Conservatives and the Union

Just a couple of days after Gordon Brown was nicking SNP policies and passing them off as Labour policies in his conference speech, now the Conservatives do the same.

Shadow Chancellor George Osborne has just announced the Conservatives will introduce a freeze in Council Tax in England.

Of course, this successful SNP policy in Scotland was opposed by the Scottish Conservatives in the May 2007 Scottish election.

They argued for a reduction in council tax for pensioners instead.

Just how will they take the new Conservative policy in England?

And there is the rub.

No matter how much David Cameron says he believes in the Union, the Scottish Conservative Party and the UK Conservative Party are becoming more out of sync.

Of course, with devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland policy divergence between the Scottish branch of the Conservative Party (and for that matter the Liberal Democrats and Labour Party) and its UK counterpart is only to be expected.

And the longer devolution makes policy decisions that are only applicable to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the greater this policy divergence will become.

So it seems to me that it would be better for the Conservatives just to have done, and liberate their devolved partners and instead become the English Conservative Party.

This case applies more to the Conservatives who only have 1 MP in Scotland, and 3 MPs in Wales; than Labour and the Liberal Democrats.

That would leave the English Conservatives room to strongly argue the case for an English Parliament, or even ending the Treaty of the Union altogether.

It already has been the most dominant of the main parties giving proposals to try and answer the West Lothian Question. For example here and here and here and here and here are just some of the Conservative proposals. Yet English votes for English matters may just bring about the end of the Treaty of Union anyway.

And ditching its support of the Treaty of the Union could make an English Conservative Party the main party of Government in England for decades to come.

David Cameron may be against Independence for Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales now, but if the planned 2010 referendum in Scotland doesn’t end up with Scotland leaving the UK, he may find that Labour will once again regain control of the UK purely because of its Scottish and Welsh MPs.

And if the West Lothian Question has not been answered by then, the pressure on his party to change position may become unbearable.

Surely taking a long-term view it is better to change now whilst ahead in the polls and in a position of strength?

Right now, their professed support for the Union in words isn’t backed by their actions.

For example, their plans for a high-speed rail network that only goes as far north as Leeds.

Now David Cameron may say that he will run the line up to Scotland at a later date – he doesn’t say when – but I doubt it will convince Scots voters.

Again, a high-speed rail link was SNP policy, but obviously they planned for the service to go between Edinburgh and London.

The Conservatives need to come clean on their view of the Union:

They need to back up their words with actions.

Or will they steal another SNP policy? Independence?

::::::::::::

The tide is turning

Its been announced today that major new tidal energy projects will be launched in the Pentland Firth, the Sound of Islay and the Antrim coast.

The Pentland Firth in particular has been described as ‘the Saudi Arabia of tidal power’ and could provide Scotland with half its electricity [Robert Gordon University estimate] (Over 15 TWHrs per annum).

Tidal farms around Orkney and Shetland may produce 25 000 MW (73 TWHrs per annum).

Although the annual needs are measured in TWHrs, the actual plant machinery is measured in MW or GW. It is then factored into how much electricity it can provide in a year, taking a third as a load factor.

For instance,

A 6 GW plant provides 6 x 365 (days in a year) x 24 (hours in a day) x 0.33 (load factor)

i.e. 17.2 TWHrs.

Installed nuclear plant has 2.09 GW, (July 08). [6.1 TWHr]

Installed renewables plant have 2.96 GW (Sept 08 figure). [8.64 TWHr]

In total, Scottish electrical plant from all fuel sources has 10.3 GW [30 TWHr]. As you can work out from the Robert Gordon figure, this pretty much equates to what Scotland uses in electrical requirement.

But, as you can see with the figures talked about regarding the Pentland Firth and the Northern Isles alone, Scotland has far more energy potential than it needs, it has the capability to export vast amounts of electrical power.

Just using tidal energy alone. And tidal energy is ‘always on’ unlike wind power (36.5 GW estimated plant). And I haven’t mentioned Wave Power (14 GW estimated plant) either.

The nuclear argument is a red herring. As long as we build over 2 GW of renewable plant by the time the last Scottish nuclear plant Torness is decommisioned (expected in 2023), we should replace the nuclear output with ease.

Scotland doesn’t need it.

The tide is turning.

Burying bad news

It seems that Jack McConnell has been plunged into a gay rights row in Malawi. The Malawian Gay Rights Movement MAGRIM are desperately awaiting his arrival.

A spokesman said: ”We are anxiously waiting for the arrival of Jack McConnell. He supports gay rights and we believe he will use his influence as High Commissioner as well as his close working relationship with President Bingu Mutharika to put in place friendly legislation for homosexuality.”

As I have commented before on this blog, Jack McConnell is due to take over from Richard Wildash when he leaves his post on January.

That means there is pressure on Jack McConnell to quit as a Scottish MSP to allow a suitable handover to take place.

Now it seems that Labour are considering holding a snap by-election in Jack McConnell’s Motherwell and Wishaw constituency on November 6th.

The same day pencilled in for the Glenrothes by-election.

The date of November 6th, being two days after the American Presidential election, is already seen as a good day to bury bad news; as the media will be focussed on the new American President.

Having two by-elections on the one day may also split the SNP campaign activists. Labour activists were vastly outnumbered by SNP activists in the Glasgow East by-election.

Gay rights is a hot topic in Malawi. Homosexuality is banned in the country.

One politician Aden Mbowani MP of the Malawi Congress Party, dismissed any change in the law, saying:

“This man you call McConnell, he will not influence any policy in this country”

I think he must have studied Scottish politics! As First Minister of Scotland even fellow Labour MPs did not know his name.

Settling the Act of Settlement

According to new reports Gordon Brown may be preparing to ditch the Act of Settlement, the centuries old English law that bans Catholics from being King or Queen. It was later included as Article 2 in the Treaty of the Union when Scotland lost its independence.

A move that has championed by Scotland’s First Minister, Alex Salmond.

Alex Salmond, the Scottish first minister, said: “I welcome these moves. The Act of Settlement is an 18th-century anachronism that has no place in a modern 21st-century constitution. The SNP first raised the issue over a decade ago, the Scottish parliament united in 1999 to call for this long overdue reform, and I hope the prime minister follows through in early course.”

This is one of latest policy u-turns Gordon Brown has done, frequently stealing SNP policies in the process.

Cynics interpret that this is Gordon Brown’s attempt to try and shore up the Catholic vote for Labour, as its suggested that Catholics are leaving the Labour Party in droves. A blatant piece of electioneering to try and secure a fourth term when the policy will be put before Parliament.

Critics of the move suggest that ending the Act of Settlement may start a movement towards the disestablishment of the Church of England. The UK monarch is Head of the Church of England, and gives an Oath of Ascession to “maintain and preserve the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government” in Scotland.

As a result the Church of Scotland is not a state church, as in England. It is entirely free and neither the Westminster or Scottish Parliaments are involved in the Kirk’s appointments.

The question is – how could a Catholic monarch be either the Head of the Church of England or give the Oath of Ascession to Scottish Presbyterianism?

Both would doubtless need to change.

It would see the separation of the Church of England from the state, as the Church of Scotland is.

And although, it is possible that a Catholic monarch could promise to uphold Presbyterianism, and leave the Oath of Ascession unaltered, its far more likely that a new Oath of Ascession would be more inclusive and tolerant to all religions.

Or even scrapped altogether.

For me, I would like religion and the state to be separate.

The Act of Settlement must go. It is an outdated discrimanating law. Not just to catholics but jews, hindus, muslims etc.

And agnostic and athetists. I’d much rather have an athetist monarch personally, I think that would be even-handed to all religions!

Welcome to Scotland

This is a map of Scotland in 1153, at the end of the reign of David I.

Note that where it says ‘England’; the line below it was then part of Scotland. The border moved north by 1286.

In fact, David I liked Cumbria so much, he moved his royal court to Carlisle.

So its with interest that I note an artist has erected a ‘Welcome to Scotland’ sign before people reach Carlisle travelling north.

The intention being to ‘reignite the debate’ as to whether Carlisle should be part of Scotland.

Its not been long since Berwick-upon-Tweed voted in an unofficial poll to join Scotland again.

Its nice to be popular, isn’t it.

We must be doing something right!

Glenrothes – mining new depths

Well, it seems that the media are now convinced that the date of the Glenrothes byelection will be November 6th. The date, it is supposed, will be so close to the US Presidental election, that it will limit the damage to Gordon Brown.

Glenrothes, originally envisaged as a mining town, would have been a safe Labour seat in the past.

Not so today.

Labour’s own canvassing put the SNP 5000 votes up, and a recent poll of Unite trade union members resulted in a majority of those votes going to the SNP. Of course, Unite members will be affected by the proposed takeover of the Bank of Scotland by Lloyds TSB. Labour activists are preparing for a voter backlash against Gordon Brown’s handling of the economy that led to the collapse of the Scottish bank.

It seems that Labour are banking on the memory of John MacDougall, their previous MP, to shore up their vote.

John was, by all accounts, a popular MP who died of an asbestos related condition. He was though suing the Labour Government for refusing to pay him compensation for his illness.

The Fife Labour Party have set up a condolence webpage for his memory.

But as Jess the dog points out, it looks like the Labour Party are willing to use Glenrothes constituents that leave a message, as targets for their electioneering.

Something that Guido Fawkes noticed happening in the Crewe and Nantwich byelection too.

Well.

At least it’ll save those stories about Labour’s dodgy election software and database that couldn’t handle those pesky Scottish flats in Glasgow East.

A British century?

“This is no time for a novice” said Gordon Brown in his conference speech.

Those words came back to me when Ann McKechin, the new Scotland Office minister – having taken over from David Cairns, was trying to explain – on Radio Scotland’s Scotland at Ten – why Gordon Brown was talking about implementing policies in England, that are SNP policies in Scotland. It didn’t sound like she convinced interviewer Derek Bateman, nor anyone else listening I suspect.

Gordon Brown’s SNP-lite policies:-

“So our plan is next year to abolish all prescription charges for everyone with cancer.” That’s in April 2009. By that time, the SNP Prescription charge will be £4 to everyone, and those on extended care with PPCs will pay £38 per year. The scheme will further reduce costs in 2010 and be free to all in 2011. I think the SNP are ahead of the game here. Although everyone is playing catchup with Wales, where they are already free.

“Greater visibility for people doing community payback” That means offenders working in the community. Something that Kenny McAskill, SNP Justice Minister, has championed.

And the SNP have pointed out that Gordon Brown’s flexible GP surgeries are already done in Scotland under this SNP Government.

Likewise his carbon emission target.

And his financial help for the elderly. Its already free in Scotland. That was brought in by the previous executive, and maintained by the SNP Government.

Well they say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

Or is Gordon Brown just trying to steal the SNP’s clothes?

One thing is for sure. How Gordon Brown can come out and say that this will be a ‘British century’ with devolved governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is extraordinary!

The SNP are in power in Scotland. Their popularity shows no signs of ending, and look favourites for the coming Glenrothes byelection.

They also plan to hold an independence referendum in 2010. Hardly a sign that Britain is united!

Plaid Cymru are jointly in control in Wales. A recent poll shows 70% favour devolution, with the majority of those wanting more powers.

Both Scotland and Wales provide powerful arguments to why Brown’s Britishness agenda is dated. Not to mention the demand for an English Parliament in England. Even Cornwall has a political party advocating self-government.

If the 21st century is to be a ‘British century’ it will surely mean that each nation will finally have its own voice.

In fact, as The Telegraph reported earlier this month, even his ‘British century’ idea is not new. Brown used it in the 2007 TUC conference as well.

No wonder I was bored with the speech.

I wasn’t the only one. Check here. And Here. And Here. And Here.

And more especially here, for a nice picture of one of the Labour delegates at conference!

All in all, even the standing ovations reminded me of Iain Duncan Smith’s last Conservative conference in charge. He managed 17 in total then was hurled out on his ear!.

I don’t think Gordon Brown is fooling anyone. At best he has bought some time.

Even the Labour Party must realise it.

Gordon Brown and the internet

So it seems that Gordon Brown will unveil an internet connection programme that will apply in England but not in the rest of the UK?

Is this part of the plan to get the UK higher up the world broadband league table where the UK sits 13th?

But its strange that this programme will take place only in England. Not Northern Ireland, Wales or Scotland.

Because England leads the UK in broadband takeup!

So because the UK Government is refusing to give Barnett consequentials to Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland, the rest of the UK misses out.

Don’t get me wrong. I’d much rather Barnett was scrapped and Scotland had full fiscal responsibility instead (I’m sure the Northern Irish and Welsh have their own ideas) – but while we’ve got the system, it should be seen to be operating.

Otherwise it can only fuel Plaid Cymru and the SNP in their bid for independent nations.

So the nation with the highest broadband takeup in the UK gets all the money, and the rest of us gets nothing! Wasn’t Barnett supposedly based on need?

Wales broadband takeup is only 45%. Northern Ireland is 52%. Scotland is 53 %.

Broadband takeup in Glasgow is 32%. I have already posted a blog comparing Glasgow’s internet reach with the Glasgow circulation of the Daily Record and found the newspaper is marginally ahead of those that read news on the internet.

What that means of course is that more people get exposed to the Daily Record’s Labour propaganda than get their news from the internet.

Indeed the whole Internet Connection Programme can be seen as politically motivated in Labour’s interest. It keeps Labour strongholds like Wales and Scotland’s public free of any dissenting Labour voice and also in England promotes freedom of expression where Labour is weak and also tries to quell any demand for an English Parliament at the same time.

Of course, some Labour bloggers may find this a good idea, given they say a leaning on the internet of nationalist blogs in Scotland.

They fail to realise that its precisely because the public have little newspaper or media support backing their aspirations of independence, that they have had to take to the internet to try and get their views heard! Again, that’s something I have blogged about before.

Incidentally, this blog has just had over 25 000 page views since I started at the end of May. (Thanks to everyone that reads!)

I think that’s not bad, since I still don’t know what I’m doing!

Thanks to Gordon Brown’s ‘not Scotland’ policy, I guess all the Scottish bloggers will be disappointed that the Scottish internet take-up will remain stagnant. (The same goes for Wales and Northern Ireland.)

Another Union dividend.

David Miliband: Bring it on!

The Sunday Mail is reporting that David Miliband will force a referendum on Scottish Independence if he becomes Prime Minister.

In an echo of Wendy Alexander’s ‘Bring it on!’ policy, the Sunday Mail reports that:

“Miliband’s camp believe she was right to call for an early vote.”

This is in stark contrast to Gordon Brown’s approach of denying that Wendy Alexander said she wanted a referendum, and instead await the Calman Commission’s proposals.

As Gordon Brown’s leadership looks increasingly shaky, it looks like David Miliband is already positioning himself for the role.

The longevity of Gordon Brown’s premiership is – according to which Labour source interviewed – dependent on

1. His conference performance.
2. The Glenrothes by-election.
3. The 2009 European elections

Given that the Labour conference is now upon us, there does seem to be a will among the delegates to try and provide a united front behind the Prime Minister.

There have also been reports that Labour’s own canvassing puts them 5 000 votes behind the SNP in the upcoming Glenrothes by-election. Some pre-emptive commentators are already remarking that Labour shouldn’t ditch Gordon Brown if they lose.

So will the European elections be the final nail in Gordon Brown’s Prime Ministerial coffin?

Will the Labour MPs want to wait that long?

And if David Miliband does become Prime Minister this term will he withstand the pressure – as a 3rd leader between General Elections – not to call a General Election? As I have noted elsewhere, it won’t be the first time that Britain has had three Prime Ministers in one term.

And if he does call a General Election; the way the polls are looking it will be a Conservative victory.

So, on one hand David Miliband wants to hold a Scottish Independence referendum.

On the other, it looks likely he would lose an ensuing General Election.

His willingness for a quick Scottish Independence referendum must then lead to one likely conclusion: that David Miliband has no intention of calling a snap General Election. On taking over from Gordon Brown, David Miliband would wait until the term finished in the summer of 2010 before having a (mandatory) General election.

His strategy must then be to become Prime Minister, hope for a Miliband bounce – that may be likely given how unpopular Gordon Brown has been in recent polling, although Miliband’s own poll ratings suggests otherwise – and pursue a quick Scottish Independence referendum; as the Sunday Mail puts it:

“It would give Labour control of the timing and wording of the vote because the referendum bill would be passed in Westminster.”

The control of the question may be critical to the outcome. (Although since the question has never been asked of the Scottish electorate it remains to be seen; we have only opinion poll evidence for this.)

Miliband must then hope that his carefully worded referendum question pays off in his favour and the Scots back the Union. He must also hope that the margin is conclusive and so derails the SNP.

He could then turn his attention to the Conservatives before the mandatory election of 2010. At which time he may have done enough for Labour to be re-elected.

There are a lot of hopes, ifs, buts and maybes in that strategy. Labour need to decide if David Miliband is really a better option than Gordon Brown. Gordon Brown’s strategy seems to be ‘keep going and eventually we’ll turn our fortunes around’. If Gordon Brown leads Labour to disaster in 2010, would this speculative David Miliband strategy be any better?

2010. Given that it is the SNP’s intention to hold an independence referendum in that year, it means that David Miliband’s ‘bring it on’ position must mean that he would have to be Prime Minister in 2009, otherwise how could he implement such a proposal?

And one last thing. How will David Miliband’s Scottish Independence Referendum sit with the Calman Commission and Liberal Democrat and Conservative partners? They have already endured Labour’s disdain at the hands of Wendy Alexander. The new Scottish Labour MSP leader, Iain Gray, says he is in support of the Calman Commission.

All of this just emphasises how divided and forlorn the Labour Party currently is.

Brown or Miliband? Calman or Referendum?

Labour needs to decide soon.

Scottish financiers try to save the Bank of Scotland

A prominent group of Scottish financiers are hatching a £6 billion bid to save the Bank of Scotland, reports the Sunday Herald.

The group includes Scottish Futures Trust chairman Sir Angus Grossart and convenor of Scotland’s Council of Economic Advisors Sir George Mathewson. Both connected with the SNP Government.

Alex Neill, the SNP MSP, and member of the Finance Committee in the Scottish Parliament is hoping to meet with the group this week.

The Sunday Herald reports that the First Minister might be sympathetic to the plan, as long as jobs are saved.

Under the plan, the Bank of Scotland would be separated from the Halifax arm.

It might also be looked on more favourably by the monopolies commission.

I have a feeling it will also be looked on favourably by the Scottish public.

If this group provides the necessary capital it must be given the chance to buy the bank.