Browne is a fairly dull and dilligent politician about whom it is difficult to have any strong feelings. However, even less fathomable is the behaviour of Gordon Brown, who has refused conspicuously to stand up for his ally.

Is he now so terrified of alienating anyone on his way to Number 10 that he can't even muster up some basic loyalty for a friend in need? We all know that Brown has made a lot of enemies on his way to the top. But if he won't even ride to the rescue of Browne, just what sort of slippery, gutless, spineless creature are a small cabal of Labour MPs set to inflict on us as Prime Minister once Blair rides off into the sunset?

As Jeremy Thorpe once remarked, 'Greater love hath no man, than that he lay down his friends for his life'.

Labour Campaign Grinds To Halt

Says it all, really.

(With thanks to Holyroodbelle for the pic).

SNP Manifesto Launch

I spent this morning at the SNP manifesto launch, held up at the Lindsay Stewart Lecture Theatre on Napier University's Craiglockhart Campus. It's a striking building from the outside, offering an equally striking view over Edinburgh from inside. It's just as well that there's window blinds installed, otherwise I can imagine the attention of students wandering away from their lecturer to the city skyline instead!


There were no such problems today, though, as the media packed in to question the man who looks increasingly as if he will be the next First Minister of Scotland. Grilled by a press corps determined to barbeque him on any number of issues from local tax to the economics of independence, an entirely unscripted Alex Salmond turned in a thoroughly assured performance. There might have been a change in style in recent months commensurate with the SNP's lead position in the polls, but there was still room for a piece of vintage Salmond tail-tweaking, when he remarked about how his relationship with Gordon Brown would probably be better than that which Brown shares with Tony Blair.

After Labour's disastrous manifesto launch and the Lib Dems' hapless efforts yesterday, it was important for the SNP that this passed off without a hitch. That's exactly what happened, and all those involved can give themselves a huge pat on the back. Sure, the Daily Record will carp tomorrow and there'll probably be a bit of bad-tempered harumphing from The Times, but if they were being honest, no-one could have left without at least a grudging respect for how professionally the whole affair, and indeed the whole SNP campaign to date, has been conducted. Just 21 days to go...

Jack - 'Out Of All My Top Priorities, This Is The Top One'

So now we know. 'Education, education, education', the infamous pre-1997 Blairite mantra, is to have yet another comeback tour if Labour get back in (watch out Francis Rossi and Rick Parfitt). After jostling with a range of issues to be the 'top priority' for Labour over the past few years, it will now take pride of place, even ahead of health, with, according to McConnell, all other departments being forced to 'cut their cloth' in consequence.

But we've been hearing this for the past 9 years, so what is Labour planning to do that it couldn't have done earlier? What's that, Jack? Get more children to learn modern languages? That sounds like a good idea, but tell me Jack, wasn't it your Executive which removed the requirement for Scottish pupils to learn a language up to the age of 16, leading to a 13% reduction in the numbers presented for examination? So would that mean that your promises on education are a case of déjà vu, or when it comes to delivery, perhaps even jamais vu? Oh dear, Jack, and you a former maths teacher and all. Go to the bottom of the class...

But licking her wounds this morning must be Cathy Jamieson. Given the task of explaining how Labour's plans to introduce extra council tax bands might work on Newsnight Scotland, she turned in an excruciatingly abject performance. She couldn't give elementry answers on how many people would be affected at each end, or explain how the numbers would add up. As it happens, by introducing a new top band and a new bottom band, Labour are expecting 11,000 householders to bail out nearly 500,000 others.

In the Orkney Islands, for instance, there are only two homes in Band H, so the entire burden will fall on either one or two householders! Labour's position yesterday was a bit of a mess, but to describe it today as shambolic would be an act of irrational charity.

Newsnight Scotland clips only stay online for 24 hours. Get it while its hot, and marvel at how Cathy could ever have been let loose on the government of Scotland. Remember - she's one of the better ones!

UPDATE: Now that the Newsnight clip has disappeared into the ether, here's a transcript of the exchange between Cathy Jamieson and presenter Gordon Brewer. My commiserations to the poor SNP press officer who drew the short straw and had to type this out!

UPDATE 2: Thanks to the wonders of YouTube, her performance has been saved for posterity!

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid...

...if you are an AC Milan or Bayern Munich supporter.

Maybe a UEFA Cup spot for Aberdeen next season isn't such a bad option after all!

Taxing Times for Labour

The Labour Party has been scathing in recent weeks about the SNP’s proposals to scrap the Council Tax and replace it with an income based alternative. It’s been described variously by Labour spokespeople as a tax rise for low earners (Not so - 90% would pay the same or less); and as a tax against small businesses (Again, not so - businesses pay separate business rates, not council tax or the SNP’s proposed replacement).

The argument for a local income tax is a simple one. Essentially, the value of your property bears little or no relation to your ability to contribute towards meeting the costs of the local services we all use. And if you are on a low income or live on your own, despite the various ‘reliefs’ which exist, the tax can still represent a very large proportion of your overall income.

Labour knows this, which is why wee Jack is waffling at the moment about including ‘extra bands’ for the Council Tax, in order to make it fairer. The trouble is, including more bands would do no such thing, since the general rise in house prices since the last revaluation would move only a small number of homes up or down a band relative to where they sit currently. It would do nothing to counter the ability to pay argument which is currently driving the debate forward. And the killer for Labour is that as history shows, property tax revaluations are about as popular with the voters as a fart in a space-suit.

Labour’s arguments don’t seem to be cutting much ice just now, since according to SNP polling, 71% of voters want to see the Council Tax gone. This is most likely why the Edinburgh Labour Party has made a very welcome concession in its local manifesto, where with commendable candour, it states that:

“The other big expense for everyone is Council Tax… …we know that Council Tax, as it is organised at the moment, isn’t always fair, with poor people paying a larger proportion of their income than rich people.

Sounds like an argument for a local income tax to me. Trouble is, notwithstanding this display of local disquiet, Edinburgh Labour is running on the same commitment to keep the Council Tax as wee Jack and the rest of the Labour Party. Despite this plaintive plea for mercy from Labour’s Embra Cooncillors, the fact remains that the only way to get rid of the Council Tax is to get rid of Labour. Period.

Independence Dealt A Trump Card

Who’d have thunk it? Donald Trump, New York property developer extraordinaire and star of ‘The Apprentice’, has given his views on Scottish Independence to the Sunday Times. Amidst dire warnings from the Chancellor of ‘instability’ leading to a ‘flight of investors’ if anyone other than Labour ends up running Scotland post-May, the man behind a planned US$500m leisure investment in North-East Scotland has signaled that he would feel equally comfortable doing business in an independent Scotland:

“I think Scotland is an amazing place and the people are incredible’, says Trump. ‘ I think if they set their minds to do something, they can do whatever they want. The biggest people in New York are from Scotland. They are a tremendous success. Scotland will always be a success, whether it is independent or not independent.”

Whoops! There goes another rubber tree plant. However, the politics of fear and uncertainty remain to the fore. Edinburgh’s Ian Rankin, author of the Inspector Rebus novels, has spoken out in recent days against independence, on the grounds that he feels the Scots are ‘too chippy’ as a nation to make a go of it. He’s entitled to his view, but I find his ‘we’re not worthy’ argument a very strange one indeed. (That said, he does offer this today).

Scotland and her people, like any country on the planet, are not without their flaws and foibles. But I wonder what sort of ‘purity test’ of the national character, such as it exists, we would have to pass before Rankin would change his mind on this point. I’m assuming he doesn’t intend to include himself amongst those he deems to be too chippy to make a go of it, but amidst the barrage of statistics and claims driving the debate at present, it does seem a rather eccentric contribution to have made.

It’s almost like the ‘subsidised Scot’ argument. They must exist, because Labour and the unionist-minded press never tire of telling us they do. However, confront those making the argument, even amongst voters, and it is never they who are subsidised personally. Oh, no, it’s someone else who’s on the scrounge. They earn every penny and have worked hard for all they've got.

As they probably have, which makes tracking down the subsidised Scot an elusive business indeed. A prime example of the same argument was used on one of the Scotsman message boards today, where one Jeremiah claimed not to understand how the 2.5m Scots in work could ever be able to support the 2.5m Scots not in work (that’s presumably the young and the pensioners as well as the unemployed).

Well, I’ll stick my neck out here and suggest it would happen in much the same way as the 29m Britons in work manage to support the remaining 30m who are not. I’m willing to bet that said punter has never met this fabled subsidised Scot, any more than he or she has ever met their English or Welsh counterpart, who logically must also exist in similar numbers.

I’ll finish with this observation. I went out on Friday night and was quizzed at length by one of the company (an SNP-sceptic) about the current state of political play and on why I thought Scotland should be independent. In the end it was a case of ‘no sale’, but on the grounds that he just didn’t see what independence would do to change things for the better, rather that it was somehow difficult or unviable. A bit like Ian Rankin, but minus the chippiness argument.

That sort of view I can respect. I hadn’t gone out to the pub with the intention of converting anyone, but if I failed on this occasion, it was down to me and me alone – I’ll just have to do better with my pitch next time I get the chance. What puzzles me is why so many capable Scots, Ian Rankin included, seem to set a bar for Scotland that they would never dream of applying to any other nation on the face of the earth?

Vacancy - Proofreader Required

This is taken from a Lib Dem campaign freesheet in Penicuik:


I think this is even better than the leaflet they put out in the same seat back in 2001, which committed the Lib Dems to improving 'pubic transport'. Now, that would have been worth voting for...

(With thanks to Anastasia Beaumont-Bott for the pic)

Right for Scotland?

The right wing of Scottish politics seems agog at the prospects of the Scottish Tories withdrawing themselves from the UK Conservative party and going it alone. Fraser Nelson, he of the irritable vowel syndrome, appears to be acting as a conduit for the idea through the pages of the Spectator. Perhaps tellingly, no-one in the Scottish Tory hierarchy is running a mile from the notion.

I’ve blogged previously about my feelings on an independent Scottish Tory Party. While any such venture would play an important part in making Scottish independence a success, it’s something which I would have expected to happen after any vote for independence, rather than in advance. Nevertheless, I sense that this is all kite-flying at the moment and nothing more. If it's going to happen at all, it won't be until after May and until after Annabel Goldie has decided to spend more time with her petunias.

However, the perennial question of ‘independence for what?’ remains. The Strathclyde Commission, held after the 1997 wipeout, gave the Scottish Tories a set-up which allowed them considerably more autonomy from London than Labour, but they've conspicuously failed to use any of it. For that reason, even if they did cut adrift from the English Tories, it would still be the same people with the same tired old ideas trying to run the show, insisting that 'virtual' apron strings remain in place.

Although the Tories would still nominally be unionist under any such arrangement, administrative and policy independence would shoot right through that argument – after all, if you need independence from Westminster to run your party properly, why shouldn't Scotland have independence so the country can do the same? Nonetheless, if there’s anything in this story, it looks like the Scottish Tories might finally be being dragged kicking and screaming into the mainstream of modern Scottish political life.

However, you don't change the culture of a party overnight, so they’ll need to do much more than simply copy the Bavarian model to prove their independence from London. Otherwise, people will rightly conclude that the whole thing is just a cosmetic con trick, a bit like when Windscale was repackaged as Sellafield. Another hiding at the polls is just what the Tories need if any mood for change is to be suitably galvanised.

The Best Wee Numpty in the World ( updated)

I'm a bit behind some others with this, but who cares? It's times like this I wish I could play the guitar as well :-)

Press and Journal Lost At Sea

I finished today up on Dundee Law, the extinct volcano which towers over the city, giving magnificent views in every direction. Even high up, the mercury was reaching 20C (70F) in the early evening – a minor miracle for Scotland in early April.

The occasion was a flying visit by Alex Salmond, for a photo-opp to unveil the Tayside and Fife breakdown of a recent YouGov poll on the forthcoming Holyrood elections. Even allowing for the enhanced margin of error, it still puts the SNP the proverbial country mile ahead of every other party, including Labour, which once had this part of Scotland in its pocket. I’m not going to post the figures, but let’s just say tomorrow’s Courier should make for interesting reading!

The Courier’s north-eastern stablemate, the venerable Press & Journal, carried a frankly daft and febrile feature today based on a straw poll of local businesses. From a total of 21 responses, most of which represented nothing more than a polite refusal to become involved, the P&J claimed to have found 6 businessmen who had said that independence would represent ‘a social and economic disaster and a colossal backward step’.

Trouble was, most of the six had said nothing of the sort, with at least one complaint about the way their comments had been represented landing on the editor’s desk during the afternoon. Of the most outspoken, Maitland Mackie, the P&J did at least have the grace to point out that he had stood unsuccessfully as a Lib Dem against Mr Salmond as recently as 1999. However, the biggest belly-laugh came in the editorial, where they appeared to suggest equivalence between the business success of Mackie and that of George Mathewson, the former chairman of Edinburgh-based banking giant RBS who recently endorsed the SNP and independence.

Let me say that coming from a farming background myself, I have the utmost respect for the ice cream business Mackie has built up over the years. As the employer of 70+ people, he's without doubt a serious enough figure in his own right. However, surely comparing his achievements to Matthewson’s stewardship of RBS to take it to being the 5th largest bank in the world, really is taking things a bit far.

More New Links

I've added a few new links. On the SNP front, my good pals Chris Stephens and Anne McLaughlin have recently joined the small corner of the blogosphere that is forever Scotland, as have Lachie MacNeill and an unknown (to me at least) member of the party’s student wing, who goes under the moniker of ‘Waxing the Lyrical’.

A blog which I’ve dipped in and out of for a while is that written by Doctorvee, who is also a leading light in the Scottish Blogging Roundup. Elsewhere, Bill Cameron writes a good blog covering a wide range of subjects. Living between Scotland and Spain, he also intersperses his conservative-leaning political observations with some impressive photos from his travels.

Finally, on a more general note, two new Scottish election blogs have started, written by the respective political editors of BBC Scotland and Scottish Television, Brian Taylor and Bernard Ponsonby. While it will be interesting to read their thoughts as the campaign develops, I hope that they choose to run them as blogs rather than as diaries. As any party activist will tell you, the best people to drink with at any political conference are the journos. A wee bit of banter and indiscretion now and again helps keep the wheels moving!

Endorse... It Confuses People

I'm not usually too bothered about celeb political endorsements, but I'll make an exception for Banff quine Sandi Thom, who has announced that she'll be backing the SNP and Alex Salmond in May's election. As well as quite liking her and admiring the shrewd way she honed her craft and got herself signed in an industry full of wannabees, it also gives me a gratuitous opportunity to include a couple of pictures of her on my blog :-)

End Of Term

Today sees the end of the second term of the Scottish Parliament. With the Executive going into 'Purdah', Labour will no longer have access to the Scottish civil service, or have a legion of Executive press officers to highlight their triumphs and bury their mistakes. Instead, they'll have to rely on their own people and a campaign machine which seems increasingly creaky and rudderless.

There's a funny atmosphere about Holyrood today. Jack McConnell is turning in a shouty, beleaguered performance at FMQs, assailed from all sides over broken election promises, health, crime, council tax, nuclear power and the performance of devolution. His rants about the SNP seem even more heated and lacking in humour than usual. All told, his demeanor is not one of a man brimming with confidence about being returned to his position in May.

The next parliament seems set to be very different indeed. 12 MSPs are standing down of their own volition, but a wee glance at the polls suggests that there could be more than a few new faces about the place come May. Both The Times (yesterday) and the Daily Mail (today) have carried polls putting the SNP ahead of Labour, both in terms of support and likely seats in parliament. The solitary thread of comfort which Labour spokespeople have clung to for dear life has been the apparent fall in support for Independence, down from 50% plus earlier in the year to just 27%.

Proof that the Labour campaign is working at a certain level, perhaps? Well no, actually. The difference is in not just the question asked, but the number of questions asked. You see, when the question of 'Independence - yes or no?' is put, there's a roughly 50/50 split. However, throw the rather nebulous option of 'more powers' into the mix and unsurprisingly, the numbers change. In fact, we find that in addition to the 27% who want 'independence, nothing less', some 52% would like more powers, perhaps as a further step towards sovereignty.

Game, set and match for the union then, and vindication for the Lib Dem stance that there should be no referendum on independence? Again, no. No-one takes the trouble to set out what these 'more powers' might be - would they include full fiscal autonomy, for example? The right for Scottish Ministers to represent us in Europe? Control over broadcasting regulation? The simple fact of the matter is that no-one knows. You'd get as worthwhile an answer by replacing the question with one asking whether you are in favour of fluffy kittens and nice sunny days.

The Lib Dems justify their anti-referendum stance by citing such polling data and by highlighting their support for federalism. In this way, they argue that there can be a 'middle way' on the constitution, whereby Scotland gets more powers and can stay happily in the union. That would be an honourable position, if it weren’t for the fact that they've supported federalism for over a century, yet still don't have a viable plan on how to bring it about.

All they have in their locker is to call for powers which Westminster would have to cede, over which the Lib Dems would have no leverage. And let's be brutally honest here - the only leverage for getting the powers worth having will be a strong SNP vote in May. Westminster might cede more powers to Holyrood, but only if Independence looks like it will be on the cards and even then, as with devolution V1.0, only as little will be ceded as they think they can get away with in order to dissipate the SNP 'threat'.

This is where it gets interesting. With any referendum likely to come towards the end of a 4-year term, there will be ample opportunity for Westminster to make its play. However, the SNP has already set out a little shopping list of powers it would like for Holyrood, such as control over North Sea Revenues and that right to lead negotiations, such as over fishing, in Europe.

If it can be shown through the rejection of some fairly modest requests that further reform of the British State is either impossible or won't come until many years into the future, won’t that make voters more inclined than ever to demand a referendum on independence? And where would that leave the Lib Dems, other than on the wrong side of the argument?

Support for independence down? It all depends on the question you ask, as well as the number of questions you ask. Alex Salmond could be unwrapping the mint Viscounts at Lancaster House yet.

Strange Happenings at Holyrood Towers

The Scottish Parliament goes into dissolution this week, which means that from Thursday until after the elections, there will be no MSPs. Accordingly, every corridor in the MSP block is strewn with packing crates at the moment, while members decide what to throw out, and what to keep in case they find themselves re-elected.

All mundane stuff. So why, then, have the Solidarity staffers chosen to 'black out' the windows in their resource centre with binliners and sellotape, while they undertake this process? What on earth could they possibly be doing that they don't want the rest of us to see? Maybe more to the point, would we particularly care even if we did?

Guardian of My Concience? Not Today...

One of the advantages/drawbacks of my job is that most days, I've read all the Scottish newspapers worth reading by 11am. This leaves me with the problem of which one to buy at lunchtime. Usually, the Evening News wins out if I'm in Edinburgh. Today, however, I opted for the Guardian, which due to the amount of tedious crud in its pages I managed to get through at near flickbook speed. That said, 2 articles jumped out for long enough to tee me off.

The first was a feature in G2 on Whole Foods, a US food store chain which is about to open its first UK outlets. Now, I quite like food shopping in the US - just 10 minutes walking round somewhere like Harris Teeter shows up many of our own supermarkets. Whole Foods, though, is in a different league - a bit like a reasonably upmarket deli the size of a small supermarket. If they are going to be any like the ones in the US, then as far as I'm concerned, they can't get to Edinburgh fast enough.

Surely then, this is just sort of enterprise which would get your average Guardianista hugging themself with delight. But woe and alack, you will be horrified to learn from G2 that there is a dark side. Trade-offs between what consumers want and the high ideals the company started out with; frozen TV dinners for sale alongside the organic produce; happy employees but only because they get high pay(!).

I'm sure you get the picture. All that's missing in the critique is a particularly graphic description of a dark Satanic mill, even though its Satanicness or otherwise would only be measured in comparison with the ideals set for it by the über-green Birkenstock wearers of California. Anyway, I'm lucky to have an old-fashioned high street and the time to shop there, but in the absence of same, give me a Whole Foods any day of the week.

But today's prize for putting the cart before the horse goes to George Monbiot, who makes the frankly bonkers claim that biofuels are causing 'more harm than good'. Eh? Causing more harm than their mineral-based equivalents? Pull the other one...

Apparently, our demand for biofuels is contributing to deforestation, and will lead to farmers growing more crops geared towards biofuels instead of providing food for those without. At a certain level, the argument has appeal - an apocalyptic paradox that by doing good, you end up doing more harm. In truth, it's well suited to the messianic 'I know better than you lot' tone that he seems to have as his stock-in-trade.

But there's 2 big problems with this thesis. The first is that since there's no shortage of agricultural land in the world, there's no reason for anyone to lose out as a result of increasing biofuel production. The second is that by trying to make a causal link between issues like all deforestation and all biofuel production, he damns the very considerable levels of potential production which can take place on currently fallow land.

All in all, if you're feeling miserable, I can recommend today's Grauniad for being chock-full of the sort of self-flagelatory, ill-informed 'we're all doomed' prose guaranteed to keep you that way. If you're in a reasonable humour, though, then steer clear. It's a lovely day, after all, and life is short.

Labour Doesn't Know Jack - Official!

Sometimes, it never rains but it pours...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5PG16p-JLc

Zip-i-dee-doo-dah, Zip-i-dee-ay...

I've been in an exceptionally good mood today. There was a wee bit of a hangover following yesterday's post-match celebrations, but that was soon forgotten about. I've even managed to sail serenely past Lord George Robertson's latest shroud-waving drivellings in the Sunday Times about the SNP.

The reason for my good mood? Well, ever since my old car got taken away to see what could be done with it after my accident, my hallway has been strewn with the general detritus from the boot. Fed up of stepping round it for the last couple of weeks, I determined that today was going to be the day I'd start deciding what to keep and what to throw out.

Rewinding a week or so to when I actually bought the new car, the salesman offered to fit a CD autochanger to it for me at a cost of c. £300, an offer which I felt more than able to turn down at the time. So you can no doubt imagine my delight to find this morning, when putting my first aid kit under the passenger seat that, unbeknown to me, a CD autochanger had already been fitted to the car!

Did the salesman already know this and was trying to sneakily screw the £300 cost back out of me? I don't know and to be honest, I don't really care either. Normally when I look down the back of my car seats, all I ever find is loose change and fluff-covered polo mints. This was a very pleasant surprise, and coming in the week that the insurance cheque came through, it's a nice and unexpected coda to this particular drama!

None Of Their Business

Usually, this blog has quite a bit of admiration for the institution that is the Royal Bank of Scotland. Although I'm not a customer of theirs, through their sponsorships, expanding branch network, free cash machines and mobile banking, they play a role in the community which suggests to me that despite now being the 5th biggest bank in the world, they haven't forgotten the essential values which have helped make the company what it is today.

Today, though, I'm going to give them a well-deserved slap. This follows the news that some jumped-up 'executive', doubtless puffed up with his own sense of self-importance and desire to please those above him, has issued a tablet of stone memo 'reminding' staff that they could face disciplinary action if they do not get their monthly salaries paid into a Royal Bank account.

Now, I don't have too much of a problem with the idea that staff should show some commitment to the organisation they work for. Nor do I have any difficulty with the idea that if you want to benefit from some of the perks of working for a bank, like getting a cheaper mortgage, you need to toe the line and use their products. However, where I draw the line is when it is made compulsory to order purely personal affairs, which do not impede your ability to do your job, in such a way as to please the whims of management.

Despite being the most dynamic part of the Scottish economy, the financial services sector can still be a hotbed of reaction and old-fashioned attitudes. I still remember with bemusement the attitude held by local management at one employer where those working 8-4 were regarded as hard workers; 9-5ers were solid and dependable; while 10-6ers like me were idle, scrimshank malingerers. Flexitime, yes, but only if you use it to suit conventions. From another employer, I can remember horror stories from the past of staff being summonsed to get a dressing down from their line manager, simply because they hadn't paid their bank credit card bills in time.

Luckilly, data protection law and more enlightened employment practices mean that for the most part, these intrusive, paternalistic and ultimately self-defeating attitides have died out. Increasingly, as lifestyles change, there is a realisation that the only way to attract and retain the best staff is to be flexible in the benefits you provide as an employer, and to drop any intrusive aspirations of having social control over your staff outside of the working environment.

Quite frankly, this 'executive' has crossed a line and deserves to be dumped on from a great height for turning this into a mini-PR disaster for the bank. Ulitimately, where RBS employees choose to place their business is none of the RBS Management Team's damn business. On this occasion, the affected staff should tell the bank exactly where they can swipe their Cashline cards.

Mr Cock-Up Comes To Town!

On Monday, wee Jack was clenching his fist with fury at SNP plans to 'wreck' the union (which on closer inspection, just meant he wasn't happy that the SNP wanted to discuss things like getting more powers from Westminster). However, in today's Scottish Parliament Business Bulletin, a motion appeared in the name of the Scottish Executive, calling amongst other things for more powers for Holyrood.

Embarrassing enough, you might think. However, not content with shooting a hole clean through one foot, this afternoon, they took careful aim at the other, then fired by amending the part of the motion which called for more powers for Holyrood 'where appropriate'.

Since it was an Executive motion, Jack would have known all about it at the time he was in full rant mode against the SNP (wouldn't he?), and presumably, was therefore in favour. He can therefore stand accused of rank hypocrisy, but now that it's been pulled, we can surely add rank cowardice to the charge sheet as well.

Who at Westminster, do we think, might have pulled his strings to get the motion amended? Where does Labour really stand on more powers for Holyrood? Who on earth is running their campaign - Gordon Brown, or Jack McConnell? And perhaps more importantly, will Scottish voters manage to emerge from their convulsions of laughter in time to cast their votes in May?

You couldn't make it up. Would the last strategist to leave the Labour party please turn out the lights? :-)

I Always Know When You're Lying, Darling

Alasdair Darling has some neck on him. Interviewed as part of BBC Scotland's post-budget coverage, he had the effrontery to claim that Labour was trying to cut income tax by 2p, while the SNP wanted to increase it by 3p.

What he forgot to mention, of course, was that under Labour you would continue to pay Council Tax, whereas under the SNP, you wouldn't pay a penny. Expect more similar Labour untruths between now and polling day.

Another Lord a' Leaping

The indescretion! Lord Turnbull, a former Head of the Civil Service who spent 4 years at the Treasury as a Permemant Secretary, has chosen to lift the lid on the M.O. of the Chancellor. And, comble de malchance!, has done so just in time to spoil Brown's budget speech tomorrow.

Brown's Treasury, we are told, surprises by "the more or less complete contempt with which other colleagues are held". Brown himself takes a "very cynical view of mankind and his colleagues"; does not allow "serious discussion" with colleagues; and in enhancing Treasury control over domestic policy, had done so "at the expense of any government cohesion and any assessment of strategy".

The Chancellor also has a "Macavity quality - he is not there when there is dirty work to be done". He also uses denial of information as an instrument of power. And just to make sure we all get the message, Turnbull goes on to conclude that "You can choose whether you are impressed or depressed by that, but you cannot help admire the sheer Stalinist ruthlessness of it all."

It's a devastating critique, all the closer to the bone for its echoes of what Brown's opponents in the Labour Party have been saying about him for years. Given Milliband's reluctance to challenge for the leadership , perhaps Blair's favoured successor really is the man charged with responding to, rather than delivering, tomorrow's budget speech.

Conference Dispatch - Sunday

Rather surprisingly for being the morning after the night before, delegates seem unusually invigorated today. However, that might have something to do with the gale force winds and near-horizontal hail which scoured us all as we arrived at the conference this morning. A few intrepid smokers are huddled outside, looking thoroughly miserable as they get blasted by the elements – I suspect they may not be the most enthusiastic of attendees at this afternoon's health debate!

The papers seemed mostly favourable for the SNP this morning, a few amusing brown-trousers-and-bicycle-clips pieces aside. The Sunday Herald has, disgracefully in my view, tried to stir it up over Brian Souter's donation, despite the fact he got no favours at all from the SNP during the repeal of Section 2A. What inference are we being invited to draw? That the SNP is tainted, while Labour and the Lib Dems, who started the Section 2A repeal process then ran and hid from the ensuing brouhaha instead of making their case, are worthy of our continued support? Eejits.

The main event this afternoon will be Alex Salmond's speech. It's being spun that he will be unveiling the SNP's proposals for government, but it wouldn't be a Salmond speech if he didn't have at least one rabbit to pull out of the hat. The actual conference hall is a bit too small for all of the people here, so I suspect I'll end up watching it on the TV in the breakout area instead.

Overall, there seems to be a sense, even amongst the most hardened of SNP-sceptics in the media, that this might really be it. The polls are all good for the SNP; the party is winning big-hitting endorsements left, right and centre; while Labour are left to fight a relentlessly negative campaign, torn tactically between wee Jack's gang on one side and the 'Brownies' on the other. I have to confess that the grim faces of Labourite journos Angus MacLeod of the Times and Magnus Gardham of the Record have been an absolute joy to behold! 46 days and counting...

Conference Dispatch

I've made it through to Govan, and despite the greyness of the skies and the awfulness of the result from Ibrox, there's a lot of cheer to be had at the SNP conference in the Glasgow Science Centre. The conference, already on a high thanks to yesterday's endorsement by George Mathewson, has been positively buzzing with the news that long-time supporter Brian Souter has donated £500,000 to the SNP election fund.

This matters on two levels. First, it represents yet another endorsement of the SNP's policy stance, albeit from a long-standing and high-profile supporter of the party. Perhaps as significantly, though, it will put the SNP on an equal financial footing with a Labour campaign which will be heavily bankrolled from London.

There's more conference business tomorrow, and rumours have persisted all day of yet another big announcement to come. However, it wasn't in Nicola Sturgeon's generally well-received address to conference, so if it's coming we'll have to wait now until tomorrow to find out if there's anything in it.

Sadly, there'll be none of the usual après-conference shenanigans for me, since rather foolishly I've already taken a gig to play at a wedding tonight in Fintry. Easy enough to get to from Glasgow, of course, but with a midnight finish I'll be lucky to see my bed by 2am. Nothing unusual for an SNP conference, I'll grant you, but tomorrow will doubtless be spent looking like a half-shut knife and facing allegations from friends of drunken excesses which won't have taken place. The joys...

By George!

Sir George Mathewson, former Chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland and the old Scottish Development Agency, has on today's Scotsman letters page come out in favour of independence and an SNP-led government post-May. It's a timely contribution, since Labour, a bit like a child which has learned a new word, has discovered that a lot of Scots work in financial services and now opts to try and tell them at every opportunity that their jobs would somehow be 'at risk'.

Total garbage of course, and Mathewson, who transformed RBS from a struggling local outfit to the 5th largest bank in the world, is clearly having none of it. I can't wait to see how Labour are going to try and spin this one!

'There are several reasons why I shall vote SNP at the forthcoming Scottish election, the foremost of which is that I believe the SNP offers Scotland the best chance of escaping from the dependency culture that is currently all-pervasive at every level in Scottish life.

'I do not share the fear of independence which is currently being fostered by those who have most to lose by a change in the status quo and those who see Scotland as a source of safe seats, thus guaranteeing their rule over the United Kingdom.

'In addition, comments that have been made on access to the English market are patently absurd. Currently, a huge proportion of the English financial services market is supplied by companies in the United States, in Holland, Germany, Ireland, etc.

'Globalisation is here and Scottish companies have embraced it and indeed have benefited from it.

'Finally, our votes will choose the new First Minister of a parliament which has consistently disappointed since its creation, partially due to the lack of high-quality leadership. The outstanding candidate must be the SNP leader, Alex Salmond'.

(SIR) GEORGE MATHEWSON, Ballintrium, Perthshire

UPDATE: We didn’t have long to wait. Blair has resorted to claiming that RBS is somehow not a ‘real business’, and that Mathewson’s contribution is ‘self indulgent and absurd’. What a deluded fool Blair has become.

£9bn... Do I Hear £12bn?

Having just come out of a horrific accountancy exam this lunchtime, I'm loathe to start talking about numbers. However, with today's confirmation that the official cost of the 2012 London Olympics has hit £9.3bn, I'm afraid I can't help myself.

When I last blogged on this and mentioned a figure of £10bn, the official cost was still £2.4bn. Nonetheless, the following day (21 November 2006), it was announced that costs had increased by £900m to £3.3bn.

Appearing before the Commons culture, media and sport committee, Minister Tessa Jowell told us that this rise was partly due to a doubling in the price of steel, along with a decision to revise transport costs to take into account inflation (!) in the years to 2012. It also included an extra £400m to pay "delivery partner" CLM to make sure the games came in on budget and on time.

Jowell duly gave assurances to the committee that 'This project is under control. Cost control is a daily part of the rigour'. Yet just four short months later, another £6bn has been added to a figure which, according to Jowell, already represented a project 'under control'.

This is just one project amongst many big infrastructure projects due to come 'on-line' around 2012, including the Edinburgh Airport Rail Link, an Edinburgh Tram Network and the start of a replacement Forth Road Bridge. Since the date of the Olympics can't move, the only variable that can be altered is the amount of money we throw at the project, doubtless to the detriment of the costs on other projects - and don't the contractors just know it.

'Dripping roast' doesn't even begin to describe the bonanza that awaits the construction industry at our expense. Most public sector projects seem to run over budget and behind schedule, but the shower of blisteringly incompetent Panglossians we have in government right now seem determined to set some new kind of Olympic record of their own. Quite frankly, I wouldn't even trust them to sell union jack tat to spectators outside the games.

Keeping Hold Of Nurse

I enjoyed this wonderfully mischievous letter in today's Herald from SNP MEP Alyn Smith. I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories, but even Scottish Tories would have to admit there might be a certain logic to this one.

Sir,

If noted intellect David Mundell MP sees fit to grade his Tory MSP colleagues then the Tory gene pool must be gey shallow right enough. More of a paddling pool, or perhaps a gene puddle.

But am I being too cynical in wondering why a paper that has existed since the summer was only leaked just before their turmoil-by-the-Tay on the eve of David Cameron's speech to the hushed faithful?

I spend time in Brussels, and this week in Strasbourg, talking to a number of colleagues, from all parties. The younger English Tories are almost unanimous in their view, at least in the bars and coffee lounges, that it is only a matter of time until the Tory mother-ship cuts the Scottish Tories loose as a bad job. They bear Scotland no particular ill-will, if they think of us at all, seeing us as the "near abroad", a convivial place to hunt and fish, and the source of the battalion of knuckle-draggers padding out the Labour benches at Westminster.

They see their party soft-pedalling on the Barnett Formula, the West Lothian Question and the, as they mistakenly see it, squillions in subsidies we ungrateful jocks fleece from the English taxpayer, not to mention the Scottish Raj running their government. They think their party in England could go after these issues harder without the need to shield their Scots colleagues from friendly fire. They view independence as a matter for us to decide and, increasingly, as a potential advantage for them.

So, is this leak in fact the opening salvo of covert friendly fire from Tory Central Office? If so, how should the Scots Tories react? I would have loved to be a fly on the wall as David Cameron headed back south having brought his cheery vacuity north to be greeted by Bill Walker and views more at home in Jurassic Park than Cool Britannia. Surely he must be tempted along the same lines as he looks towards his next Westminster election, probably facing the self-proclaimed Great Briton but irredeemably Scottish Gordon Brown.

I know a number of decent Scots Tories, and if it comes to it there are competent ones as well, looking to get a decent result for the people of Scotland, same as most Scots politicians of other parties. But is the party as a whole going to allow misty-eyed illogical sentiment for the Union to destroy them? Not least when their own UK party views them increasingly as at worst a hindrance and at best a slightly embarrassing mad old Scots Auntie Morag who sits at family gatherings dribbling into her soup muttering about the Treaty of Union?

In the European Parliament, there are dozens of modern centre-right political parties of the Christian Democrat model from large countries and small. Would the Scots Tories not do rather better to put sentiment to one side and embrace independence? The Tories right now are a de facto anti-Scottish party, so the SNP currently has a policy of not entering into coalitions with them. If they wised up they could reinvent themselves as the only party promoting a centre-right, pro-Scottish agenda. I disagree with the "centre right" but I'd work with them on the "pro-Scottish".

That does, of course, presume that they will change, though I suspect the change is going to be forced upon them anyway. Something for them to think about. Perhaps David Mundell could write us a memo?

Alyn Smith MEP, SNP Europe spokesman, European Parliament, Strasbourg.

Train Kept A Rollin'

I'm on my way to London just now to spend a couple of days out on the lash with an old friend of mine from Scottish Widows. We both bailed out at around the same time, myself to go and work for the SNP, while Rich moved to London to be a mortgage broker. As he's just bought a house in deepest, darkest Beckenham, I'm guessing he did the right thing by moving on when he did too!

The idea was that we would go to see the England-Scotland women's international, which was due to be played on Sunday at Wembley. Although the English FA got the keys to the stadium today, the game has been moved to Wycombe Wanderers ground instead, which would be a bit of a hassle for us to get to. For that reason, the girls will just have to do without our support while we go out and get trashed instead. Ochone, ochone etc.

Anyway, I'm on the train in a first-class carriage, getting free coffee refills; getting online thanks to GNER's free wi-fi; no-one caring if I've got a set of nail clippers or a bottle of water in my bag; sitting in a big comfy seat with plenty room to stretch my legs; and in less than 3 hours time will be delivered slap-bang into the centre of London and all for under £40. I'm racking my brains just now to come up with a good reason why I used to always fly down, but right now I'm damned if I can think of one.

Get the Edinburgh-London rail journey time down below 4 hours, and I can guarantee that the airlines and their shareholders will start cacking themselves. Now, remind me again, why was it again that former British Airways Chief Executive Rod Eddington thought high-speed rail travel was such a non starter? All answers on the back of an airline boarding pass, please, to the usual address.

With friends like these...

The capacity of the Scottish Tories to self-destruct never ceases to amaze. After the wipe-out of 1997; David McLetchie's little confusions over expenses; Annabell Goldie's reluctant leadership and persistant attempts by a grassroots minority to throw the current MSP group overboard; it was difficult, although by no means impossible, to see how they could slip any further.

With an election coming up, the party high-heidyins must have been praying that everyone would just stick to the script and stay gaffe-free until polling day. The last person they would have been expecting to pull the plug on their campaign would have been Shadow Scottish Secretary, David Mundell MP. Alas, on the eve of their Scottish Conference, the Daily Record (I feel nauseous linking to this) has obtained a memo sent by Mundell to party leader David Cameron, which contains a damning assessment of his erstwhile Holyrood colleagues.

According to Mundell, the MSP group suffers from a "simple lack of thinkers". They are 'incapable of coming up with new policies', while "there are more obvious problems than solutions emanating from Scotland from a party point of view." The replacement of Scottish party chairman Peter Duncan should be an "immediate priority". And while "key personnel need to be identified to take on strategic roles...nobody obviously comes to mind".

With friends like these... there are conflicting views amongst Tory bloggers, with Ian Dale supportive, while Conservative Home demands his head on a stick. I think if I were a Tory activist, though, I'd be arranging my holidays to coincide with the elections so I could be as far away as possible from the impending carnage in May.

There's a place for a party of the centre-right in Scotland - but the prospects of anyone being able to hew it from the rotten timbers of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party now look not so much slim as positively skeletal. Independence and cutting the apron strings to the party in London must now be their only hope for recovery.

UPDATE - Widespread praise in the canteen for Annabell Goldie's riposte to Jack McConnell's use of the above memo at First Minister's Questions. 'At least, First Minister, my party's internal memos don't end up being scrutinised by Scotland Yard'.

Splat! Who said that Holyrood had banned bloodsports? :-)

Age Shall Not Weary Him

'What is the point of Menzies Campbell?', is a question with which I've been wrestling for quite a while now. In many ways, it's a question I never thought I'd ever be asking myself, since I'd long had a kind of sneaking regard for him. Sure, whenever matters SNP reared their head, I'd always found his knee-jerk patrician sniffiness to be absolutely insufferable. Otherwise, though, he earned my respect for both looking and sounding like a thoroughly competent MP who knew exactly what he was talking about.

I see in retrospect that mine was quite a rose-tinted view. That sure-footedness, demonstrated in matters of home and international affairs, has never quite been there when it comes to the equally important arenas of economic, health and education policy. In fact, it seems that the very qualities that made him appear so well cut out to be a Home or Foreign Secretary - his dispassionate aloofness and cultivated appearance of somehow being above the vulgar posturing of lesser mortals - are the very same qualities which are now rendering his stewardship of the Lib Dems such a becalmed and uninspiring affair.

Oddly, he seems to have diminished in stature since assuming the Lib Dem leadership. His perceived lack of support for Charles Kennedy tainted him from the start, as did his many fluffed appearances at Prime Minister's Questions. But never mind the recent fuss about whether he'd dump PR to get into government with Labour. To me, it is his apparent inability to connect with voters or to articulate any kind of coherent policy agenda, which should be causing the most discontent in Lib Dem ranks just now.

They are dropping, slowly but surely, in the polls. Where people liked Charles Kennedy even if they didn't necessarily respect him, Campbell seems to suffer from the reverse. Concerns about his age are raised, to which he now responds with an unbecoming prickliness. Watching him try to address this irrelevant jibe is becoming an increasingly painful sight. Like Gordon Brown trying to convince Middle England that he would make a good Prime Minister, the more Campbell tries to stress his youthfulness, the less it convinces.

Let's be clear, his age is largely irrelevant if we regard it as being an attitude of mind rather than a physical characteristic. In fact, I get the feeling that Campbell was probably middle-aged by his early twenties. And as one of the many politicos spawned by the Glasgow University Union Debating Society in the 1950s, it would have been surprising if he'd turned out any other way.

For all his protestations of having grown up in a Glasgow tenement, Campbell is a politician from the upper-middle classes, imbibed with a paternalistic and slightly patronising sense of noblesse oblige. But what once reassured about Campbell now just grates. And it is this, I think, which is what is hampering him and his party, rather than any questions about age. Like Gordon Brown, a section of voters has decided that they don’t particularly like him. And while voters cite Brown’s ‘Scottishness’ as being his prime draw-back (something which doesn’t seem to affect John Reid), it is Campbell’s age which is being held against him.

Highlighting the most obvious perceived flaw of someone we dislike is an instinct we develop in the playground. It might not be fair and it might be as base as it gets, but as Neil Kinnock, William Hague and Iain Duncan Smith all found out, if the voters won’t take to you then electorally-speaking, both you and your party are toast.

The Lib Dems, while often confounding the pundits, have for the past while seemed like a party in search of a role. The charisma of a Paddy Ashdown or a Charles Kennedy has always in the past allowed them to escape the scrutiny they deserved for being all things to all people. With a revitalised Tory Party in England under David Cameron, also no slouch at appearing to be all things to all people, the days of the Lib Dems being able to hoover up the votes of the disenchanted now look to be numbered.

R.I.P.

Well, I phoned the insurance company this morning and regrettably, my car is going to cost too much for them to fix. It was still driveable, though, so maybe somebody might be able to put it back on the road. Hopefully it's not for the scapyard quite yet, and someone else might be able to get the good of it.

It's a nuisance, because the car was reliable, comfortable and I'd planned to hang on to it for at least another year. Anyway, that's all out the window now, and since my courtesy car is due to return as soon as the cheque arrives, it was out for a piece of unscheduled car hunting this lunchtime.

I've fancied getting a poor man’s Volkswagen Skoda turbo-diesel ever since I got a shot of my cousin's partner's one last year (taxi drivers seem to rate them too, which must count for something). The one I was after seems to be in short supply just now, but luckily, the garage down the road had a pre-registered one on the forecourt with just 27 miles on the clock.

Anyway, after taking it out for a blast with the salesman, we completed the paperwork and as of Monday, it will be mine, as, sadly, will be the paying of it for the next five years - ouch. It should be a lot more economical than my old car, mind, but since it's quite a bit smaller I suppose I'm going to have to learn to keep a boot tidy again!

And As If By Magic...

Once more, Holyroodbelle is first off the mark with a sneak preview of Labour's latest campaign poster :-)

Scorching the Earth

Well, at least we can't say we weren't warned...

McConnell Starts Dirty War

"There is nothing that Labour can say that will change peoples' minds about Labour. There is no point in having a positive campaign because it doesn't wash. There isn't a bit of evidence to suggest that going positive will make any difference. They don't know Jack and they don't like Labour." - Labour Campaign Source.

Sir Menzies hits out at opponents

The Liberal Democrat leader questions Gordon Brown's "courage" to lead and attacks David Cameron.

So there you have it. Since Labour and the Lib Dems (the original Labour saving device?) have little good to say for themselves, they'll try and scare people away from their opponents; play the man rather than the ball at each opportunity; drive down the turnout and then hope for the best. Anyone fancy a sweep on how long it is before Lakshmi Mittal is paying for posters round Scotland of Alex Salmond with 'demon eyes'?

UPDATE - just found this excellent post by Will Patterson, saying much the same as me, but with far more eloquence than I feel like attempting just now. Read and enjoy.

Legal Weasels

I've just had a 'courtesy call' from the legal team attached to my car insurers, following my accident at the start of the week. They asked me how I was, to which I answered "fine". "Are you sure?", they then asked, "no aches or pains or anything? Because we can get you examined".

"Quite sure", I said, before joking that I had no plans to sue anyone over the accident if that was what they meant. And without so much as a pause for breath, the caller went 'OK Mr Thomson I'll just put that on your notes thanks for your time goodbye', and hung up.

I know they're on my side, but even so, what a bunch of ambulance-chasing, unethical weasels! How many folk are now pursuing claims for damages, on the grounds of non-specific back and neck pain 'resulting' from minor car accidents, I wonder? And how many settlements are made out of court, not becuase of the merits of the case, but because it's the cheapest way to make it go away?

'Courtesy' call my foot. Grrrrrr.

Worth a Laugh

This is good. Well worth a look.

WTF?

Can anyone explain to me what business Network Rail, an effective state monopoly masquerading as a private company, has in donating any money at all to the regional franchise of the governing party?

Scottish Labour

Network Rail Ltd status: Company
company reg no: 04402220 40 Melton Street, London NW1 2EE
28/02/06 £ 5,000.00

Scottish Labour

Network Rail Ltd status: Company
company reg no: 04402220 40 Melton Street, London NW1 2EE
31/12/06 £ 6,000.00

Good News Travels Fast

Rather irritatingly, Tory über-blogger Ian Dale, has scooped us all with details of a sensational poll in tomorrow’s Scotsman (even more so since he appears to be on a jolly to Washington DC right now!). In figures unprecedented this close to an election, it would seem that the SNP has a 5-point lead over Labour for Holyrood in the constituency vote and a 4-point lead in the regional ballot.

It looks like the wheels are coming off the Labour campaign, since this poll won’t take account of Health Minister Andy Kerr announcing a probe in to the alleged manipulation of NHS waiting lists. Neither will it have been able to digest the astonishing news that senior Labour aide, Stephen Lawther, had quit his post following clashes with colleagues over tactics and presentation. And with Jack McConnell providing such visible leadership…

The polls have been remarkably consistent of late, agreeing that the SNP is ahead, even if there’s some debate about the magnitude. And unless far more complex moves are afoot, this apparent swing to the SNP looks like having one of two possible explanations. Neither, it has to be said, looks particularly good for Labour.

The first explanation is that traditional independence-supporting Labour voters might be starting to come over to the SNP, thus threatening to tip the balance in many marginal central-belt seats. Alternatively and perhaps more worryingly for Labour, if these voters are staying loyal, perhaps it is floating voters who don’t necessarily want independence, that are now looking for an SNP government.

Neither group looks like particularly fertile ground for Labour’s current nat-bashing strategy, described by one party stalwart at the weekend as being ‘The worst campaign I have been involved in for over 20 years”. While I’d never underestimate the power of the Labour establishment in Scotland to pull out the stops for the party, even that might not be enough to save them this time.

The SNP deserves a chance to show what it can do in office. I hope these figures can be taken as a sign that it might be about to happen.

Another Competition

After yesterday's unplanned excitement, it looks like things might be getting underway. My car should be collected tomorrow morning by the garage, and a courtesy car delivered around the same time. Fingers crossed, then.

I've spent a lot of time on the phone this morning, being entertained, if that's the word, by the music they play when you're on hold. And while I was waiting I thought, why not have another competition, this time to find the least appropriate piece of music to play while someone's on hold to their car insurance company?

I can't promise a prize this time, since this could see me a few hundred quid out of pocket for a week or two. However, I will start things rolling with some suggestions of my own. There's 'Crash! Boom! Bang!' by Roxette; 'Hazard' by Richard Marx; and 'Into the Valley' by, ahem, The Skids.

I'm sure there's loads more, and of a higher quality than I've managed. Anyway, the comments section quivers with anticipation...

Call Centre Limbo Beckons...

I had an accident in the car on the way home from Dundee tonight. Nothing serious, no-one injured, but the poor girl in the other car was pretty shaken up by it.

It happened in Perth, on the north side of the river, just before you turn over the bridge to head south. Basically, I was coming up the inside of a queue of traffic, when someone turning right into a side entrance pulled right across in front of me. There was no time to stop and so I went straight into the side of her car at 90 degrees.

Luckily, there were witnesses and since she pulled in front of me without a clear view of what was coming, the insurance claim should be cut and dried. I was going fairly slowly, so no airbags were harmed, although since the crumple zone did its job so efficiently, it did mean that the car limped home looking more like an accordion than anything else.

Anyway, on getting home tonight, I dug out my policy and phoned to set the claim in motion. However, the phone number put me through to a different part of the insurance company, who then transferred me to customer services. They then gave me another number which, you've guessed it, put me straight back through to the first number.

Not really what I wanted to hear, as I'm sure you can imagine. And since they shut in 15 minutes, it hardly seems worth trying to fight through the system tonight. Why do I get the feeling that the rest of the week is just going to end up as one big massive hassle? >:-/

Lazy Sunday - Part I

Some interesting stuff in this morning's Sundays. The Sunday Herald splashes with news that one of Jack McConnell's key election strategists has quit, supposedly after having clashed with senior Labour colleagues over tactics and presentation. Now, regular readers will know that I don't like to intrude into private grief (much), but surely eyebrows will be raised at the quote from the 'senior Labour insider' that “This is the worst campaign I have been involved in for over 20 years”.

Regardless as to whether it's the conflict story which is true or the official line that 'family reasons' are behind his departure, there's one thing of which we can be completely sure: no-one in their right mind would be happy about having such a senior aide quit just a matter of weeks before an election. And just how hacked off would you have to be in your job to walk out and leave your chosen party in the lurch like that?

Next up is the Sunday Times (when are they going to put their Scottish content back on line, BTW?), which carries a story about how Rory Bremner, posing as Gordon Brown, managed to trick Margaret Beckett into making some indiscreet comments over the phone about her cabinet colleagues. The usual disclaimers apply here – shameful intrusion of privacy, sneaky and underhand blah, blah, blah – but I still found it incredibly funny in spite of that. And I have to admit, Beckett's reported response of 'Oh f***' when she found out about the con, hasn't made it any easier for me to regain my composure...

Of more significance are the lead stories on page 2, where Scottish Power, HBOS and the Edrington Group are 'understood to be furious over the [CBI] decision to challenge the SNP over its economic plans'. This refers to a series of 11 questions posed by the CBI, an early draft of which was leaked to the SNP. The SNP responded direct to each CBI council member, but in spite of that, the leadership took the decision to publish the questions anyway, before screeching that the SNP weren't answering the questions and that Alex Salmond was somehow refusing to meet with them.

Leaving aside the sheer mendacity of the CBI leadership tactics and the remarkable similarity in language between the questions and many recent Labour press releases, a better theatrical strop you couldn't have found outside the pantomime season. But will the people be much wiser as a result? I doubt it, somehow.

Thank goodness, then, for Bill Samuel, former senior corporate adviser to the Bank of Scotland and property investor, who not content with rescinding his former anti-home rule views, has made a £25,000 donation to the SNP and written a powerful article on p17 of the ST, where he sets out why he feels independence is the only way to address a falling population and low growth rate. And for good measure, he accuses Labour of having delivered “mediocre, lacklustre management”, while describing Alex Salmond as “a leader of real vision”.

SoS has got hold of a US government memo in which senior political figures spoke prior to the 1999 election of their concerns that the Scots wanted to be independent in the long-term, and that doubts amongst the Scottish voters as to Labour's good intentions meant that the SNP was well placed to do a number on the party. The language is vivid, and all the more striking when you see the people quoted. Go take a read, and compare and contrast with what they said in public at the time!

And finally, Mungo Mackay's diary entry for Friday has a familiar ring to it. Should I ask them for royalties? Or maybe even a job? :-)

Lazy Sunday - Part II

One of my favourite Sunday vices is to head down to Stockbridge, and seek out a cafe in which to spend the afternoon leafing idly through the papers. It's often hit and miss whether I can find somewhere with a seat, but it's been harder than usual today, thanks to the 'unforseen circumstances' which have kept Maison Hector closed.

It's clear that my long-held idler approach to Sunday is becoming increasingly popular in this part of town. And despite the ubiquitous Starbucks and Café Nero, it seems to me that there's plenty more room in the market for coffee and brunch-type places here.

My two favourite shops in Stockbridge when I was a kid were Duncanson's pawn shop (long since moved upmarket to Queen St), and the Stockbridge Bookshop. Sadly, the bookshop is now closed, but it does mean that some excellent window fronted premises are now for let...

Put in a decent coffee machine, some nice seats, tables at a height comfortable enough to read, eat and use a laptop at; install a wi-fi connection, find a decent patissier, learn how to do eggs benedict properly, and I can guarantee you'll be stowed out every weekend. I would if I had the spare cash, but I don't. Are there any business people out there with an urge to have their own little slice of Edinburgh café culture?

Some New Links

I've updated the links section to include some of the blogs and sites which have caught my attention recently.

First for a mention is my former SNP HQ colleague Julie Hepburn, wife of SNP Cumbernauld & Kilsyth Candidate, Jamie. I particularly enjoyed her demolition of the chancers of the SSCUP, but the most interesting thing will be to compare and contrast how the two blog about the run-in to the election and its aftermath.

Next up are Clairwil, Kevin Williamson, The Flying Rodent and Scotswahey!, while 1820 - Rise Like Lions and SNP Tactical Voting are also worth a look.

Finally, I'm adding a link to a new site called You Scotland, which bills itself as being "about the people of 21st-century Scotland taking power for ourselves, reclaiming the Home Rule agenda from a Scottish establishment that has so patently failed".

Sounds promising, although it doesn't seem to be much more than a glorified debating forum at the moment. But am I alone in thinking that the idea there's somehow a mass 'collective will' out there, ignored by politicians, but which can be brought to bear by a website, is really keech of the highest order? It all sounds too much like the fraudulant rhetoric of the 'independent' or the 'anti-politician politician' for my liking. 'Vote for me and I'll consult and then do whatever you want'. Aye, right.

Maybe this is how it needs to pitch itself to get attention from Scotland's web community. However, if it manages to get people thinking about their collective democratic responsibilities as well as getting folk to yell about the hot button issues of the day, those behind You Scotland will deserve the thanks of us all. I wish it well.

Question Time - Have You Seen This Man?

Question Time was enjoyable last night if you are a Nat. Poor George Foulkes was awful, making a fool of himself at one point by accusing the SNP of 'xenophobia' ( S&I passim), just seconds before he slated Alex Salmond for being 'London based'. Oops...

Nicol Stephen started promisingly enough, but he never seems to know when to shut up. In the end, vile self took over to turn in a waffly and forgettable performance. Annabel Goldie started quietly but came into it later, scoring points off of George Foulkes over crime (but did she really mean to say that Independence was 'not a priority'? - wow). Meanwhile, Alex Salmond was effective, winning the audience over early on and, maybe surprisingly in view of the red rag tendencies of wee George, kept the interruptions to a minimum.

But the star for me was Hardeep Singh Kohli. Not for him the usual celeb panellist cop out of regurgitating for each answer some variation on the theme of 'why can't we all be nice to eachother and have the politicians work together?'. He managed to be truculent, impassioned, thoughtful, honest, respectful and funny, often at times in the same sentance. He even got away with responding to the Edinburgh congestion charge debate by declaring 'I'm from Glasgow - I don't care', and lived to tell the tale! A fine performance - well done, sir.

And nice to see someone in the audience point out that McConnell had once more bailed out of a debate with Alex Salmond, leaving an unelected peer in his place. Wee George was left to splutter away about planted questions... rule number one, George - even if it is a planted question, you still answer it gracefully, even if you don't particularly see why on earth you should!

Jack Posted Missing. Again.

Question Time comes tonight from Edinburgh. All the main Scottish party leaders will be there, with the exception of First Minister Jack McConnell. Instead, Labour has decided to send along no-hope list candidate and serial bluster-merchant Lord George Foulkes.

Notoriously, Have I Got News for You, on being stood up once by Roy Hattersley, replaced him on the panel with a tub of lard. Maybe the Question Time team should have considered, oh, hang on a minute…