Scotland

Tuesday

Alex Massie

Osborne, Laffer & the Cost of Black Gold Populism

As you’d expect, Brother Hoskin offers a fair summary of George Osborne’s difficulties with fuel duty. Osborne, backed it should be said by Danny Alexander, decided to pay for his fuel policies by levying additional taxes on North Sea oil production. How’s that worked out? Entirely predictably: North Sea Oil production fell by 18% last year* – the biggest fall ever. By some estimates, this cost the Treasury more than £2bn in lost oil revenues and thus, probably, rather more cash than Osborne planned to raise from his increased taxes on oil and gas. Moreover, there was just half as much new exploration in 2011 as there was in 2010

Monday

Alex Massie

Lockerbie: Megrahi Publishes His Defence

The Lockerbie case is back in the news with the publication of Megrahi: You Are My Jury by John Ashton, a member of Abdelbaset ali al-Megrahi’s defence team. That Megrahi remains alive, if only just, two and a half years after he was released on compassionate grounds is, plainly, an embarassment and all the evidence required to demonstrate that Kenny Mackaskill’s decision to release him on license was mistaken. It has been contradicted by events. Worse for Mr MacAskill, however, is Megrahi’s suggestion that MacAskill advised him that his chances of being released on compassionate grounds would be enhanced if he dropped his appeal against his conviction for the bombing.

Wednesday

Alex Massie

Cameron Ducks His Own Scottish Question

Since the NHS is a subject even more boring than American healthcare, I was more interested by the Prime Minister’s response to a question from Angus MacNeill that, though I might have worded it differently, was a perfectly reasonable query that deserved better than the non-answer given by the Prime Minister. This was their exchange: Angus MacNeil: Last week in Edinburgh the Prime Minister said there were more powers on the table for Scotland but couldn’t name any. A few months ago he mocked the idea of Scotland controlling its own oil wealth. In the Scotland Bill, even the Crown Estate was too big. Can the Prime Minister now name

Monday

Peter Hoskin

If Cameron doesn’t talk about greater powers for England, Labour will

Action over Scotland is certainly producing a reaction in England. It’s not what you’d call an ‘equal and opposite reaction’ yet, but it’s there — and it’s crystallised by Tim Montgomerie’s article for the Guardian this morning. I’d recommend that you read it in full, but Tim’s basic point is that David Cameron could score a ‘triple crown of political victories’ by moving towards a more federal UK: ‘By offering to extend Scottish devolution he can be the Conservative leader who saves the union. By promising to balance Scottish devolution with a commitment to new arrangements for the government of England, he can radically improve his own party’s electoral prospects.

Friday

Alex Massie

Can Cameron Deliver on His Promise to Scotland?

Well, Pete, I’m not so sure that David Cameron done brilliant in Edinburgh yesterday. To put it mildly, he has complicated an already complex situation. How does the Prime Minister think Scotland should be governed? How much Home Rule does he think is enough Home Rule? What “further powers” does he mean? Neither his speech nor his answers to questions give us any real idea at all. As I said yesterday, at least we have a reasonable – if still imperfect – idea of what Alex Salmond means by independence. Cameron’s preferences? An utter mystery. Moreover, if, as he plainly concedes there is a reasonable case for “further powers” then

Peter Hoskin

Cameron’s new offer for Scotland could mean a new offer for England

The consensus opinion across most of today’s papers appears to be that Dave done good in Scotland yesterday. And now the Prime Minister’s cause has been helped that little bit more by the Lords Constitution Committee. ‘We are firmly of the view that any referendum that is held must be a straight choice between full independence or the status-quo,’ says the committee’s chairman Baroness Jay. ‘A third “devolution-max” option is clearly something every part of the UK must have a say in as it has the potential to create different and competing tax regimes within the UK.’ The strange thing is, a UK-wide referendum on ‘devo max’ could actually produce

Thursday

Hamish Macdonell

Cameron’s risky move could play into Salmond’s hands

Not many politicians would conjure up the spectre of Alec Douglas-Home to scare the Prime Minister, but that is exactly what Alex Salmond did today — to some effect. The Scottish First Minister was responding to David Cameron’s ‘jam tomorrow’ offer to the Scottish people. ‘Vote “no” in the independence referendum,’ Mr Cameron effectively told Scots today in his latest attempt to make some progress in the independence debate, ‘And I’ll see that you get major new powers for the Scottish Parliament.’ It was one part bribery, one part political strategy and Mr Salmond was on to it quicker than the average Scot can order a haggis supper. ‘We’ve been

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Cameron’s plan to protect the Union

‘When the referendum on independence is over, I am open to looking at how the devolved settlement can be improved further. And yes, that means considering what further powers could be devolved.’ These words in David Cameron’s speech today, which follow on from what the Scottish Secretary Michael Moore said at the weekend, make clear what the Unionist campaign’s message will be. They’ll say to the Scottish electorate ‘Vote no to independence and then we can talk about devo-max’. This strategy will probably ensure victory in the referendum. But there are risks to it. First, more constitutional debate will create more uncertainty. Second, any changes to the devolution settlement which

Alex Massie Alex Massie

David Cameron Opens the Door to Devo-Max

At this moment, I dare say industrious hacks are searching for politicians to condemn David Cameron for “selling the jerseys” on the question of further powers for the Scottish parliament after an independence referendum (assuming that Alex Salmond is defeated). Isn’t the Prime Minister in danger of conceding what Salmond really wants? Well, maybe. But what if he is? Perhaps Mr Cameron is less beholden to out-of-date Unionist shibboleths than you might think. Or, of course, perhaps he knows not of what he speaks. His speech in Edinburgh today is not, in fact, a bad one. It is better than his article in today’s Scotsman. In fact, it was One

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Alex Salmond, Supply-Sider?

Today’s Chat With Dave is all very well and good but Alex Salmond’s speech to the LSE last night was just as significant. Much of the wrangling about Scottish independence has, for respectable reasons, concentrated on matters of process leaving the substance of what an independent Scotland might actually be like for another day. This too is reasonable since so much is speculative at this stage and, in any case, one should not necessarily presume that the SNP would dominate post-independence politics. Nevertheless, it is useful to have an idea of what Alex Salmond considers important. What he emphasises now is the best available guide to what might be emphasised

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Mr Cameron Comes To Edinburgh

So Dave meets Eck at St Andrews House today. Earlier in the week there had been talk that their tea-time chat was nothing more than a “courtesy call” from the Prime Minister, popping in for a cuppa since, well, he was in the neighbourhood anyway. Perhaps. More importantly, this is the first meeting between the two since Alex Salmond announced he plans to hold a referendum on Scottish independence in the autumn of 2014. The details of that remain unresolved and important but, in terms of mood and optics, Salmond’s meeting with David Cameron bears some resemblance to a press conference announcing and confirming an eagerly-anticipated prize fight is announced.

Wednesday

Matt Cavanagh

How to implement a minimum price for alcohol

Pete posted earlier on the Prime Minister’s latest intervention on the issue of problem drinking. The new proposals — like a greater police presence in A&Es, and ‘drunk tanks’, special units where drunks are taken to sober up — are sensible enough, but seem small relative to the scale of the supposed problem, and focus on peripheral (though important) side-effects, rather than the core of the issue. The ‘big idea’ seems to be missing, even though the Conservatives have been flirting with it for some years, is a minimum unit price (MUP) for alcohol: far more controversial, but potentially far more effective. The last Labour government, in which I was an adviser, looked at this

Saturday

James Forsyth

Westminster’s attention heads north again

The debate over the referendum on Scottish independence will take centre stage next week. Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary, will see Alex Salmond in Edinburgh on Monday and then Cameron will head north a few days later. It appears that the coalition is ready to give way to Salmond on the date of the referendum but not on the fact that it must be a straight yes or no vote. Moore tells The Times (£) that ‘There absolutely must only be one question.’ Quite what the coalition will do if Salmond goes ahead with his own refrendum on devo max remains to be seen. I suspect that Salmond’s ideal result

Thursday

Alex Massie

Donald Trump: I Am Trying To Save Scotland

The SNP’s other big idea – apart from independence – is to make Scotland a kind of renewable energy pioneer. To that end, something close to open season has been declared on parts of the countryside as developers rush to erect as many windfarms as can feasibly be erected in, well, just about every part of the country within easy cabling distance of the national grid. Like many others, I am not wholly persuaded this is an unmitigated blessing. Tidal and wave power in the Pentland Firth (or Sound of Islay) is one thing; plastering the countryside with windmills another. Enter Donald Trump, harrumphing from stage left. The “tycoon” has

Friday

Alex Massie

Two Nations; One Calcutta Cup

Flower of Scotland is really a dreadful dirge. The one time it is acceptable, however, is when England come to Murrayfield. ‘Tis 30 years since I first attended the Calcutta Cup. That was a 9-9 draw courtesy of the English prop Colin Smart who, in the dying moments, yapped at the referee causing a Scotland penalty to be advanced into the English half and therefore just within Andy Irvine’s range. The great man duly kicked the goal to earn a draw. Happy, relieved times. The following year I visited Twickenham for the first time and, lord, if you had told my eight year old self that would be the last

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Mike Russell and the Mythical Anti-Scottish Conspiracy

Mike Russell is a genial chap who, most of the time, is not much of a fool. Most of the time is not all the time, however, and this week he has, inadvertently, illuminated some of the reasons why the SNP struggles with what the Americans call “high-information*” voters. Mr Russell, the Scottish government’s education minister, became the latest senior SNP figure to accuse his opponents of being “anti-Scottish”. This is an increasingly tedious line of attack and one suggesting both a certain defensiveness and a bleak lack of imagination. There is also a Boy Who Cried Wolf problem: kneejerk suggestions that policy differences are motivated by anti-Caledonian spite or

Thursday

Alex Massie

Alex Salmond’s problems with women (and the wealthy and the old)

Like the Peat Worrier and Kate Higgins, I think the headline figures on polls asking Scots whether they fancy independence or the Union are much less interesting than the numbers lurking beneath the surface. For it is these that reveal where Alex Salmond has the upper hand (at least for now) and where he most certainly does not. The latest Ipsos-Mori poll reports*, as Brother Jones noted the other day, that 39% of Scots certain to vote in the referendum favour independence. That’s dandy but not all that intriguing. Poke beneath the surface, however, and you find this: 45% of men back independence; just 30% of women do so.  45%

Jonathan Jones

What difference the Scottish independence question makes

A very useful contribution from Lord Ashcroft this morning, in the form of a poll he’s commissioned on Scottish independence. What sets Ashcroft’s poll apart from previous surveys is that he asks three different questions to three different sets of around 1,000 Scots.   The first is the question Alex Salmond wants on the ballot paper at the referendum: ‘Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?’ 41 per cent say ‘Yes’ and 59 per cent say ‘No’. The second alters the wording only slightly, to ‘Do you agree or disagree…’ and finds 39 per cent agreeing (i.e. supporting independence) and 61 per cent disagreeing. So far, fairly

Tuesday

Fraser Nelson

Freedom for Shetland!

If Scotland can claim independence — and a ‘geographical share’ of the oil regardless of population — then why can’t Orkney & Shetland? It’s the Up Helly Aa festival in Lerwick tonight, where men dress up as vikings and set a longship ablaze. Not a very Scottish festival, but when your nearest city is Bergen how Scottish do you feel? Laurance Reed, a former Hebridean resident (and ex-MP), has a piece in this week’s magazine pointing out that, by the Salmond doctrine, there is nothing to stop the Scottish islands breaking off, claiming the oil wealth and becoming the Dubai of the north. His piece is below. Freedom for Shetland!,

Jonathan Jones

A poll to darken Salmond’s day

It looks like Fraser was right to question Vision Critical’s recent Scottish independence poll. That poll surveyed just 180 Scots and found 51 per cent saying they would vote ‘Yes’ to Alex Salmond’s referendum question – ‘Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?’ – and just 39 per cent saying ‘No’. Today, Ipsos MORI has released a somewhat more reliable poll, sampling 1,005 Scots. It finds 50 per cent saying they’d vote ‘No’ and just 37 saying ‘Yes’. So, it looks like even if the referendum asks Salmond’s leading question, the Nationalists are likely to be defeated. And while the SNP may try to claim that 37 per cent