Precisely

Amen to this.


Lesley Riddoch: Mock Nordics if you like, but they are survivors

The Scotsman - Published Date: 13 October 2008

LITTLE countries have come under suspicion since Iceland's banks went belly-up. Geir Haarde, the prime minister, enraged Britain by suggesting foreign investments would not be protected. And though the war of words has abated with Haarde's assurance that "we will honour our obligations", the damage to Iceland's reputation has been done.

No-one came to bail out the Icelanders – quite the opposite. Clearly no-one in Britain ever believed that a country of 316,000 souls could possibly produce firms like Baugur whose rampant expansion bought over half the British high street. At least not without paying a terrible price. Iceland will pay for it.

But is Iceland also being made to pay for its inclusion in Alex Salmond's arc of prosperity – the ring of small, northern seafaring states whose prosperity, according to the First Minister, arises directly from their independent status?

Opposition politicians and commentators have used the economic woes of Reykjavik to fire a salvo across SNP bows – whaur's your arc of prosperity noo?

Without Big Brother Britain to bail out Scottish banks, they argue, an independent Scotland would now be in economic meltdown just like lonely, little Iceland.

Indeed, British shoppers are boycotting Iceland grocery stores in protest at the threatened loss of charity, council and individual savings – in a sad echo of the confused attack on a paediatrician's office during an anti-paedophile campaign.

Ironically, Icelanders would be unlikely to make such mistakes. Blessed with the highest rates of literacy in the world, and the freedom to opt for plain Icelandic rather than archaic Latin in their public world, this part of the so-called arc of prosperity has not only enjoyed financial success. In May of this year the Economist Intelligence Unit named Iceland the world's most peaceful place based on the absence of an army and the lowest ratio of citizens in jail. The UN Human Development Index, makes Iceland the world's most developed country (male life expectancy at 81 is the highest in the world) and one of the most egalitarian (they read more books per capita).

Iceland's long been described as the "bumble-bee" economy – no-one knows how it flies – and yet its population is young and rising.

So Iceland is a success story on many levels – not just the financial one over which so many crocodile tears are currently being shed.

And anyway, one country's failed banking system doth not a failed arc make. How have the other small countries in the arc of prosperity been doing? Actually, not too bad.

In fact, the British government appears to have used the Nordic bank nationalisations of the 1990s as a model for its own present banking bail-out. The Nordic crisis, in the early Nineties, was sparked by a property boom, deregulation of financial services and the economic crisis in neighbouring Russia. Norway took full control of two of the country's top four banks – wiping out shareholders, and purging senior management. In Sweden, the government also took control of failed banks and created a "bad bank" for toxic assets.

Nordic banks have since been nursed back to health and assets sold when valuations improved. According to Steinar Juel, chief economist at Nordea, Scandinavia's biggest bank: "It was very, very painful, (but] taxpayers, in general, did well. All the money governments spent, they got back again."

How are the countries at the heart of the arc of prosperity faring today?

Compared to the arc of materialism, they are facing no major banking crisis. Meanwhile, in the world's others envious arcs, scapegoating, denial and displacement
abound.

So should the financial problems of Iceland change public perceptions of independence?

Quick thinking and opportunism are part of the Icelandic psyche. That's why they took advantage of Danish occupation by the Nazis in 1944 to declare independence.

That outlook has upsides and downsides. But does anyone think the Icelanders this week wish they had not parted company with Denmark? Do their current woes make them wish there was a large wing they could crawl under and quit the dodgy business of self determination? Iceland may have made some colossal mistakes – but I'm sure the decision to stop living in the distant shadow of Denmark is not considered one of them.

Iceland's people have long experience of adjusting to bad news. Seismologists expect a vent or chasm to open up near the massive glaciers of east Iceland anytime with viscous lava creating a cloud of dust that could reflect sunlight and cause darkness and crop failure across northern Europe. Some experts speculate the last such eruption in the 1780s caused such widespread hunger and unrest that the French revolution was the result.

Who knows when nature will deliver its own credit crunch? The Icelanders have been living more or less happily with its certainty for centuries.

If we valued a healthy outlook as highly as financial liquidity, we'd realise the Nordics are the only people getting it right in the developed world today. And applaud the Nobel Prize Committee who awarded this year's Peace Prize to the Finnish president Martti Ahtisaari. Despite that country's recent traumatic college shootings, despite nervousness over the resurgence of the tiny nation's giant neighbour Russia, Finland is still a model of prosperity and peace.

Small Nordic countries have generally outperformed Scotland in every way. But that simply proves the Scots current preference for the Union is not the product of calculation or international comparison.

Enthusiasm for constitutional change will be home-grown or still-born. And nothing in Iceland will change that.

Oops!

My researcher, Mr Google, has drawn my attention to an article in the Scotsman, where Tavish Scott is having a go at the SNP.

No change there. However, this time he's making the case for something called an 'Infrastructure Investment Board' to be set up, which would take the decisions about which major transport infrastructure projects ought to be progressed out of the clammy hands of ministers.

'Why on earth would he want to do that?', I hear you ask. Well, it seems Tavish has it in his head that the SNP is only interested in advancing major projects in constituencies which they hold, or would like to hold. This, he contends, would be a way to stop such low down skulduggery.

Golly. I wonder if he means the Edinburgh Tram Project? Oh, sorry, that one's going ahead, and the SNP was against it, wasn't it? Ah, here we go - he means improvements to the A9 between Perth and Inverness, which, he contends, the SNP only want to press on with, not because it might be a good and useful thing to do, but because it runs through Fergus Ewing's constituency.

R-i-g-h-t. Now Fergus, I concede, is indeed the SNP MSP for Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber, and could, I suppose, accurately be described as someone with an interest in seeing improvements to the A9 go ahead. But remind me - which party currently represents the seats containing Caithness and Sutherland; as well as Inverness West at Holyrood? And which party is it that represents Inverness and all points north at Westminster? And which party, other than the SNP of course, is it that has repeatedly called for the A9 to be dualled between Perth and Inverness over the past 4 decades?

I'll give you a clue. Russell Johnston, a formidable advocate in his lifetime for improving the A9, used to be one of their MPs [for Inverness, as it happens].

Still nothing? Well, they provided the transport minister in the last Scottish Government, before the SNP took over in 2007.

Still nothing? Oh, OK then. That former transport minister, who singularly failed to improve the A9 during his term of office, is the one now complaining in this Scotsman article about the SNP going ahead and doing what he didn't.

It's certainly a novel tactic - trying to hold onto seats by complaining about transport improvements which you've always supported going ahead. Anyway, all answers, this time on the back of a dodgy by-election bar chart, to the usual address.

More Nonsense

So, Angus... do tell. Exactly whose cash is the UK 'begging' for at the moment? And if even the mighty US banking sector is in difficulties, why would any rational observer claim that size offers any protection whatsoever in respect of exposure?

All answers on a set of unionist blinkers please, to the usual address...

Breaking Cover

Light blogging this week, thanks to the competing demands of work, Glenrothes and trying to have something approximating to a life. However, I'll break cover to make the following observations.

• In the present financial situation, the tendency to jump up and down yelling 'I told you so!', whether it relates to interest rates, borrowing, house prices, securitisation, boardroom pay, bonuses or whatever – can be overwhelming, whether indeed you did tell people so or not. The fact is, the present situation is unprecedented in any of our lifetimes. History books are likely to be as useful right now to our policy makers as a dog-eared undergraduate copy of Lipsey.

• Sadly, the Western taxpayer is going to be seen as the only solid guarantor for financial institutions. If banks require to be recapitalised by the state, we the taxpayers must get something in return in the form of an equity stake.

• Central banks should offer to further guarantee deposits and extend liquidity to the commercial banks.

• While the actions of governments may be the best hope of restoring stability in the short to medium term, we should recognise that direct government management of our financial institutions is unlikely to offer the best route to their recovery in the long term.

• Sooner or later, something is going to have to be done about the 'toxic' securitised debt on bank balance sheets. Whether its unwound in some way or ultimately taken on by the state, the extent of that debt needs to be quantified, and fast.

• It seems inevitable that interest rates will be cut quite substantially, which ordinarily would allow inflation to grow. However, we should recognise that inflation has been kept artificially low in recent years by cheap imports from Asia and migrant labour from Eastern Europe. Effectively, it's been inflation postponed.

• In any case, if the economy has grown further than its productive capacity is able to sustain, then inflation is probably the least of our worries right now. Deflation is probably the outlook for the next few years.

• Just as the banks must be able to lend once more to eachother, it's important that businesses are still able to access capital to finance themselves.

• Labour mobility is a key driver of economic growth. For that reason, it's imperative that the housing market is kept going.

• China, Russia and the oil-rich Gulf economies are the countries with the capital to invest right now, and the debt to exchange for equity. There is likely to be a substantial rebalancing of world power and influence in the next few years from the US and Europe in favour of the east, and we'd better get used to the idea.

• I enjoy a good cyber punch-up as much as anyone, but I'm inclined to ignore some of the sillier posts out there trying to criticise comparisons which have been made between Scotland and elsewhere. The fact is, no open capitalist economy has shown itself to be immune from events elsewhere. If there's any lesson to be learned, it's that size offers no protection to exposure, whether you have a economy the size of America or indeed one the size of Iceland.

• Finally, if anything, it's those who act firmly and decisively, regardless of size, who will emerge in the best shape from the present maelstrom.
  

Right, it's bedtime. Let's all hope that this has a positive and calming effect.

William Forsyth Community Garden

I began Saturday morning in Oldmeldrum at the opening of the new community garden. The garden was conceived by local Rotarians as a project which would commemorate the 2005 centenary of Rotary, yet also enhance the town for visitor and resident alike.

A lot of work has gone into the garden, from securing the land as a gift from Meldrum Estates and Aberdeenshire Council, to getting the site surveyed by Meldrum resident Jim McColl of Beechgrove Garden fame, and having plans for the site drawn up. Through the clearing of the land, the planting, weeding, fundraising, securing of materials and sheer hard graft, it's a project which has brought together all sections of the community.

The name of the garden is taken from William Forsyth, who was born in the town in 1737. Forsyth was a botanist of considerable note, who worked in the Apothecaries Garden in Chelsea. He became Curator aged 34, and eventually Chief Superintendent of the royal gardens at Kensington and St James’s. He was also one of the founders of the Royal Horticultural Society.

The day itself was a bit breezy, but otherwise the weather held, giving us a fine clear day to appreciate what the garden has to offer. Here's some pictures which I snapped from the opening ceremony:


The ribbon being cut by Jim McColl:


The view from the garden towards Bennachie:

It's a lovely setting, and will be a tremendous asset for the town. I can't think of a better way to celebrate an organisation which puts the good of the community at the heart of all it does, and to commemorate one of Oldmeldrum's most famous sons. I'm sure it won't be my last visit to the garden.

Jeremy Spoke In Class Today

At this time of international financial turmoil, with once mighty banks falling victim to speculation and tightening credit conditions, and being driven into the arms of larger suitors or forced into the safe harbours offered by nationalisation, we look to our elected representatives for leadership. In such trying times, it’s comforting to know that we have people like Lib Dem MSP Jeremy Purvis on the case to look after our interests.

Admittedly, if he hadn’t been scribbling in today’s ‘Scotsman’ to tell us all how energetic he’s been on our behalf, I confess his efforts would almost certainly have gone unnoticed, at least by me. However, let’s not be churlish – it’s clear that while the world financial system has been imploding, Jeremy has been a very busy little bee indeed. Frankly, my admiration is unbounded.

You see, he’s met personally with representatives of Lloyds TSB and HBOS, to make the case for jobs and competition. Good for him, although the fact that the talks were arranged so all major parties could participate seems to have been omitted from the final version of his article - presumably having been cut by a negligent sub-editor somewhere. However, and this is the really impressive bit – it’s not just the high-heidyins of the banking world with whom he’s been meeting in recent weeks. Oh no – Jeremy’s also been meeting with some ‘ordinary people’ in the past month as well!

Amidst the frenzy of cap-doffing and forelock-tugging which this doubtless inspired amongst a grateful multitude, do you know what these 'ordinary people' have been telling him? Go on – you’ll never guess! It was that the cost of living was going up, particularly the cost of energy and the interest payments on mortgages. You can say what you like about Jeremy and let’s face it, lots of people do, but there’s nothing that gets past him. Clearly, Holyrood’s gain was Scotland Yard’s loss. Or should that be the other way about? I don’t know. Anyway, this is getting off topic.

You see, Jeremy has a cunning plan to help us all through the credit crunch. The Lib Dems want to cut the UK basic rate of income tax by 4p. However, not content with this, Jeremy wants to use the Scottish Parliament’s tax varying powers to slice another 2p on top of this from the Scottish budget. And how is it to be paid for? Well, by eliminating ‘waste’ from Scottish Government spending.

Now, no-one likes paying more tax than they have to. However, if you’re going to call for tax cuts, you should be honest enough to admit how you’re going to make the books balance, and what you’re going to go without in consequence.

Calling for efficiency savings is great, since few object to reducing waste. However, the SNP Government has already committed to finding £1.6bn, achieved through efficiency savings in the public sector of 2% pa. The Lib Dems decried these at the time, even finding criticisms of the freeze in council tax. However, while welcoming their conversion to seeking value for money in the public sector, they’ve now moved from a position of demanding higher public spending to demanding double the efficiency savings they already criticised the SNP for seeking!

Now, of course, most governments have the power to borrow to meet mismatches between revenue and expenditure. Sadly, this option isn’t open to the Scottish Government as things stand. However, the option to borrow is open to the government in London. Given that UK borrowing this year, excluding nationalisations and PFI is in the order of £40bn, the Lib Dems presumably have no problem in seeing this total rise in order to help pay for their tax cuts.

That £40bn debt is funded by international borrowing. International borrowing, you’ll be astonished to learn, involves borrowing money from other countries. Therefore, you’d imagine securing the use of resources from overseas is something which Lib Dems seeking to increase government borrowing would be in favour of.

But wait! Who’s this criticising the SNP for apparently seeking to secure investment from the Qatari sovereign wealth fund? Why, it’s none other than Jeremy Purvis – sneering that "Before the election, Alex Salmond promised that patriotic families would be able to buy bonds for an iconic bridge across the Forth. He never said he meant Qatari families."

I’m sure Jeremy’s just trying and failing to be clever with that remark, so I’ll overlook the rather unpleasant undertones which appear to accompany his statement. Nonetheless, it’s worth having a wee recap of his position as expounded to date:

• SNP efficiency savings of 2% = unachievable.
• Lib Dem efficiency savings of 4% = achievable.
• SNP Council Tax freeze = service cuts.
• Lib Dem 6p income tax cut = leaves services intact.
• UK international borrowing = a good thing, no matter what the source.
• Scottish Futures Trust securing overseas investment = a bad thing.

Notice a pattern? A recurring theme on matters financial seems to be that everyone else is wrong, particularly if they’re in the SNP, and that only he can bring a rigour denied to lesser mortals to such elevated matters. Anyway, given that he had to create his own murmurings to deny about his seeking the Scottish Lib Dem leadership, maybe I shouldn't be too hard on him.

Instead, I'll leave that to a most unlikely source, via a story which I've pinched from Christine Grahame MSP. Apparently together with Jeremy and then Green MSP Chris Balance, all 3 were visiting a school in the Borders to speak to the pupils about politics. As part of a general chat about how they had become involved in politics, Jeremy said that aged 16, he’d done two things – made a living will and joined the Lib Dems.

The mild-mannered Chris Balance, I’m told, simply enquired whether the two events were in any way related...

Otherwise Engaged

This is fantastic - the tears are still rolling down my face :-)

DC Shock

'Not Flash, just Gordon' was how Saatchi & Saatchi suggested portraying the Prime Minister as he took office last year. It's a theme to which he returned himself in his conference speech, as he sought to get across the image of the steady, experienced, reliable hand at the tiller, standing in sharp contrast to the novice(s) whose time(s) had not yet come.

'Who better to have at the helm in this time of international fiduciary brouhaha?', we find ourselves asked by his dwindling band of supporters. He is, after all, 'the most successful British Chancellor in living memory', who is needed, we are told, not just by Britain, but by the rest of the world in order that we might be dragged out of the present banking malaise.

Leaving aside the self-serving spin at work here, the trouble is, no-one seems to have asked the rest of the world whether or not they agree with this assessment. In fact, an indication that this glowing opinion of the PM's abilities might not be universal comes with the news that US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson has declined the opportunity to hear the thoughts of our dear leader while he's in Washington DC.

Which ought to tell us, if we hadn't worked it out for ourselves already, that Brown's international standing is of little or no consequence. In Europe, he's forever known as the chap who wouldn't turn up for his photo in Lisbon. In America, if he's known at all, it's as the one who took over from Blair and who is about to hand over to the other guy.

Anyway, I've twice visited Washington DC and deliberately not meet Hank Paulson on either occasion. Going by the Brownite spin, does this make me twice as important as the PM?

As Ithers See Themselves

I'm not sure it's exactly how I'd put it given the opportunity, but the words of Harald Magnus Andreassen, chief economist at Norwegian brokerage First Securities, and those of Ådne Cappelen from Statistics Norway, given in this interview in Aftenbladet, are certainly worth some thought.

Huntly 'First Responders'

Packing bags this morning at ASDA, in aid of the Huntly First Responders...

Baillieston by-election - SNP Hold

The SNP has won the election to fill the vacancy in the Baillieston ward of Glasgow City Council. The vacancy arose following John Mason's election as SNP MP for Glasgow East.

Well done to all involved. See you in Glenrothes!

That David Cairns Letter In Full

This has be one of the most extraordinary resignation letters I've ever seen in politics. Not because it was written at all, though that is extraordinary enough in itself. No, what surprises me is that in a 'genre' which tends to be formulaic, platitudinous and dripping with pathos/bathos, this one manages to be heartfelt, regretful and yet, still bore right to the heart of the Prime Minister's current problem.

Throughout his career, Gordon Brown has been ruthless in briefing, leaking against and generally doing down anyone whom he perceived to be a threat to his political ambitions. The treatment handed out to junior bag carriers who had the cheek to call for a leadership contest has simply been the latest manifestation of what is a deeply unattractive and long-standing character trait.

I'm sure that David Cairns didn't want to be the one to have to call him up on it, but after what must have been a day or so of mounting pressure to 'break cover', he has done so. Cairns has been one of the most diligent, intelligent and loyal Ministers at Brown's disposal, and one of the few ministers who could manage to come across as the voice of sweet reason while defending the seemingly indefensible - a rare skill in politics. If even someone like David Cairns feels that time is up for Brown, then it really is game over.

Dear Gordon

As someone who has never uttered a public word of criticism of our Labour government, far less ever cast a vote against it in the years that I have been an MP, the concept of loyalty to my party and our leader is at the very heart of my political beliefs.

As such, the greatest privilege in my life has been to serve as a Labour minister.

For me it is an article of faith that the worst day of a Labour government is better than the best day of a Tory or SNP one.

This has been borne out by the tremendous progress that we have seen over the past 11 years in communities like my own in Inverclyde where regeneration is replacing years of decay, caused in large measure by destructive Conservative policies.

This is why I got into politics and why loyalty is a price well worth paying.

Yet despite our achievements, if surveys of public opinion and recent byelections are to be believed, we find ourselves in a position where we appear to have fallen well behind a Tory opposition of quite breathtaking shallowness with no answers to the challenges that our country faces, and an SNP administration that has betrayed pensioners, students, homeowners, and is decimating the voluntary sector.

Of course governments in all countries are facing problems and it would be disingenuous to argue otherwise, but this is not the only challenge we face.

It was in this context that some colleagues requested nomination forms for a leadership contest.

When asked my opinion I counselled against this as I argued that it could only lead to further division and internal wrangling.

Nevertheless they went ahead, their names found their way into the public domain, and, to my dismay, the current crisis began.

However it is the response to this action that has caused me most unhappiness.

Rather than seizing the opportunity to open out to the broader party membership a discussion that is being held in private, our response as a government has been to suggest that these were the actions of a tiny number of disaffected people who have taken leave of their senses, are part of some larger plot and are entirely unrepresentative of the PLP.

These were among the more charitable responses.

I do not believe any of these things to be the case, though I understand the frustration of those good comrades who hold a different point of view.

In any event the debate is now on.

The issue of leadership and direction are being discussed and argued over, and to go on denying it is hardly credible. I wish it were otherwise.

To that end I believe that the time has come to take the bull by the horns and allow a leadership debate to run its course.

I know that it is incompatible to hold this view and to remain a serving minister, and although it had not been my intention to resign, I have reluctantly concluded that it is the only honourable course of action left open.

Yours sincerely

David Cairns

Member of Parliament for Inverclyde

Comment Moderation

Has been turned on. I'm doing this as a temporary measure, because quite simply, I wish to close the debate on the post below.

It's not something I'd ordinarily be comfortable doing. However, people have expressed their views, and frankly, given one of the comments left already, I can only see matters deteriorating from there.

Apologies to Scottish Unionist (whom I'm sure would like to continue in his usual civilised manner), but this one's run its course. Normal commenting policy will recommence in due course.

What A Load Of Rubbish

Bring back Wendy. That’s all I can say after a shoddy and shabby performance by Cathy Jamieson at today’s First Minister’s Questions.

It’s debatable whether matters of internal party discipline are really suitable fodder for FMQ’s. However, despite the injunctions of the Presiding Officer, I’m inclined towards the view that you should be able to raise whatever subject you like and to take the plaudits or brickbats which then result.

Brickbats, sad to say, is all Cathy Jamieson deserves today. She opted to raise the ‘issue’ of SNP Cllr Jahangir Hanif, recently suspended after a video emerged of him firing an automatic weapon in Pakistan, and comments made by the SNP’s John Mason MP on the affair.

John Mason appears to have made the perfectly reasonable observation that some of the criticism of Cllr Hanif had a distasteful whiff of racism about it. However, this has been presented subsequently by the Evening Times and Ms Jamieson, inter alia, as an allegation from Mr Mason that anyone criticising Cllr Hanif’s behaviour was therefore racist.

Of course, he had said no such thing, to the Evening Times or anyone else. But that hasn’t stopped one Tory MSP who should know better, from having a short circuit of the brain and likening his comments to approval of beheadings and female circumcision. Nor has it stopped a Labour Party still licking its wounds after the Glasgow East by-election, from promoting one side of a rather ugly family dispute in an attempt to discredit Cllr Hanif.

Some points which may be worth observing:

• Cllr Hanif is currently going through a messy divorce.
• The video of Cllr Hanif firing the weapon on a family video could only have entered the public domain via a family member.
• Curiously, the Daily Record managed to obtain a copy of a letter by Cllr Hanif’s eldest daughter to the First Minister and to print extracts on 5 September.
• Labour, I understand, now has the full text of the letter and is desperately hawking it to anyone who will read it, or better still, print it.
• Clearly, someone, somewhere, is determined to do harm to Cllr Hanif, be that personal, political or both.
• Labour, to their shame, have now taken sides in a private family dispute, solely to further a local political objective.

Is this really the best they can do? Exploiting an acrimonious family breakdown so as to throw mud at the Government? Twisting the words of an MP to try and suggest a non-existent allegation of racism against political opponents? It’s so far beyond pathetic, I’m not sure the English language has adequate capacity to express the extent of my revulsion.

Iain Gray has made much in his leadership campaign of putting an end to ‘playground politics’. Right now, from their newly plumbed depths of sewer-rat politicking, even being able to approach the quality threshold implied by ‘playground politics’ seems but a distant aspiration.

Paul Sinclair Offski?

Is 'Sinky' leaving the rats' ship? STB has the news...

Go Andy

All the best for tonight to Andy Murray, as he takes on Roger Federer in the US Open Tennis Final.

Thanks to little things like my taking umbrage at seeing the SNP symbol depicted as a noose on the front page of the Sun, I have a Freesat box at home rather than one from Sky (nothing personal, Rupe - but your editors pee’d me off and frankly, you’re already rich enough). So, unless the match is being covered on one of the freebie foreign channels like Abu Dhabi TV, I guess it’ll be Radio Scotland for me, or a repeated pressing of the ‘refresh’ button to keep tabs on his progress.

I’ve heard a couple of whinges today on the radio about Murray’s ‘bad attitude’. You know what? I think he’s got a great attitude. He wants to win, it hurts when he doesn’t and he’s not afraid to let it show. When he doesn’t win, he’s honest enough to recognise why and then goes away to work on it. When he does, he’s gracious enough to downplay it, credit his opponent and grounded enough to recognise what in his performance could have done with improvement.

Scottish (and English for that matter) sporting history is littered with ‘gallant’ losers and ‘good sports’. Personally, I got fed up long ago with winning the ‘Best Fans’ and the ‘Fair Play’ awards, only to get bumped out in the first round and be on the first plane home. We can handle the plucky loser all right, but the big bad winner seems to present a more challenging psychological problem for us, as if it’s somehow vulgar in victory to be seen as caring too much or to have tried too hard.

If you’re going to be a champion, you need more than just the talent – you need the winning mentality and yes, sometimes a streak of arrogance and grit into the bargain. I remember Murray at Wimbledon in 2005 against Nalbandian, when the Argentine hit a lucky shot which just scraped the net. He rubbed the top of the net and looked heavenward, as if God were on his side. Murray managed to get a point after hitting the net in the same fashion in the next game, and rubbed the net in a similar way. He didn’t look skywards, though – he just stared straight into Nalbandian’s eyes as he did it. It was spine tingling – a wordlessly eloquent two fingers which told his opponent exactly what he could do with his gamesmanship – and the crowd loved him for it.

That’s the sort of X-Factor which a champion needs, and Andy Murray has it in spades. He and his mother have achieved it all pretty much by themselves, and they’ve secured the best training possible for him, sometimes maybe because of, but more often in spite of the blazer brigade at the LTA. If he wins tonight, he’ll be entitled to pump his fist and let out a roar of satisfaction and tell the critics to go to hell. And if he doesn’t? He’ll learn the lessons, and come back stronger the next time, exactly as he’s always done before. Go Andy – make us proud.

UPDATE: Oh well. I tuned in just as Murray started to rally in the second set, but Federer was just too strong for him this time round. Still, Murray's reaction just goes to vindicate everything said above. He's now officially World number 4 and if he doesn't make it right to the top, it won't be for lack of ability or the wrong attitude.

The Scotsman And LIT

As promised, here's the rebuttal to the Scotsman's continued vendetta against Local Income Tax. Anyone would think their editor might be in danger of paying a bit more or something the way they carry on...

1. Local income tax (LIT) will leave a £750 million financial black hole in Scotland. Others have suggested it could be as high as £1.3 billion.

YVETTE COOPER, CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY

False. This figure relies on current Council Tax Benefit (roughly £400m) being removed from the Scottish block. The rest will be made up from central (Scottish) government.

2. LIT will make Scotland the highest-taxed part of the UK and this might encourage businesses to leave.

INSTITUTE OF DIRECTORS

It’ll do no such thing, because council tax is being removed. Replacing one tax with another, which even its supporters admit will collect a lower amount, can not possibly represent an increase in the overall tax burden.

Perhaps we could lock Yvette Cooper and the IoD in a room together so they can make up their minds as to whether LIT would be a tax increase or a decrease. Just a thought...

3. There will be serious service cuts at council level unless local income tax is set at 4.5p or higher.

THE LABOUR PARTY

See point 1.

4. LIT may be illegal under the provisions of the Scotland Act because it is unclear whether a local tax can be replaced by a national tax.

PROFESSOR RICHARD KERLEY, OF QUEEN MARGARET UNIVERSITY

Gotta love the use of the word ‘may’ here. The only basis for saying that LIT would be illegal is if someone were to produce a statutory definition of the word ‘local’ in the Scotland Act. Since no such definition exists and given local taxation is very clearly a devolved matter, let’s move on.

5. Replacing an unfair tax with an unworkable tax will cause more misery than we can know.

PATRICK HARVIE, GREEN PARTY

This is a personal assertion and nothing more. As for unworkable, on a sliding scale of difficulty running from 'easy-peasy' to 'Land Value Tax', it's sitting quite comfortably towards the easier end of the scale.

6. There will be a 'damaging' impact on service personnel, who would have to pay the new tax in full, but currently have their council tax reduced. This could lower morale and cause yet more recruitment problems.

BOB AINSWORTH, ARMED FORCES MINISTER

Service personnel already have deductions made to their salaries to pay for their council tax, so there's no reason why dispensation couldn't also be given under LIT.

It’s possible that higher ranks may end up paying more. However, I’ll bet the marginal rate of tax applicable to a Brigadier is unlikely to be a major factor in keeping people out of army recruitment centres.

7. There will be serious anomalies over people living in England but working in Scotland. There are also concerns that people may register as living in England to avoid paying.

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

Presumably these cross border commuters, even though they be they ever so few in number, pay council tax somewhere at present. If your home is in England, you'll continue to pay CT. If you have a home in Scotland and England, then there's already well established residency rules for liability for the 3p tax varying powers which could come into play.

8. Hard-pressed students, who are currently exempt from the council tax, would have to pay.

THE NATIONAL UNION OF STUDENTS

This is an argument to exempt students from Income Tax full stop. In any case, if you're earning above the tax threshold, which many students will not be, then there's no reason why you shouldn't be contributing on that portion of your earnings above the earnings threshold.

9. Scottish firms would be placed at a competitive disadvantage to companies in other parts of the UK because LIT additions to wage packets would be passed on to customers.

SCOTTISH CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE

Rubbish. Income tax would be no more passed on to consumers via staff wage claims than is council tax at present. If anything, given the burden it takes off the poorer paid, it might ease pressure on employer payroll costs.

10. LIT will take £70 million from vital city council services which will lead to severe cuts.

GLASGOW CITY COUNCIL

See point 1. If the argument is that Glasgow has an insufficient tax base, it seems to be ignoring the likely level of central government grant support which would continue to come to local authorities.

11. The PAYE system does not easily deal with taxpayers who receive income from different sources, including pensioners receiving pensions from different employers or those who have various part-time jobs – this will particularly affect those on low incomes who will be exposed to incorrect PAYE codes, and these practical issues should not be underestimated.

THE LAW SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND

There'll be no arguments from me on this one. This is a serious concern, and while not insurmountable, it's something which needs to be thought through.

12. Regardless of the rate of tax chosen, there will be uncertainty as to the yield that can be obtained, as revenues derived from income taxes can be more volatile.

SCOTTISH COUNCIL FOR DEVELOPMENT AND INDUSTRY

This is true, although it's possible to overstate the effects given the relatively low proportion of the overall local government settlement will come from LIT.

13. LIT would be technically complex and challenging to implement because of the complexities of tax law, and trying to sort out what would happen to the £400 million council tax benefit.

THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC FINANCE AND ACCOUNTANCY

Indeed. It's still not an argument for not going ahead and in fairness to the institute, I don't think they intended for their measured comments to be given the Chris Hoy treatment by the Scotsman.

14. Investors and businesses who are thinking of coming to Scotland will be scared away because of the extra income tax.

CBI SCOTLAND

Oh, behave yourselves. See point 2.

15. LIT probably breaks European law by removing control of raising local finances from councils. It could break Article 9 of the European charter of local self-government, which guarantees the right of councils to raise a large part of their own finances.

PROFESSOR CHRIS HIMSWORTH, OF EDINBURGH UNIVERSITY

That word 'probably' again. LIT will be a tax levied specifically to pay for local services. Even describing this one as 'recondite' doesn't do it justice.

16. Wealthy people who have unearned income from sources like share dividends can avoid LIT whilst poorer people would have to pay.

THE SCOTTISH TRADES UNION CONGRESS

They can avoid it on their unearned income, but not their earned income. In any case, over a million Scots earn less than £160 [SOURCE: HMRC] from their savings and investments. 3% of £160 is £5 – is the STUC really suggesting that it's worth rifling through the bank accounts, ISAs and BT shares of over a million Scots, just to extract an additional £5 or less from them in LIT?

17. The UK tax system does not give across-the-board allowances for disability and, in the absence of such allowances, the burden of LIT will be higher on disabled people than on the general body of taxpayers.

LOW INCOMES TAX REFORM GROUP

This may be true, but that's a broader argument for tax reform rather than one which affects LIT particularly.

18. LIT will be more intrusive into people's lives because it would require far greater knowledge of their personal circumstances than a property tax would.

THE INSTITUTE OF REVENUES, RATING AND VALUATION

If you class making a declaration of income to the collecting authorities as an intrusion, then yes, it probably is.

19. At present, a cohort of carers are currently "disregarded" (treated as not living in the property) when calculating council tax. Households with multiple taxpayers will end up paying more and this has the potential to include more carers who are not currently liable for council tax.

CARERS SCOTLAND

Possibly, but carers on low earnings will find themselves paying very little, or indeed nothing at all. If you are in receipt of the carers allowance, you need to be spending more than 35 hours a week looking after someone, so your opportunities for earning anything to put you above the earnings threshold are unlikely to be very great.

20. The £281 million of savings that need to be made to create a 3p local income tax could be used instead to reduce the burden of the council tax.

THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY

It could, but that still wouldn't make it fair. Nor is a call to bung more cash at adding ever more exemptions to the CT or simply to further reduce it much of an an argument against LIT.

21. LIT would bring unwelcome extra bureaucracy and cost to businesses because of all the extra paperwork created in sorting out employees' income tax. Lib Dem proposals for different rates for different areas would make it even worse.

THE FEDERATION OF SMALL BUSINESSES

I have some sympathy with this view. However, I think the impact can be overstated. For larger companies, suitable payroll software should make light work of the administration required, just as it does with pension contributions.

22. Families will be worse off, or there will be cuts in public services, because the 3p rate will not be enough to fund current service levels.

UNISON

Nonsense which could have come straight from a Labour Party press release. See points 1 & 2.

23. Water and sewerage charges are collected by local authorities on behalf of Scottish Water – the consultation did not present any proposals on how such charges will be set and collected under LIT.

SOCIETY OF LOCAL AUTHORITY CHIEF EXECUTIVES

True, but again, not an argument against LIT per se.

24. LIT would be bad for the environment because it will take away the flexibility needed to bring in specific charges for rubbish collection.

THE POLICY INSTITUTE

Let me get this straight... LIT would be bad for the environment because it might not let us do something that we're already not doing? Much silliness. Andrew Neil and the Barclay Brothers have a lot to answer for the tripe this lot have churned out– at least they're merging with a more sensible crowd now over at Reform Scotland.

25. The SNP's centralising LIT proposal reduces the lack of control [sic] that councils have over local finances.

SOUTH LANARKSHIRE COUNCIL

'Reduces the lack of control?' A good thing, surely?

You know, I have some sympathy with the argument I suspect they actually made. I just see merit in having the rate set nationally, at least until things settle down. Again, though, hardly a clinching argument.

So, some concerns which are substantial, nothing which is insurmountable, and some hysterics from a few of the usual suspects whom you'd think really ought to know better. And despite the headline, there's not a single argument against LIT to be found which even approaches being remotely conclusive.

Right, I'm away for my tea now. However, do please read Jeff's version of the same exercise - it's also only fair to point out that he did beat me to the punch with this one by several hours!

25 Reasons Why 'The Scotsman' Is Rubbish, And 1 Reason Why It Isn't

The Scotsman, as part of the stable's protracted girnfest about the Local Income Tax, today gives us 25 reasons why LIT would be a bad idea. Suffice to say, most are complete twaddle, and I'll be rebutting every single one later this evening when I have time.

However, it's difficult to be overly critical when they also have the stout good sense to publish letters such as the first one here.

Sir Kenneth Calman says of his commission of the great and the good: "It is quite wrong to imply we are not interested in engaging with all shades of Scottish opinion" (Letters, 2 September).

The annexe to the commission's first set of minutes, from 28 April, 2008 and available to all on its website, states that "the commission starts from the position that Scotland should remain a distinctive part of the United Kingdom", which rather contradicts the statement in the next bullet-point that "the commission will consider the distribution of powers between the Scottish Parliament and Westminster without preconceptions".

Indeed, it even goes on to suggest that any change to these bounds for deliberation would "be justified only if it serves the people of Scotland better and secures the continuation of the Union".

There you have it. No preconceptions at all, except perhaps for those it already had when it began. Extraordinarily, given the commission's conceit of being "evidence-based", we learn that even if it could be proven beyond all doubt that independence would serve the people of Scotland better, that option would be discounted instantly by the commission because it does not secure "the continuation of the Union".

Since we must assume these minutes represent a true and accurate reflection of proceedings, it is clear that nationalists need not apply, at least not if they want their views to be considered in any meaningful way.

So, is Sir Kenneth being deliberately disingenuous in his claim that he wants to engage with all shades of opinion or does he genuinely not understand the contradiction at the heart of these statements? I must say, none of the possible explanations bodes particularly well for the quality of the final outcome of his deliberations.

RICHARD THOMSON
Western Avenue
Ellon, Aberdeenshire

I really couldn't have put it better myself. Oh, wait a minute...

Mentioned in Dispatches

Crikey - the Google alerts are fair going daft this morning...

Someone called Mark Wadsworth is having a bit of a go here and here. The crux of it is he believes in a Land Value Tax, while I think LIT is the way to go. We've had a disagreement in his comments section about the effects of LIT, but it seems to be getting a wee bit lively. Anyway, go and take a look and let us know where you think one, the other or perhaps even both are going wrong.

Of greater consequence, my good pal Angus MacNeil MP has been busy scribbling away on LIT for 'Comment is Free' over at the Guardian, and he's been kind enough to give me a little mention. I knew all those hours trawling Treasury and HMRC reports would reap a dividend one day... :-)

Since Everyone Else Is Doing It

So... 9th best Scottish blog (despite spending the whole year outside Scotland!); by extension the 3rd best SNP blog; 48th best left-of-centre blog and 137th best overall in the yookay. Thanks to all who voted - room for improvement clearly, but it's certainly better than being ranked as #4 prostitute in all Khazakhstan :-)

Bagpipes, Shortbread and a 60th Anniversary

I was in Huntly today to help celebrate the 60th anniversary of the town's Pipe Band. Fingers were crossed and uncrossed throughout the journey, since the weather looked decidedly indifferent as we headed across country. Luckily though, a few light showers apart, the weather held.

Quite apart from the obvious discomfort it would have brought, heavy rain would have meant the pipers having to cover up with their waterproof capes, which would have denied us the spectacle of seeing each of the bands in their full number 1 kits. With some nine other bands present to help the host band celebrate their anniversary, there was colour to be seen aplenty to help lift the gloom of the skies above.

Huntly Pipe Band plays a big role in the life of the town and throughout the North East. There's rarely a major community event in Huntly where they can't be heard. At Halloween, they march down from the castle into the town square wearing masks - I don't know if it does anything to help frighten the ghouls away, but it's worth seeing anyway! And in one of those nice little twists of fate, it's arguable that one of the town's major businesses, the shortbread manufacturer Dean's of Huntly, owes its very existence to the band and its perennial need to fundraise.

It's a great story. Back in 1975, Helen Dean, wife of the then Pipe Major Bill Dean, was noted locally for her baking. To help raise funds for the band, she decided to start making batches of her own recipe shortbread. Soft textured, unlike so many of the mass produced shortbreads of the time, her recipe proved so popular that she decided to go into business and established her own bakery.

The reputation of Dean's shortbread grew quickly, to the extent that the company, now run by the couple's son (also Bill), had to move in the early 1990's to larger premises on the outskirts of the town. Recently, they branched out further by opening a visitors centre and cafe/bistro at the factory. If you ever find yourself heading along the A96, it's well worth stopping off for a coffee and look round.

Anyway, I snapped off a couple of videos of today's events on my phone. The first is of the bands arriving at the town's Market Muir:

The second is of the massed bands marching, immediately after they had been addressed by First Minister and local MSP Alex Salmond.

It's a great regret of mine that I haven't yet learned to play the pipes. I can play the chanter without difficulty (doubtless a legacy of learning the recorder at school), so maybe one of these days I'll get someone to show me how to combine it with everything else that's supposed to go along!

Often, if you sit out on the Terrace of the House of Commons in the evening, you can hear a piper playing somewhere along the river. I never found out while I was down there who it was or where they were playing, which is a shame, because it seemed the most incongruous thing to be hearing slap-bang in the middle of London.

It was like a little bit of home sometimes as conversations stopped while people strained their ears along the river to listen. Today, it was great to be amongst the crowds and able to see the real thing up close and on such a scale. Congratulations to everyone involved in Huntly Pipe Band, and here's to your next 60 years.

A Hearty Welcome...

...to the surfer with the AOL ISP who arrived here on 25 August via Yahoo by using the search term 'insufferable Scots'. I hope you found everything that you were looking for :-)

Baracked

Cruel. Funny, but cruel :-)

Hoy-st By Their Own Petard

Well, well, well. See that fuss about Chris Hoy apparently describing a Scottish Olympic Team as 'ridiculous'? It seems I was right to point out that he'd said no such thing. In today's Daily Record, which as we all know is a fine newspaper which always prints the truth, Hoy is quoted thusly:

TRIPLE gold medal hero Chris Hoy last night said he'd be proud to be part of a Scottish Olympic team.

The Edinburgh cyclist rubbished reports that he thought the idea was "ridiculous". Speaking exclusively to the Record, he told of his pride in his home country.

And he said he believes Scotland could form a world-class team - with the right investment in sports.

Chris was given a hero's welcome when he landed back in Britain on Monday after winning three golds in Beijing.

But the 32-year-old said: "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.

Hoy then goes on to opine that presently, the infrastructure and facillities for that to happen simply aren't in place. Fair points all - and you'll find little disagreement from me on that score. However, I can't help but feel that its still a far cry from the constructs which the Hootsmon and, dare I say it, a few others, have sought to put on his views.

In the end, we come back to the fact that most athletes probably are more concerned with their sport than politics; that they are in the main proud to compete for whoever; and that what people see as the merits or otherwise of a Scottish Olympic team vis-a-vis 'Team GB' is largely a matter of conjecture and personal preference.

Even then, I know it's the silly season, but I'm still surprised at the fuss all this has caused. I'd have thought that for anyone of at least meagre to moderate awareness, an SNP preference for a Scottish Olympic team would be about as surprising a revelation as that of the likely incidence of ursine defecation within forested areas. While these have been pretty lean times politically for unionists, what I wasn't expecting was the way that people would so shamelessly try to equate sporting success with the vitality of the status quo.

I mean, isn't wrapping yourself in a flag supposed to be the preserve of narrow and parochial Scot Nats like me, rather than of stout-hearted Britons who as we all know, are not in the least bit nationalistic, this being an infantile disease which afflicts only those unfortunate enough to have been born elsewhere? People like me just can't help ourselves apparently, and our polite cough about how it might be nice to have a Scottish team was thus elevated to the crime of having taken a piddle in the great national British punch-bowl.

To be honest, I find the double standards all quite amusing, as indeed I do the indecent haste with which some people have used it to vent bile about the SNP. However, before anyone thinks of jumping in with the ritualised 'your lot started it' cobblers, perhaps I could recommend a perusal of the following from Robbie Dinwoodie's blog:

Two minor points about the attacks on the SNP for supposedly spoiling the party – last week, after Chris Hoy's third gold, the Scottish Government initially offered simple congratulations, with no talk of a separate Olympics team until his senior advisor was pressed on the subject by the Daily Telegraph. Similarly, at the weekend, communities and sports minister Stewart Maxwell was speaking to the BBC about housing and was then asked about Olympic Team Scotland.

Well, there you have it. Now, can we move next business, please?

Congratulations

Congratulations to Tavish Scott - newly elected leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats.

One thing that does catch my eye, though, is that while he secured the position with a stonking 59% of the votes cast, this equates to a rather less than stonking 1,450 votes in total. Which, with a 61% turnout, by my reckoning puts the Scottish Lib Dem membership at (1,450/0.59/0.61) = 4029.






Back in the 2005 leadership election, Nicol Stephen triumphed with 2,108 votes, ahead of Mike Rumbles, who trailed on 642. Given it was a 65% turnout, the membership then would have been 4,231, or 202 members higher than today.

Back then, the Lib Dems were in government too, and Mr Stephen immediately took on the mantle of Deputy First Minister. A Lib Dem leadership election was therefore a matter of great national significance. Today, Mr Scott has simply been elevated to position of parliamentary leader of the fourth party in Scotland.

Progress, anybody?

Hoy, Wait a Minute...

Belated congratulations to Chris Hoy, the Scottish/British/equallyscottishandbritish (delete according to personal preference so as to avoid offence) triple-gold medal winning Olympic hero.

It's a tenuous claim to fame, but I know his girlfriend. And her big sister. We used to play together in the Lothian Schools Strathspey and Reel Society. Much as I enjoyed cycling as a teenager, I have no hesitation in admitting I was considerably better at music than sport.

Mr Hoy, or Sir Chris as he may become shortly, should probably get used to people claiming to know him or generally wanting to get a piece of the action. All of a sudden, he's marketable. Want to sell bikes? Get Chris' agent on the phone. Energy drink? He's your man. Life assurance and pensions? Well, you can never start too early. Want to consolidate all your debts into one single easy monthly payment? Err, maybe he'll get back to you.

He's also got a bit of political marketability now. If he wants to campaign to keep the velodrome in Edinburgh open, then as far as I'm concerned, good luck to him. We're about to get a world-class one in Glasgow for the Commonwealth games, but his moral clout on this issue will never be stronger than it is now. He's quite right to make hay on this while the sun shines. Whether he's successful or not, I hope he encourages more than a few to take up cycling, whether as hobby or competitive sport.

By any measure, 'Team GB' has had a successful games to date. The haul of medals and incidences of pristine Union Flags being raised seems to have moistened more than a few eyes. However, have the games really shown, as the Torygraph's Iain Martin claimed today, 'fellow Britons proving what we can achieve when our national shoulder is put to the wheel'?

Really, Iain? Even in individual sports? And what of the contention that Alex Salmond will somehow have to take account of the London Olympics in 2012 as he plans an independence referendum? Does that mean all journalists exposing the shortcomings in 2012 financial management will now be denounced as traitors and fifth columnists? And what to make of the claim from the normally sensible government minster Tom Harris that "The fact that his bike was actually manufactured in Derby is a fine illustration of the benefits that can accrue to both nations through the Union"? Laugh? I almost had a Ken Bates moment :-)

Sorry to be a party pooper, but Usain Bolt wouldn't have run any faster if Jamaica was a state of the USA, any more than Michael Phelps would have swum less well had he been from downtown Ochos Rios. It's individual dedication and the support on offer which makes a champion. And, when it comes to team efforts, there's nothing to suggest that bigger always means better. Really, when it comes to succeeding at the Olympics, your passport is only of relevance in getting through customs. Everything else is about preparation, your physical state and above all, your mental state.

So, good for Chris Hoy. In fact, good for all the gold winners, wherever they come from. And, believe it or not, good for team GB. And if some want to claim that using a lot of energy to go round in circles repeatedly is somehow symbolic of progress for those who support the union, then as far as I'm concerned, they're more than welcome to the analogy :-)

Kerr In The Community

From the Daily Record:

LABOUR must tackle the SNP head on or "whimper out of existence," MSP Andy Kerr warned yesterday.

He said: "Labour people who are in hand-to-hand combat with the SNP want to see me as leader of the party.

"This is a battle to the death with the SNP. That's how I see it and many party members see it."

It's nice to see that Mr Kerr is mantaining a sense of perspective and balance in his party's hour of need...

An Outbreak of Common Sense?

From The Scotsman:

"IAIN Gray, the frontrunner in the Scottish Labour leadership race, raised the prospect of a groundbreaking pact with the Conservatives yesterday as a way of taking on the Nationalists in the Scottish Parliament."

His justification? Simply, that the Labour Party should be prepared to undertake that kind of cross-party approach if it was to use the parliament of minorities to its advantage.

How very pragmatic of him. Sensible too - after all, since each party is in a minority, the only way to ever win votes in Parliament is to build alliances on an issue by issue basis. For that reason, I can only assume that it was a completely different Iain Gray who stood up in Parliament last February to deride Conservative support for the SNP budget as "a tartan Tory tango".


Still, there's more rejoicing in heaven etc etc. On the bright side, perhaps we've now heard the last of Labour's dead-from-the-neck-up rhetoric about the SNP somehow being in an unholy alliance with the Conservatives. After all, having so publicly outed himself as a raving consensualist, Mr Gray will look mighty foolish if he resorts to that sort of silly jibe in future...

BBC News - MEP Helps to get 20 cows pregnant

So. How was it for moo?

Populism and Smugness

Oh dear. One Labour MP accuses a party leader of 'smugness'. Another Labour MP accuses a party leader of 'frantic populism'. Just another series of skirmishes in Scottish Labour's daily attempted media assault on the SNP? Surprisingly, this time, no it's not.

Proving that you instantly in some Labour minds become 'smug' if you look like you're about to beat them, Mr Eric Joyce has weighed into David Cameron. His crime? Letting it be known that the Conservative party is starting to prepare for the prospect of Government at Westminster.

Looking at recent UK-wide polls (Scotland being a different story entirely), it doesn't seem an unlikely prospect. However, Labour is the natural party of government, runs the thinking, and anyone who may be about to usurp that position is 'smug', 'presumptious', 'arrogant', or perhaps even all three if the press officer on duty is particularly articulate.

Turning now to frantic populism - is this another initiative of the Scottish Government falling victim to attack from a Labour Party too timid and guileless to do likewise in office? Again, no. This time, it's Nick Raynsford, a former housing minister, who in a clear-sighted article for the New Statesman, has turned his fire on Gordon Brown, and urged his government to recognise that "there is no single 'Get out of Jail' card" for their current difficulties.

Referring to policies floated over the past week in an attempt to regain the political initiative, such as a suspension of stamp duty (how to kill housing market activity in one fell swoop) and a £150 payment for families to help with fuel costs, Mr Raynsford said: "'When you are in a hole, stop digging'."

He goes on: "So what types of digging needs to stop? First is the frantic search for some magic populist policy solution. There is no single 'Get out of Jail' card, and it is foolish to believe that such simplistic solutions will do the trick. Indeed some are counter productive, inviting the public's contempt by implying a desperation to "buy" support by ditching unpopular taxes or offering dubious incentives."

"Just as dubious is the siren call for more initiatives. One of the greatest mistakes in government is to confuse activity with outcomes. Just because ministers feel busy devising 101 new ways of tackling a problem does not guarantee the problem gets solved. Instead the public grow cynical as government rhetoric becomes increasingly divorced from reality, while practitioners grow exasperated to implement yet another initiative, often before the previous one has even been evaluated."

Sounds pretty sensible to me. But then, so did Tom McCabe's recent take on the current travails of Scottish Labour, which saw him dismissed by a backbench Glasgow Labour MP as being 'out of the loop' for his troubles. For others, Labour's Scottish troubles are the fault of PR in local government, which saw many of their minority FPTP citadels toppled. For Brian Wilson, it's all the fault of devolution itself. The party collectively flails and thrashes in all directions. The public like less and less what they see and Labour's electoral fortunes decline accordingly, in England as well as Scotland.

Harold Wilson was fond of comparing the Labour Party to a stagecoach - when it was rattling along at speed, people were either too exhillarated or too queasy to worry about the direction. It was only when the coach stopped and the passengers got off that there were squabbles over where to go next.

Personally, I'm fond of pointing out that a fish always rots from the head down. A party which became solely about the pursuit, retention and exercising of power, once denied that power, will no longer have a purpose. Sure, the payroll can keep things ticking over in the absence of broader support, but once the councillor allowances start to disappear, when the MSP numbers become diminished, when the patronage can no longer be sloshed around as once it was, when the membership and activist commitment begins to dry up, when those at or near the top start bickering, it becomes a vicious and self-reinforcing cycle of decline.

Could we be witnessing here with these misplaced scripted jibes and internecine squabbles the puffs of acrid smoke which herald the long-term disintigration of the Labour Party? Or is the smoke the first signs of the bushfire which will, in time, allow vibrant new growth to appear through the scorched earth? Either way, the stench of defeat and purposelessness eminating from Labour on both sides of the border is becoming overwhelming.

Turra Show

Pics from Sunday and Monday at the Turrff show:




L-R: Banff & Buchan Candidate Eilidh Whiteford, Stewart Stevenson MSP & Richard Thomson







And a special mention to Kate and Shona, for whom I sadly lack pictures, but who as well as having the foresight to wear wellies, were also kind enough to get me a burger and a can of Irn Bru :-)

S&I Elsewhere - The Banks That Like To Say 'No'

Matters credit-crunch related have been covered elsewhere in the Scottish blogosphere in recent weeks, notably by Bill Cameron. However, in a bid to maintain frequency during a relatively fallow blogging month [Blame the by-election/moving house/ a crawling GPRS internet web connection - but broadband should be on it's way in a week's time - hooray!] here's my column from this month's Scots Independent.

The credit crunch. It almost sounds like a new kind of chocolate biscuit, albeit one which threatens not to leave such a nice taste behind.

We know the story. Banks in America lent too enthusiastically in a market of cheap credit to 'sub-prime' mortgage customers, who had stretched themselves to their financial limits. As the cost of living rose, people found themselves unable to repay their debts on the terms agreed. Falling house prices then left the assets worth less than the loans they were supposed to guarantee.

And then the fun really began. Financial institutions which had bought packages of consolidated mortgage debt started to panic, since in light of the defaults and property market falls, they could no longer say with certainty what these investments were worth. Banks became reluctant to lend to one another, inter-bank lending rates soared above official central bank interest rates and in short order, there was a 'liquidity' crisis which threatened to bring the banking system grinding to a halt, like an engine without oil.

But why should the inability of homeowners in the US to repay their mortgages be pushing up our cost of living here? Simply, it's because our economies are now so open and interlinked. The whole basis of our economic system is confidence – we don't insist that every pound in circulation is backed by an asset of similar value, because we have confidence in the money we carry around with us. And like the banks with other banks, when our creditors lose confidence that their loans will be repaid, they become reluctant to lend and the cost of borrowing begins to rise.

I've been feeling the effects of this myself in recent weeks as I've sought to buy a house in the constituency I hope to represent following the next election. Getting a mortgage was far harder than it was last time I bought a flat, and the providers are now hiking up interest rates, padding their 'arrangement fees' and reducing the maximum loan-to-value they are prepared to offer. Bad enough for a second time buyer like me with a modest amount of capital, but disastrous for first-time buyers already struggling to scrape together sufficient deposits.

Some 42,000 home loans were approved in May, a 28% fall compared with the previous month and 64% down on a year before. The Bank of England has also reported that the number of new mortgages approved for house purchases had fallen to its lowest level since figures began in 1993. The number of mortgages available on the market has also plummeted, from over 11,000 different types a year ago to fewer than 4,000 today. As indicators go, they make for pretty grim reading.

Our homes have been the way we have funded much of our recent consumption. Rising house prices made us all feel prosperous, even if that profit was only a paper one until such time as you either traded down or got off the property ladder altogether. It stands to reason, if not logic, that a period of falling prices will make us feel more gloomy.

Almost certainly, personal credit has been too free and easy over the past decade or so. For a while, it seemed like anyone could get a credit card with a debt limit representing a significant fraction of their income. With banks falling over themselves to offer 0% deals, juggling card debt between one introductory offer and another seemed to become something of a national sport. After all, we worked hard, and what the hell if income didn't match expenditure? That better paid job was only a couple of years away, so what did it matter if we borrowed to get the holiday, the suit, the car or the mobile phone straight away?

That said, debt, quite rightly, is no longer something to be ashamed of. If you go to university these days, it's practically state-sanctioned and compulsory. I certainly don't want to return to a situation where you are made to feel that the building society is doing you a favour if it deigns to lend you the money to buy a house, or release home equity to start a business. However, it's another matter when our levels of unsecured debt, from personal loans or credit cards, becomes almost a rueful badge of pride.

But then, we've had a lousy example of financial management over the past decade from the man who only last year moved from number 11 to number 10. Gordon Brown has racked up £40bn of government debt this year, with the UK fast approaching a cumulative debt of £650bn. He's also about to break his self-imposed 'golden rule' of only borrowing to invest over the economic cycle.

That rule, alongside his professed desire to keep debt below 40% of GDP, is certainly of greater symbolic than economic importance. Why does it matter, then? Well, Brown has been like the schoolboy who sets his own exam questions before marking his own papers. He's basked in his own self-proclaimed brilliance for a decade, on a boom fueled by consumer debt, and shifted the goalposts when it suited. Having set the terms by which he wanted to be judged, he can hardly complain if he is now found wanting when judged in precisely that manner.

The biggest surprise of the credit crunch is that anyone is surprised it came at all. Our debt-fueled splurge of the past decade was always going to have to be paid for at some point and after all, in any market economy, there are always periods of expansion, followed by periods of contraction or slower growth. But then, surely none of us were daft enough to swallow Brown's claims to have ended boom and bust in the first place?

We'd have gotten away with it, if it hadn't been for his pesky Lordship...

I am roused from the box-strewn midden I am proud to call my new living room and my dial-up internet purgatory, by this piece of idiocy:

SNP 'brainwashes' Scotland by painting trains in blue and white Saltire livery

"The Scottish National Party was accused of attempting to "brainwash people into independence" after it emerged that Scotland's trains are to be re-branded in a blue and white Saltire livery.

"Labour said the move was a "huge waste of money" and accused the Scottish Executive of adopting the design for nationalistic reasons.

"Stations will also be repainted in a dark blue colour scheme similar to that already used at Glasgow Central and Edinburgh Waverley.

"Lord Foulkes, the Labour MSP, said it was "independence by creep" and followed on from the SNP re-branding of the Scottish Executive as the Scottish Government".

Drat, rumbled again! All those hours spent plotting away in secret at Nat Towers on McDonald Road, agonising over our strategy on how to get the last few percentage points we need to win an independence referendum. Eventually, we alighted on a scheme whereby die-hard unionists getting on a train at Glasgow Queen Street at 7.45am on a Monday would become Nationalists through colour-scheme osmosis by the time they'd stepped off at Haymarket 50 minutes later. It was as villainous and cunning as it was masterful. And it's all been ruined! We'd have gotten away with it as well, if it hadn't been for his pesky Lordship...

Mind you, it still doesn't explain how I managed to spend my childhood hopping on and off Edinburgh's maroon and white buses without ever being converted from an Aberdeen supporter into a Hearts supporter. But then, perhaps I can thank the Tories for their bus deregulation, which meant that the effects of this sinister Jambo/LRT subterfuge were neutralised any time I stepped on a green and white citysprinter.

Now I think about it, maybe my nationalism was affected by travelling on all those Citylink coaches as a student, with their sinister and insidious use of the prefix 'Scottish' and their stylised saltire logos? Maybe all those British Airways flights I've taken to and from London over the past year have turned me a little Unionist? And what about the effect of all those orange-liveried Easyjets? Goodness, where will it all end? With me taking walking holidays in Belfast in July?

Alternatively, and much more likely, his Lordship could just be talking nonsense and be in need of a lie down. Perhaps some kind soul could offer him a soothing expenses claim form to help cool his fevered brow?