With the Glasgow East by-election and two Holyrood groups abruptly deprived of their leaders, it probably wasn't the best of times to be floored by a lurgy, but you can't really plan for these things.
Watched from 50 miles away, with the help of painkillers, I have marvelled less at the debating skills of the candidates than the London media's limited stock of Glaswegian stereotypes. On the telly, the most competent of an under-impressing bunch has been Lib Dem Ian Robertson. But this contest, rightly, won't be won by how you sound on TV.
With a Solidarity candidate called McLeish calling for massive nationalisation, it needs checking that the former First Minister hasn't taken a new twist in his political career. More confusing is the profusion of candidates called Curran. In battling the SSP's former MSP Frances, Labour's candidate has presumed to take on the star treatment of being merely 'Margaret'. Only a few politicians get to be known by their first name – Winnie, for instance, or Margo, or even Wendy. For lots of Glaswegians, the last Maggie to make it big in politics didn't make it their favourite name.
____________________
What does the Government get up to when everyone goes off on recess?
If you're John Swinney, you begin to sound exasperated in answering huge numbers of tricksy questions poking at the many holes in the Scottish Futures Trust plan, which were tabled in writing last month by Labour's Peter Peacock. Most of them get to go to picturesque bits of Scotland on summer ministerial tours. Or, in the agriculture brief, today should have been the day for launching a consultation on "The Eggs and Chicks (Scotland) (No 2) Regulations 2008". This may be an attempt by cute critters minister Mike Russell to reach a government position on whether the egg or the chick came first, but as the online consultation has been announced but remains frustratingly unhatched, we don't yet know.
___________________
From The Economist magazine this week:
"Like the SNP's symbolic victory in the dockyard constituency of Govan 20 years ago, overturning Labour's majority of 13,507 in Glasgow East would be seen as a milestone on the high road to the ultimate goal of independence. In fact, an SNP victory would mean little for the cause of Scotland's separatism. The party's mild-mannered candidate is campaigning not for independence but on a classic by-election slogan:
as a chance to protest against Labour. A big vote for him will not indicate a surge of nationalism. That is true in Scotland generally:
for all Alex Salmond's canny bolshiness, popular support for independence has not risen in line with his party's popularity".
Discuss… nicely. And no throwing sand in each other's eyes.
Labour nerves are beginning to jangle audibly at Westminster over Glasgow East. After the party's shaky start in finding a candidate, its morale was finally boosted with the arrival of Margaret "feisty" Curran, who is regarded as a no-nonsense political street-fighter.
But there are increasing signs of nervousness from Labour MPs. One big worry is that while they think they can win the poll, they fear that if this message gets out too much, then some Labour voters might take the vote for granted and not turn out. No doubt come Thursday night Gordon Brown will be biting his nails to the quick. Fasten your seatbelts, it could be a bumpy night.
A large crumb of comfort is offered to the PM today by Peter Kelner of Yougov fame, who says people are over-reacting to the prospect of a Labour defeat and that even if Labour were to lose in Glasgow East it would not be curtains for Mr B.
He points to previous Scottish by-elections - Hamilton South in 1999, Monklands East in 1994, Govan in 1973 and in 1988 as well as Hamilton in 1967 - when Labour had large swings against them.
The latter saw Nationalist icon Winnie Ewing capture Hamilton on a mind-boggling 38% swing. The SNP only need 22% in Glasgow East.
Mr K notes: "To say that Labour must win the by-election for Gordon Brown to remain Prime Minister is politically daft. It defies the key message from history that big swings to the SNP in by-elections in Labour seats are neither unprecedented, nor fatal to Labour’s national prospects."
We shall see.
The day after the by-election the PM will be at Warwick University for Labour's national policy forum to discuss the next election manifesto when he will be ambushed by the left.
The trade unions - whose members have already struck over pay - will be in forceful mood over industrial rights while the leftwing Labour Representation Cttee today put out its own shopping list of demands from troop withdrawl from Iraq and Afghanistan to renationalising the railways and from opposing 42 days pre-charge detention to restoring the link between earnings and pensions immediately.
If Labour were to be defeated in Glasgow, then Mr B, already embattled and weakened, will mingle with his comrades as an even more wounded premier.
Despite Mr Kelner's sanguine outlook for the PM's chances even in the face of a Glasgow loss, many might think a Labour defeat in its Scottish heartland will be the beginning of the end for one Gordon Brown.
I WAS at Heathrow and about to board a flight for Washington DC when I saw the BBC newsflash on one of the flat screen TVs saying that Wendy Alexander was about to announce her resignation.
By the time we touched down in the US David Marshall's resignation had been announced and there was to be a by-election before the end of the Glasgow Fair. For the next few days I was inside the Beltway but I could hardly have been more out of the loop. In Williamsburg I couldn't find an internet connection so I was in North Carolina before I learned, belatedly, that Nicol Stephen had resigned. This was getting ridiculous.
So I'm back, but barely up to speed, as I head for Easterhouse, Barlanark and Tollcross. What I do know is that already it's a very strange by-election. For by-elections in England David Cameron has taken to sending in his Westminster troops in overwhelming numbers. For defending a Glasgow heartland seat Labour has been treating it like a special forces expedition, a handful of SAS infiltrated in secret as if behind enemy lines.
So it's official. It's good for Margaret Curran to be seen with an actor who appears on Taggart, publicly discussing making the streets safer with someone who's only a pretendy polis, but it's way too embarrassing for her to be captured on camera with Gordon Brown’s deputy, so Harriet Harman is back in the safety of Westminster before news gets out that she's been here. Ditto the Defence Secretary. You couldn't make it up.
Anyway, I'm off to see what the mood is like on the streets.
Just another quiet week has passed in Scottish politics; merely the proposed suspension of the Labour leader leading to her resignation, a pivotal by-election called in Glasgow, a hectic end to the parliamentary session, and a major report on criminal justice. Some reflections...
Crucially, it was based on evidence – more so than some of its instant critics. Its solutions are expensive, but it made clear that the alternatives could be even more expensive, if nothing is done to halt the spiralling number of prisoners. Though it didn't get as much coverage as the call to cut prisoner numbers or the end to sub-six month sentences, it is worth noting the observation that crime rates have actually been falling. The reason for rising incarceration is that serious and violent crimes are getting more serious and the tariff for serious crimes seems to be on the rise.
Henry McLeish and his committee was given a wide remit to go away and address some really tricky issues . This bought time for the SNP, but it also moved the issue into less party political space, to help make the case for some radical new thinking about why Scotland is so much keener on jailing its people than similar European countries. A vital test of the report – and Henry McLeish was clear about this – was how it was going to play in the media. And judging by this morning's press, it was not a good start, fuelled by both Labour and Tories piling in with attacks, blurring the line between this being an independent report and the policy of the SNP administration, and seeing it as "the first SNP gaffe of the Glasgow East by-election".
Daily Mail: "Anger as 'soft-touch' SNP now plans to empty jails...
Thousands of thugs, housebreakers and drug dealers are to be spared jail under plans to slash Scotland's prison population." The Mail editorial says Labour has been offered a golden opportunity to appeal to "the terrified citizens who have been abandoned by Alex Salmond's administration".
Daily Record splash: SNP TO FREE 4000 JAILBIRDS, and inside:
"Outrageous, daft and soft on cons... Anger over Nats plans". Its editorial states: "The truly alarming thing about this report is the government are taking it seriously... Emptying the jails to see if community service works better for hardened crooks would be a staggeringly reckless gamble".
The Sun's splash: EMPTY THE PRISONS. There's a prominent place given to the "fury" the report sparked, but read into the report, and it's surprisingly free of "bang 'em up and throw away the keys" sentiment.
The paper argues it would be good if community sentences work and are tough, though it would prefer to put offenders in orange boiler suits, and it concludes "the jury is out".
Express: "HALF OF SCOTS PRISONERS TO GO FREE... in a damaging shake-up of the country's justice system." The paper turns over its editorial line to Tory justice spokesman Bill Aitken.
Mirror: "You Won't Cell Us This... Proposals to halve Scotland's soaring prison population were branded a nightmare last night."
From The Scotsman comes "The Great Scottish Prisons Gamble", with a hostile response from a former sheriff, but the most positive editorial conclusion: "It is up to those who disagree with Henry McLeish to come up with something better".
From The Herald's editorial comes some sceptical questioning about community sentences, similar to that of the Press and Journal, and there is even stronger scepticism in The Courier.
Does any of this media scribbling matter? You bet it does. Ministers will watch very closely to see how these ideas fly before being willing to fight for them, and it is unlikely to want that much hostility from the tabloid press.
_____________________________
Glasgow East is going to be a short but fascinating by-election campaign. There is real needle between Labour and SNP front-runners.
Both could win, but the uncertain bit is how much of an appetite voters have for giving Labour a kicking. Do they have the same passion that the voters of Crewe and Nantwich had, or those in Henley? Are die-hard Labour supporters yet ready to switch to the SNP? How will Nationalists adjust to fighting with a record to defend for the first time? What impact could Tommy Sheridan have, and from where could he take votes? And just how low can the turnout go during the Glasgow Fair?
But before then, let's look again at the reason this by-election is taking place. After 29 years, David Marshall has suddenly resigned because of ill-health. I don't doubt he is ill, and I'm not demanding to see his doctor's certificate. But I'm struggling to think of any ailment that requires a by-election right now. I can't imagine Labour's whips at Westminster being given a choice between Mr Marshall on long-term/permanent sickness leave or Mr Marshall resigning, and preferring the latter when it means a losable by-election.
Something tells me we're not hearing the whole story... yet.
______________________________
The SNP tonight selects its short list for the by-election. They're looking for someone local, and there are at least two Glasgow councillors already in the frame. But if they want someone with a track record of building the vote in Baillieston, and for dogged campaigning, surely the SNP should look no further than former SNP MSP Dorothy-Grace Elder. I put this suggestion to the party's high heid yins, and they seemed oddly unenthusiastic.
_____________________________
We carried a brief report in The Herald of the Holyrood enterprise committee's report into Scotland's bid to become home of the home of the new Energy Technologies Institute . Some more space here helps tell the story. With a budget of £1 billion, this matters quite a bit, and Scotland's research strength put it in front-runner position. But Loughborough won, as part of a Midlands consortium. The report explicitly pulls its punches, explaining Scottish universities still hope to win some of that research funding. But read between the lines, and there are some interesting hints of what went wrong:
The bidding process changed from a focus on research strength (good for Scotland) to the office accommodation available. But the committee was "surprised" that deciding UK committee found there were "management risks" with the Scottish bid's accommodation plan, yet the same issues affecting Loughborough were not seen as a risk. The committee doesn't spell it out, but could it be that Loughborough got the nod because it was handier and more attractive for the Institute bosses than Aberdeen or Glasgow, and that the rules were framed accordingly, midway through the process?
Within the Scottish consortium bid, how did the Scottish universities choose where the hub of the institute should be? When he was enterprise minister Nicol Stephen, the LibDem leader, made no secret of his desire to bring it to Aberdeen, where he is an MSP, and where it has some claim to strong energy credentials. He told civil servants this, but they said that if a preferred hub was named, it would mean the other parts of the Scottish bid consortium would lose interest and support. By the time the decision, Mr Stephen had left government to fight and lose last year's election. The committee received reassurances from the academics involved in the bid that all was harmony between them. Both of those propositions cannot be true.
Is this evidence that Scotland's prospects were harmed by university rivalry? Let's hope not, as they are important to similar bidding processes in the future.
When the decision was finally taken for Loughborough to win the bid, it was taken by a show of hands at a committee meeting, without an adequate paper trail of how that decision had been taken. The enterprise committee was strongly critical at both Scottish and UK levels for the lack of clear paperwork, and (by the LibDem convener's casting vote) of the incoming Scottish ministers, notably Jim Mather, who were none too helpful in explaining what had happened after they took office.
__________________________________
If you've stuck with this lengthy blog long enough to reach this far down, your reward is confirmation of what has made it into the blogosphere – that I'm leaving The Herald to join BBC Scotland as its Business and Economics Editor. But I'm still here until September, giving ample time for my small band of devoted and demented critics to prepare for their withdrawal symptoms and to transfer their allegiance elsewhere.
Margo MacDonald has suggested to Alex Salmond a new plan that might help the independence cause. In a letter sent today to the First Minister, the Lothian independent and ex-SNP MSP suggested voters turning out for the European elections in June next year should also be given a form asking if they think there should be a referendum on independence.
This would not be a referendum, she insists, but a sort of referendum on a referendum, or at least a very large polling sample. It would appeal to the Nationalist cause by raising pressure or at least keeping the pot boiling ahead of the referendum the SNP wants in autumn 2010. Margo MacDonald also suggests the survey could raise turnout at the European elections.
Don't expect this idea to go down too well with the Scotland Office, which reminded us again today that it jealously guards its role in running non-council elections. With the running of elections heavily surrounded by legislation and regulation, there are sure to be reasons why an unofficial survey will be kept outside the polling station.
An odd aspect of this is that one of the main reasons for Margo MacDonald's split from the SNP was her vehement disagreement with its strategy of having an independence referendum at all. It now seems she wants a pre-referendum too.
_________________
Simon Pia, spokesman for Wendy Alexander, dropped by The Herald office today to serve notice that I have joined the list of those male journalists deemed to be misogynist for daring to suggest that his boss's "bring it on" handling of the independence referendum was somewhat less than politically smart.
Here was me with this this old-fashioned notion that misogyny had to do with hatred of women. Now I know better. It is any male criticism of the Labour leadership.
It is true Holyrood needs a better gender balance in its reporting, or indeed any gender balance. But would female reporters really appreciate how much Wendy Alexander's leadership is a model of clarity, vision and success, putting the SNP on the run while positioning herself perfectly to seize power when the opportunity arises?
The C Diff outbreak at Vale of Leven has been a serious issue for Labour to test its mettle as an effective opposition. This is precisely the kind of 'event' that government ministers fear, when they need to be seen as having taken action, as getting control of a situation long after it's too late, of showing appropriate contrition and empathy for the bereaved, and all while there is a little bug wreaking havoc, over which ministers can't hope to have any control.
While pressing home the Scottish Government's discomfort on the issue, it was odd that Wendy Alexander opted not to ask about it at First Minister's Questions last Thursday - while Annabel Goldie and Nicol Stephen did. Perhaps she felt enough had been said when her colleagues accused the government of a 'sinister' role and the mother of all cover ups. The SNP was lame in its outrage at Labour for playing party politics with this issue. As if an SNP opposition team wouldn't have done exactly the same as Labour. The only difference is that they would have done it better.
______________________
Scottish Labour has been filling some of the vacancies in its backroom team, particularly on the media front, but it is some way off being a model of message clarity. Gavin Yates, head of communications for the shadow cabinet (and MSP group?), was joined by Simon Pia, spokesman for group leader Wendy Alexander, and more recently Andrew MacFadyen has joined, from Channel Four News, as director of press and broadcasting, along with Rami Okasha, a former candidate and student leader, who is head of communications at party headquarters. Which of them speaks for the party? Take your pick. But on the evidence so far, it doesn't yet look a whole lot like joined up opposition.
_________________
It seems one of our regular contributors to The Herald's politics discussion forums has been moonlighting as a script-writer for the Stone of Destiny, premiered to a stellar audience at the Edinburgh Film Festival during the weekend. A fine cast was let down by screenplay as clunkily subtle as a Hillman Imp cobbled together on a bad day at Linwood. For instance, we learn, from Billy 'Hobbit' Boyd that the reason Scots are not fired up for the cause of home rule is because we don't think, and we're too busy. Yes, it really is that simple.
___________________
Labour has never been in the running for the Henley by-election, caused by Boris Johnson's departure for London city hall. But a new humiliation awaits if one high street bookmaker is correct in saying the Government's candidate is on course to lose its deposit.
_________________
As ithers see us, in the Jamaica Gleaner, where David Jessop of the Caribbean Council has been reflecting on a visit of High Commissioners to Holyrood earlier this month:
"The Scottish Parliament is unusually accessible and transparent to the Scottish people; it is socially driven and has a membership that is almost one-third female. Its members do not have the remoteness or, for the most part, the confrontational political style that Westminster has. Its chamber is U-shaped and the process is more given to consensus. The language of Parliament is not archaic, and it is strikingly family-friendly with large numbers of schoolchildren visiting and sitting in the public galleries of the chamber.
"For the Anglophone Caribbean locked into the Westminster model with all of its formality, confrontational style, arcane practice and its implied remoteness from the people, Scotland's parliamentary system and style offers a model worth studying, not least to see whether there might be ways in which adoption of best practice could rejuvenate Caribbean parliamentary democracy.
"Clearly, Scotland is not the Caribbean, but if the high commissioners' visit to Scotland indicated anything, it was that there are important devolved and modern consensual and socially oriented models of governance in the United Kingdom that any nation which has inherited the British model might usefully learn more from."
Politics
