Scotland

This Scotland, Alas

I gather this banner was seen at Celtic Park yesterday. Notice how these clowns can’t even spell. I wonder, too, what the club’s chairman, Dr John Reid, thinks of this sort of caper. For the rest of us, it kind of leaves one thinking that if there isn’t a refereeing conspiracy out to get Celtic (the buggers won 9-0 yesterday) then perhaps there should be? Then again: why give them the satisfaction? Also worth noting: this sort of dreary “protest” is so familiar that, like the 90-minute (at best) bigotry at Ibrox, it barely warrants much of a mention in the press.

Why is Hopi Sen a Free Man?

By which I mean why isn’t he cooped up inside Ed Miliband’s office, working as a strategy-comms chap? Maybe he wouldn’t want the gig but it’s a good thing for us (in both a blogging and an anti-Labour sense) that he’s still a free man. Take this latest bout of good sense, for instance: Our nation has significant challenges – from deficit reduction to welfare policy to job growth. As an opposition we must have opinions on all of these, but lack the power to act on them. That is an exposed, vulnerable position. We already know how the Tories want to define us.  They want to spend the next four years painting us as

The Miliband deception

Ed Miliband’s speech in Scotland this afternoon was a strange beast. So much of it was typical of the new Labour leader: for instance, the incessant stream of words like “optimism,” “new” and “change”. Some of it was rather surprising, such as the lengthy and warm tribute he paid to Gordon Brown at the start. One passage on the flaws of the Big Society (from a Labour perspective, natch) set out a philosophically intriguing dividing line. And his challenge over housing benefit was quite swashbuckling, in a Westminster-ish kind of way. But there’s one line I’d like to focus on, because I’m sure it will come up again and again.

Alex Massie

Dimbleby Fail

I didn’t watch Question Time last night, but there seems to be some stushie over David Dimbleby’s refusal to allow Nicola Sturgeon to talk about fiscal autonomy. “This is for a UK audience!” squawked our host, shutting down any discussion of a matter that, whatever he may believe (if he knows anything about the subject) is not in fact of merely local, tartan interest.  I don’t quite agree with everything Joan McAlpine writes here but many of her points are well-made. Dimbleby’s attitude – assuming it has been reported correctly – reflects a London-based parochialism that does neither him nor the Corporation any credit. This is not a Scotland vs

The unavoidable cruelty of necessary cuts

Even though the SDSR promises that it “will be used by units returning from Germany or retained for other purposes,” the loss of RAF Kinloss will still be a body blow to Moray. For years, it has sustained hundreds of airforce families in Elgin, Forres and Nairn – mine amongst them. And I can picture the bakeries, shops and other small businesses that will be hit by losing so many clientele. About 6,000 jobs depend on the RAF up there: not just Kinloss but Lossiemouth, 15 miles away, whose future also looks bleak. Jet fuel for the Tornados in Lossie is sent via Inverness harbour, so it would mean job

Lansley wants ‘no win, no fee’ medicine

Last week, Andrew Lansley spent the weekend reassuring sceptics about his NHS commissioning reforms. He’s at it again this weekend in an interview with the Times (£). Hoping to calm Claire Rayner’s restless ghost, Lansley emphasises that his reforms will improve patient care and give the patient-come-taxpayer value for money. Medicine and treatment are Lansley’s primary target. On the day that Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish Health Secretary, has protected free prescriptions in Scotland, Lansley proposes this radical solution to regulating and affording expensive treatments: ‘“NICE will be able to give advice about what is the best treatment but it won’t be about saying ‘You must have this’ or even less

Salmond Derangement Syndrome

The main sufferers of this admittedly rare condition are London-based Scots. Fraser, I’m afraid, seems to have come down with a case of SDS if this post is anything to go by. The murder of Linda Norgrove is a ghastly, horrid business that might, one would think, be considered sufficiently awful to be above or beyond politics. Apparently not. I see nothing wrong far less anything political in the First Minister issuing a statement about the murder of one of his compatriots in Afghanistan. Criticising Salmond for making cheap political capital out of such an awful business is itself a cheap journalistic shot.  Consider this: if Linda Norgrove had been

Aunt Annabel Gets AV Right

David, while one should never discount incompetence as the guiding force behind anything the Scottish Conservative & Unionist party proposes in this instance I fancy indifference – rather than self-interest or incompetence – is behind Aunt Annabel’s apparent admission that the party won’t take a view on the Alternative Vote. At present elections in Scotland are run using four different electoral systems: FPTP (Westminster), Additional Member System (Holyrood), Single Transferable Vote (council elections), Party List (European Elections). In other words, there’s precisely nothing sacrosanct about FPTP and, indeed, the case against it has been conceded at both the Holyrood and council level. This being so, what’s the point of pretending

Scottish Tories won’t oppose AV

Annabel Goldie, leader of the Scottish Conservatives, made an odd admission at a fringe event last night. Asked how she would campaign against AV next May, she disclosed that there wouldn’t be a concerted campaign because ‘people have already made-up their minds’. I’m told that David Mundell, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, sat in impassive agreement while the audience raised its collective eyebrow. Conservatism hasn’t scaled Hadrian’s Wall for twenty years. Representation is thin because residual loathing for Thatcher and Major runs deep. Loud partisanship against AV may incite the hostile populace to vote for it out of spite. Discretion looks the better part of valour.   There is

Shocking Tory Development in Scotland

Blimey. Here’s a turn-up for the books: in a bid to avoid being thought Europe’s Most Useless Political Party the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party has done something sensible. They have decided that running an election campaign with the unofficial slogan Vote for Us, We’re Only Interested in Opposition is a dumb idea. Hence, as Scotland on Sunday reports, the party is preparing (albeit and as usual tentatively) to take the bold step of declaring that they will countenance the idea of serving in government at Holyrood. Of course, the Tories would still require an invitation to the dance if they’re to sit in government in Edinburgh and it may

Answering The Lib Dems’ Scottish Question

Pete mentions Tim Montgomerie’s suggestion that a Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition at Holyrood could be the most likely result at next year’s Holyrood elections. As Tim puts it: One thing I’ve worried about for sometime is the implications for the Coalition of bad results for the LibDems in next year’s Scottish elections but it is perfectly possible that Labour – like in 1999 and 2003 – will go into another Holyrood coalition with the LibDems. This double coalition deal could be an important tool for Clegg to keep his Left happy and for the new Labour leader to open the door to a future LibLab deal at Westminster. Well, anything is

The Lib Dems’ Scottish question

If you’re looking for a spot of LibCon strife that might actually mean something, then how about Tavish Scott’s interview in Scotland on Sunday? Judging by what he says about David Cameron, the leader of the Scottish Lib Dems clearly isn’t one for coalition niceties: “I suspect that (David Cameron) doesn’t even think about Scotland. It is not even remotely on his radar screen. He has a Scottish Secretary, and that’s that.” With the Scottish general elections drifting into view, there’s little doubt that Scott is dissociating his Lib Dems from a Tory party that is unpopular and – as Alex has frequently noted – inept north of Carlisle. But

Who’s Afraid of Catholic Schools?

Since it’s Pope Day, let’s consider this tediously-hardy perennial too. Commenting on this post, Fifer asks: Since you’ve given this some thought, then, perhaps you can answer me this – why, exactly, are my taxes being used to fund an education system divided in Scotland on sectarian lines when, out of a population of 5 million, only 65,000 can be bothered turning up to see the head of their faith preach? Even Celtic can manage that turnout a few times a year. If we really are in the dire financial straits we’re told we are, perhaps it really is time to “think of the children” and educate them all as

Flodden vs Culloden

Further to this post, it’s not a fair fight. Commenter Ben G asks: But isn’t Culloden more significant? The effective end of a Scottish claim to the throne. Remember, after that you became ‘North Britain’. This is a common misperception. Unlike Flodden, Culloden was not a fight between England and Scotland. As many, and perhaps more, Scots fought against the Young Pretender on Drumossie Moor as fought for him. The ’45 was as much a Highland vs Lowland conflict as a Scotland vs England affair. Which is one reason why, from a Unionist perspective, Culloden is less important than Bannockburn. The latter prevented Scotland from becoming a northern Wales and

Remembering 9/9

The annual memorial service at Flodden. Photo courtesy of Grant Kinghorn. Today marked the 497th anniversary of the battle of Flodden, perhaps the gravest military disaster in Scottish history and a fiasco that’s still keenly recalled in these parts where Flodden is a bigger deal than Bannockburn. The story goes that some 50 men from Selkirk rallied to King James’s colours but that only one, a man named Thomas Fletcher*, returned alive. Commemorating that loss remains at the heart of the town’s Common Riding ceremonies each June. Outside the Borders, however, I suspect Flodden is most familiar as the inspiration for the most beautiful of all laments, The Flowers of

The Horror of Scotland 2 Liechtenstein 1

  I don’t know. I really don’t. It can’t go on. But it will. It bloody will. There are times when watching Scotland play international football produces the sensation that one’s actually trapped inside a Beckett play. It might seem a tragicomedy to you but it’s no fun in here. A game of two halves, as a friend puts it, in which bugger all that’s good happens. Twice. We can all recite the horrors. The 7-0 hammering against Uruguay in 1950 1954*. The 9-3 unpleasantness against England. Peru. Iran. Costa Rica. The two draws against the mighty Faroe Islands. But all bar the last were at the Big Show and

The Most Useless Political Party in Europe

This is a subject that one could – and may! – return to frequently. David Cameron, not unreasonably, seems to have decided that there’s no point to the Scottish Tories at all. This is not a great surprise given that the Scottish Tories have declined to make any meaningful, let alone sensible, case for themselves. According to Hamish Macdonell – a reliable reporter – Cameron has had enough of his enfeebled North Britain platoon. By her own admission, Aunt Annabel Goldie hasn’t spoken to the Prime Minister since the election. And what would they have to talk about anyway? The sorry truth is that the Scottish Conservative & Unionist party

How Do You Make North Lanarkshire Look Good?

The answer may not be what you think. It seems that South Lanarkshire council have embarked upon the most idiotic defamation action of the year. Over to Jonathan Mitchell QC to explain: South Lanarkshire Council has long had a certain reputation for Brezhnevism. Recently it seems to have excelled itself by bringing proceedings for defamation in Lanark Sheriff Court against the membership of a local community council for an article on its website which linked to another article on a different organisation’s website entitled “South Lanarkshire Council and Scottish Coal Hand-in-Hand at Community LIE-aison Meeting”. I have never before heard of a Scottish local authority attempting to bring a defamation

To A Foulkes

George – now Lord – Foulkes is taking his leave of Holyrood and returning to the comfort of the red benches in the House of Lords. It’s fair to say that Foulkes’s ability to wind up nationalists has not endeared him to SNP supporters. Still,  Lallands Peat Worrier is quite right that the national bard would, were he still drawing breath, have felt the need to mark this heavyweight departure with some stirring lines in the old Scots demotic. Happily LPW was on hand to take dictation. It begins: To a Foulkes   So ye’re gaun at last, ye Lairdly ferlie? Your impudence protect you sairly! ‘Tis time again for

Bad news for Clarke

Professor Ken Pease, the renowned criminologist, has written a report for the think-tank Civitas which rubbishes Ken Clarke’s plan to reduce prison numbers by extending community sentencing. Pease is of the Howard school: prison works. The key is that community sentences do not reduce reoffending. Pease estimates that 13,892 convicted offences could have been prevented by incarcerating prisoners for one extra month. The crimes for which offenders are convicted are a fraction of what they author. Pease quotes one estimate that there are 130 burglaries per conviction. Money is not saved by reducing incarceration because the costs associated with the victims (police time, NHS treatment, increased insurance premiums) increase. Using