Scotland

I’ve written a piece for today’s Scotsman noting that there are some parallels between Scotland’s independence stushie and the pre-Iraq War rammy a decade ago. Only this time it’s the nationalists who are, if you will allow the comparison, the neoconservatives. Just as pro-war advocates back then (and I was one of them) cheerfully labelled anyone who opposed the war of being “objectively pro-Saddam” so the nationalists today essentially argue that anyone opposed to independence is anti-Scottish and, implicitly, objectively so. This is as tedious as it is stupid and the kind of thing liable to further hamper the party’s already faltering attempts to win what the Americans call high

Also elsewhere today, I’ve a piece for the Scotsman arguing that Andrew Adonis was the third-most important person in the Blair-Brown governments and that, by god, Scotland could do with some of his reforming zeal too. Most sensible people in England agree academies have been a success (though there’s still a long way to go); unfortunately most people in Scotland seem to think there’s precious little need for reform. This complacency is unwarranted. Adonis has written a memoir – Education, Education, Education: Reforming England’s Schools – that should be read by every MP and MSP. It’s probably the most important political book of the year. I know suggesting Scotland might

Donald Trump and the world’s first ‘professor of carbon capture’ clashed last night in the Spectator’s first debate in Edinburgh over the motion :  as they sparred over the contentious motion – Scotland’s Energy Policy is Just Hot Air. Andrew Montford posted his argument on Coffee House earlier, and I thought CoffeeHousers may like to know how the rest of the debate went, Trump could not, alas, be there in person but he sent in a video message in which he supported the motion. It was, as you’d expect, a coruscating attack on the SNP administration’s pro-wind farm policy. He is a well-known opponent, having been campaigning against a proposed off-shore wind

On balance, Iain Duncan Smith’s spell as Tory leader can’t be remembered as an unmitigated success. Be that as it may, sometimes there are second acts in political lives and, just occasionally, these are worth celebrating. IDS is one example of this. Nevertheless, even a man as palpably decent and well-meaning as IDS doesn’t always pitch his argument about welfare reform in the best, most sensible or plausible fashion. This is unfortunate, not least because it allows his opponents to question his good faith. And good faith matters in politics. Especially when you’re attempting to overhaul welfare. At the best of times this is a sensitive issue requiring a deft

Well, probably neither actually. But there’s every reason to suppose that just as some Unionists are fooling themselves when they discount the possibility of dear old Scotia thriving as an independent entity so some backers of independence may be deluding themselves if they think independence is a one-way ticket to a socialist paradise. That’s the premise of this week’s Think Scotland column, written in the aftermath of Jim McColl’s decision to be out for independence. McColl, Heid Neep at Clyde Blowers and reckoned worth a billion pounds or so, is Alex Salmond’s latest boardroom success. Admittedly McColl’s support is less than whole-hearted. It’s predicated upon Unionist reluctance to move much beyond

In a recent piece Stephanie Flanders, the BBC’s economics editor, pondered how the UK economy could be adding jobs while, according to the figures, shrinking by 0.7% during the second quarter of this year. As she put it, this is a conundrum that “Britain’s finest economic brains simply cannot explain”. Well, I can’t explain it either. But, perhaps because I’m not any kind of economic brain, I wonder if all this measuring and collecting of information now does as much harm as good. In one sense, of course, it seems obviously good that government collect data so it knows what’s going on. But that comes at a price: it encourages