The Beginning

The campaign is now underway, with the traditional news that Scotland's shipyards (at least the ones in Govan - a key marginal, funny that, isn't it?) will get work. Also leading the Labour campaign (and the LibDem campaign) is their promise to end tolls on the Tay Bridge and end all tolls except for lone car users on the Forth Road Bridge. The following Labour and LibDem MSPs voted against a proposal to end the tolls just a few weeks ago (from the Business Bulletin). They also voted against a Green proposal which suggested taking the occupancy of a car on the bridge into account. If they're your local candidate, why not ask them why this was a bad idea two months ago, but it's the right thing to do now?

Alexander, Wendy (Paisley North) (Lab)
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Boyack, Sarah (Edinburgh Central) (Lab)
Brankin, Rhona (Midlothian) (Lab)
Brown, Robert (Glasgow) (LD)
Butler, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)
Craigie, Cathie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab)
Curran, Ms Margaret (Glasgow Baillieston) (Lab)
Deacon, Susan (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab)
Finnie, Ross (West of Scotland) (LD)
Gillon, Karen (Clydesdale) (Lab)
Godman, Trish (West Renfrewshire) (Lab)
Gordon, Mr Charlie (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab)
Gorrie, Donald (Central Scotland) (LD)
Henry, Hugh (Paisley South) (Lab)
Home Robertson, John (East Lothian) (Lab)
Hughes, Janis (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab)
Jackson, Dr Sylvia (Stirling) (Lab)
Jackson, Gordon (Glasgow Govan) (Lab)
Jamieson, Cathy (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab)
Jamieson, Margaret (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab)
Kerr, Mr Andy (East Kilbride) (Lab)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (LD)
Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab)
Macintosh, Mr Kenneth (Eastwood) (Lab)
Macmillan, Maureen (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab)
McAveety, Mr Frank (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab)
McCabe, Mr Tom (Hamilton South) (Lab)
McConnell, Mr Jack (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
McMahon, Michael (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab)
McNeil, Mr Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab)
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab)
McNulty, Des (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab)
Morrison, Mr Alasdair (Western Isles) (Lab)
Muldoon, Bristow (Livingston) (Lab)
Mulligan, Mrs Mary (Linlithgow) (Lab)
Munro, John Farquhar (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD)
Murray, Dr Elaine (Dumfries) (Lab)
Oldfather, Irene (Cunninghame South) (Lab)
Peacock, Peter (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Peattie, Cathy (Falkirk East) (Lab)
Pringle, Mike (Edinburgh South) (LD)
Purvis, Jeremy (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)
Robson, Euan (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD)
Rumbles, Mike (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD)
Scott, Tavish (Shetland) (LD)
Smith, Margaret (Edinburgh West) (LD)
Stephen, Nicol (Aberdeen South) (LD)
Stone, Mr Jamie (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)
Wallace, Mr Jim (Orkney) (LD)
Whitefield, Karen (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)
Wilson, Allan (Cunninghame North) (Lab)

The End

Although Dissolution doesn't officially take place until 3 April, today marks the last meeting of Session 2 of the Scottish Parliament. After that Scotland will technically not have a Scottish Parliament and no one will, strictly speaking, be able to use the title 'MSP'. There will be a final FMQs at 12, followed by a motion of thanks to George Reid, the Presiding Officer, who is bowing out of Holyrood, but will oversee the swearing in of the new MSPs after the election, as well as the appointment of his successor as Presiding Officer.

George Reid was one of the 'First Eleven' (he was in fact voted into Parliament as one of seven MPs in February 1974), serving as the SNP MP for Clackmannan and East Stirlingshire until 1979. After a spell with the Red Cross (this was highlighted in Holyrood when he taught Members the Russian for 'Speak or you will be shot'), he returned to representative democracy in 1999, as one of the SNP Regional MSPs for Mid Scotland and Fife. His return to Holyrood was far from certain, having been ranked 5th on the Regional List for the 2003 Election, but he succeeding in winning Ochil (with a majority of just 296) from Labour's Richard Simpson, who had been forced to resign as Deputy Justice Minister earlier in the year, having referred to striking firefighters as 'fascist bastards'.

Also leaving is Susan Deacon, a Minister under Donald Dewar and Henry McLeish, and caught up in McConnell's purge of the Scottish Cabinet. She has been MSP for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh since 1999, and since joining the back benches, she hasn't been afraid to speak her mind. Labour's MSPs will not contain Kate Maclean either: Maclean scraped home by 121 votes to win Dundee West in 1999, so it was seen as a shock to many that she won re-election (and increased her majority) in 2003. Janis Hughes is standing down as MSP for Glasgow Rutherglen, a post she has held since 1999. Probably leaving is Maureen MacMillan, who wants to retire but has been press-ganged into standing for Labour in Ross, Skye and Inverness West. She probably won't win, but after eight years as one of Labour's few Regional MSPs (Highlands and Islands), she won't mind too much. This will actually be the second time she's contested the Constituency at Holyrood, having been the candidate in 2003. She came third. Definitely leaving is John Home Robertson, MP for Berwickshire & East Lothian from 1978, then East Lothian from 1983 until 2001, and MSP for East Lothian since 1999. Rumour has it his heading for the Lords, but it's suggested that his departure has more to do with his accommodation expenses, which caused such a row last year.

Although George Reid was elected as an SNP MSP, he gave up his Party affiliation to be Presiding Officer. The only current SNP Member to stand down from Holyrood is Bruce McFee, MSP for the West of Scotland since 2003. Campbell Martin is standing again as an Independent.

From the Conservatives, James Douglas-Hamilton is leaving. Lord Selkirk of Douglas (as he is now), was MP for Edinburgh West from 1974 until 1997, when he was caught up in the Tory Wipeout of 1997. He had renounced his title as the 11th Earl of Selkirk in order to remain an MP and stave off a By-Election (which the Tories would almost certainly have lost), but joined the House of Lords as a Life Peer following his defeat. He has been an MSP for the Lothians since 1999, and has been the only Tory MSP with Ministerial experience, having been a Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, then a Minister of State, in the Scotland Office. Phil Gallie is also leaving: Gallie was the MP for Ayr from 1992 until 1997, and an MSP for the South of Scotland since 1999. His high selection on the List in that year possibly goes down as one of the greatest examples of bad timing in politics: had he not got in, he would no doubt have stood as the Tory candidate in the Ayr By-Election, which John Scott won for his Party. Also leaving Holyrood is Brian Monteith, who started his Parliamentary career in 1999 as one of the Tory Regional MSPs in Mid Scotland & Fife, and securing re-election in 2003. He was drummed out of the Party in 2005 when it emerged that he had suggested to a newspaper that they ought to call for David McLetchie's resignation as Tory Leader.

There are two Liberal Democrat departures: Donald Gorrie, MSP for Central Scotland since 1999, and MP for Edinburgh West from 1997-2001, was the first Parliamentarian to have a dual mandate for two separate areas for the two-year overlap. He's now retiring. Jim Wallace, meanwhile, is the main departure from the Party: he was elected as the Liberal MP for Orkney & Shetland in 1987, and became leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats in 1992. This is how he went into the 1999 Election, where he became MSP for Orkney (standing down from Westminster in 2001). He then secured his Party's membership of the Coalition with Labour, which saw him appointed Deputy First Minister, and he stepped in as Acting First Minister on three occasions: Donald Dewar's heart surgery, Dewar's death in 2000 and Henry McLeish's resignation in 2001. He resigned as LibDem leader after the 2005 Westminster Election, opting to leave on a high.

It's believed that Frances Curran, the SSP's MSP for the West of Scotland since 2003, is also standing down. The final departure is Dennis Canavan's. Canavan was the Labour MP for West Stirlingshire from October 1974 to 1983, then the MP for Falkirk West from 1983 until 2000. He wanted to be the Labour candidate for Falkirk West in the 1999 Holyrood Election, but his name was kept off the list of approved candidates. This didn't deter him, and he stood as an Independent, winning comfortably. He secured re-election four years later, and he's standing down after a series of family tragedies.

MacNumpty 2011: How we got to Independence

3 May 2007 - Polling day.

4 May 2007 - Election results. The SNP are the largest Party, Labour are second and the LibDems are third. The only viable two-party coalition is between the SNP and the LibDems.

30 May 2007 - After lengthy negotiations, and with a day to spare, the SNP and LibDems agree a Coalition. The Council Tax will be abolished, no planning permission will be granted for nuclear power stations and the Graduate Endowment will be abolished. A referendum on Independence will be held, according to the question drafted by the SNP with the aid of the Scottish Executive, but Collective Responsibility will be suspended and Liberal Democrat Ministers will be free to campaign for the 'No' side.

31 May 2007 - Alex Salmond elected First Minister. Nicol Stephen will continue as Deputy First Minister.

7 May 2009 - General Election. The Conservatives make major gains in England, and anti-Labour tactical voting is rife in Scotland. Labour still come first in terms of votes, but with a major swing against them of 9%. They are damaged by anti-Labour tactical voting, and end up with 30 Scottish seats. The SNP come second in votes, thanks to a 7% swing towards the Party, but end up with ten seats, picking up Aberdeen North, Dundee West, Kilmarnock & Loudoun and Ochil & South Perthshire. The LibDem vote drops slightly, but the anti-Labour voting allows them to gain seats: they consolidate their hold on Dunfermline & West Fife, win Edinburgh North & Leith and Aberdeen South, and take the scalp of key Brownite Nigel Griffiths in Edinburgh South. The Tory vote increases by around 2%, which combined with the anti-Labour vote, gives them their highest number of Scottish MPs since 1997: four. Dumfries & Galloway, East Renfrewshire and Stirling all turn blue. Nationally, the Tories win the election but with a majority of just 20. Scottish Labour Leader Wendy Alexander is blamed for the performance. Labour Leader Wendy Alexander publicly slaps down her predecessor Jack McConnell's suggestion that the Scottish party distance itself from London. Tory Leader Murdo Fraser and Prime Minister David Cameron agree that more autonomy is what the Scottish Tories need, and following discussions taking place over the past two years, announce that the Scottish Conservatives will take the UK Tory Whip at Westminster, but that the parties will, for all intents and purposes, be separate entities.

14 June 2009 - European Election. The SNP overtakes Labour into first place. Both take two seats, along with the Conservatives. The Liberal Democrats take one. After the hard-fought General Election campaign, turnout is a pathetic 20%.

Faced with the strong SNP performances in the Elections, combined with his slimline majority, Cameron's first speech in Scotland contains lines on the need to scale back Whitehall involvement in people's lives, and, more controversially, an announcement that London will not 'keep Scotland out of self-interest'. He informs his audience that if, and only if, the people of Scotland back independence, he will have no choice but to support it.

6 May 2010 - the Referendum campaign. First Minister Alex Salmond leads the 'Yes' campaign, and in a shock move, Murdo Fraser supports him. Leader of the Opposition Wendy Alexander publicly leads the 'No' campaign. Nicol Stephen stays largely silent, but George Lyon and Tavish Scott make a handful of anti-Independence speeches. There is no intervention by UK Government Ministers, who are conspicuous in their absence. The result: 55.2% in favour of Independence. Negotiations begin, and move rapidly.

5 May 2011 - Elections to the Independent Scottish Parliament.

Referendum 2010?

Assuming that this blog does last until that long, I could well have a very large section on this: The Sunday Herald inform us that that's the date pencilled in for a referendum on Independence, most likely 6 May (That is a Thursday, isn't it?), if current practices are any indication.

But the question will not be a simple "Should Scotland become an independent nation?", oh no. It will be: "The Scottish parliament should negotiate a new settlement with the British government, based on the proposals set out in the white paper, so that Scotland becomes a sovereign and independent state." The answers will of course be, 'Yes, I agree' and 'No, I disagree'. There are rumblings among the Liberal Democrats that a referendum might be agreed to, if an extra option for seeking extra powers can be added. Alex Salmond's comments have left that option open, but I foresee workability issues there: either it needs to be an Alternative Vote referendum (with a first and second choice), or a two-question affair, with Question 1 being Further Powers, and Question 2 being whether or not that should go as far as Independence.

A simple FPTP referendum wouldn't do, unless one option got more than 50% of the vote. If that didn't happen (which it probably won't), then the legitimacy arguments will last a lifetime. Even an alternative vote one would be shaky: again, unless an option got 50% of #1 votes, Scotland ends up implementing something on the grounds that it was a lot of people's second choice, not what they actually wanted, but less unacceptable than another otpion. And the two-question option would be fairly clumsy, Question 1 is wide-ranging, and Question 2 suddenly narrows it to one option. And what happens if only one option gets through? It would makes matters more complicated rather than simpler.

Holyrood Watcher wonders why it's suddenly legal to ask this question when it wasn't before. Has the Executive's legal team changed its mind? I'm no lawyer, but I'd guess not: the key is in the wording. Previous draft referendum questions involved the Scottish Parliament asking a direct question on Independence, which is a constitutional issue and so prohibited under Schedule V of the Scotland Act 1998. This question is different: it's asking the people whether Holyrood should talk with Westminster about Independence. It doesn't even say who'd do the legislating, so it's actually quite vague, especially as we don't know exactly what's in the White Paper.

Of course, this is all predicated on the SNP leading an Executive after May. I might have to break my own rules and get the crystal ball out...

A brief run-down of various things

Sir George Mathewson stepped into the election campaign, backing Alex Salmond and independence. Tony Blair dismissed the former Chairman of the Royal Bank of Scotland's comments as 'self-indulgent'. The counter-attack, of course, backfired: Mathewson is famous for working to turn an economic basket case vulnerable to foreign takeover into one of the world's major companies with global interests, while Blair of course will be remembered for his part in a war based on weapons of mass destruction that never actually existed. I therefore bow to Blair's superior experience and knowledge of self-indulgence.

Brian Souter offered the SNP £500,000, prompting an angry reaction and allegations that the SNP are going backwards on gay rights. Needless to say, I disagree with that assessment: the SNP's voting record shows that the majority of its MSPs are pro-equality and it's worth remembering that Souter is a long-standing supporter of independence. Grant Thoms has had more to say about this and his comments are well worth a read.

Adam Ingram, the UK Armed Forces Minister talked about how if independence were to happen, the English Navy would never arrange for ships to be built in 'foreign Scotland'. Ingram would do well to remember that for him, it's the Navy that would be foreign rather than Scotland: he is the MP for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow. He's also overlooked the fact that grey ships have ended up being built not at Ferguson's shipyard on the Clyde, but at the Remontowa shipyards in Poland. Which Act of Union incorporated Poland into the UK?

Finally, the Budget: Gordon Brown has thrown a hand-grenade into the election campaign with his plans to cut the rate of income tax to 20%, but to abolish the 10% 'starter rate' from next year. The other parties will now have to work out their response to that, given the tax-varying powers available to MSPs. However, possible bad news for graduates: Brown will be selling off £6bn of the student loan book to the private sector. There are already dark mutterings about commercial rates and graduate debt could be about to rise sharply. On hearing this news, I began to shake profusely. I am not a happy bunny.

West Dunbartonshire again

Via Grant, we learn that Martin Rooney has indeed been deposed with a month and a half to go until the Election.

It seems a bit pointless, but it's a mark of how the Labour group there has imploded, with ex-Labour and rebel Labour Councillors co-operating with the SNP - how often does THAT happen?! - to get rid of Rooney and replace him with Denis Agnew, a former Labour Councillor.

In my post about the Tories, I said how Labour's bloggers were on-message. Seems that's not the case in local government!

You must be Joe-king

The Joe in question is Joseph Devine, Bishop of Motherwell, who has antagonised me before. This is the first time I've been asked to comment on a story. Well, I say asked, that's not strictly accurate but I'm taking the comment as a hint that it's worth saying something (By the way, Grant, if you want to bash the Bishop, that's fine, but do you have to do it on my blog?).

Basically, Bishop Devine has had another pop at Labour for forsaking Christianity by supporting civil partnerships, so he won't be voting for them, and his congregation aren't as strongly disposed to supporting Labour as normal.

Why would they be? Labour are 10 years into government at Westminster, and 8 at Holyrood, so even in staunch Labour areas, an element of fatigue will be setting in. Meanwhile, off the top of my head, I can only identify two groups of people who might give a rat's arse about civil partnerships. The first consists of gay voters who might want to take advantage of the legislation at some point in the future, and while for me that point is some way into the future, I count myself in this group. For this group, the legislation is a good thing. The second consists primarily of fundamentalist nutjobs who are obsessed with what people might be getting up to in their bedrooms and who they get up to it with, and I count Bishop Devine in this group. What will everyone else be concerned about?

Why will everyone else be switching? It might be to do with hospital closures, Iraq, the exponential increase in Council Tax. It might be connected with Labour's fixation with a dull, grey status quo. Those are just some of the possible reasons to switch, there are many, and every member of Devine's congregation will have their own, so the Bishop's attempt to link the two is wrong.

Margaret Curran's hands are baffled by his decision: they shake angrily (they always do) as the rest of her rightly points out that Labour were far from alone in backing the legislation. She's right: there appears to be a consenus between the leadership of the various mainstram parties that gay rights are generally a good thing. I therefore agree with Margaret Curran, and I will never forgive the Bishop for making that happen!

However, following Devine's many rants against gay rights, Curran needn't be baffled or disappointed: she should be relieved that this man won't be joining her on any platform, and my advice to all parties is as follows: avoid this man. If he walks towards you, cross the road. If he calls you, hang up. If he e-mails you, empty your inbox completely, and format your hard drive just in case. This man is radioactive - touch him and you will be tainted. His endorsement, far from being a good thing, is an utter disaster, an embarrassment for any party who wants to be seen as modern and forward-looking.

Take your faith into the polling place, by all means. Vote according to your principles: that's the general idea, anyway. But remember this: there is one person, and one person only, who can decide with any finality how you should cast your vote. That person is you, yourself. It's not Bishop Devine (unless you are Bishop Devine).

He has a right to say what he wants (no matter how retarded). He has a right to vote how he wants. He has a right to say how he intends the vote. But if he even thinks of telling his congregation how to vote, then he has crossed a line. He may think I'm sinful, and I'll live with that, but to turn to people who respect him and value his opinion, and say "I'm voting for X, because it's the right thing to do as a Catholic," is immoral: it is, for me, an abuse of his position.

And he has the gall to say it's immoral to let people commit in law to spending the rest of their life whomever they choose!

I'm not a religious man, but I would ask a favour of those readers who are: pray for wisdom for Devine's congregation, and pray that they are strong enough to vote for who they want to win the Election, not who Joseph Devine wants them to vote for.

More nuclear fallout

First Malcolm Chisholm went. Then Jim Devine went, and commenters on my post about him are still chewing the fat over his motivation.

Now Nigel Griffiths, Deputy Leader of the House of Commons and MP for Edinburgh South, has resigned his ministerial post so as to vote against the government on Trident.

I don't wish to start the motivation debate again, in spite of his wafer-thin majority over the Liberal Democrats: Griffiths is not the kind of MP who would risk his short-term ministerial career simply in the hope of keeping his seat in the long term - there has to be something more.

How can I say this with certainty? His position was vulnerable at the last election, his constituency is packed with students and he stayed in the government and voted for top-up fees. The primary reason that he didn't lose his seat was because the LibDem candidate antagonised the student popluation herself, by supporting a quota on HMO licences in the area.

No, believe me, he must mean this, he must believe this, he must be doing what he genuinely thinks is the right thing.

On a wider point, here we have prominent Labour politicians, in strong positions, climbing the ladder and close to Gordon Brown, so going far in the future, willing to put all that at risk to oppose Trident. If that's how strong feeling is in the Labour Party, this vote might have trouble passing even with Tory support...

This week's Scottish Blogging Roundup is out, if you haven't seen it yet. Among this week's delightful treats are Patrick Mercer's outburst, David Mundell's memo, reasons to kick the Liberal Democrats, a near-consensus that the leadership of the RMT needs a slap, the prevalence or otherwise of the name Senga and more besides.

Cheers to Duncan, Mark and Steve for putting things forward. Special mention goes to Duncan who was too modest to put his own post in his list of suggestions!

Devine Intervention

The BBC report that Jim Devine, MP for Livingston, is resigning as PPS to Health Minister Rosie Winterton, with a view to voting against the Government when the House of Commons debates the replacement of the Trident system.

This of course will bring up memories of the resignation of Devine's predecessor, the late Robin Cook, who resigned his post as Leader of the House of Commons days before the invasion of Iraq. It will also have echoes of Malcolm Chisholm's resignation from the Communities Minister post in the Scottish Parliament, after he voted with the SNP on Trident. The job of PPS may be one of the lower rungs on the Parliamentary ladder, so this resignation might not have the same impact as Cook's or even Chisholm's, but that he's willing to climb down from it shows some presence of backbone and principle that does restore a little faith in politicians.

But should it? Consider Devine's constituency: in the By-Election to replace Cook, Devine saw a 10% swing against his party to the SNP. A majority of 13,097 turned into a lead of just 2,680. There's now an argument for calling Livingston a Labour-SNP marginal seat, with a swing of less than 4.6% on the By-Election result being required for the SNP to take it at the next Westminster Election, the sort of swing which, especially if people vote to give Labour a kicking then, will be possible.

And there are more immediate concerns: Devine's Westminster Constituency contains almost all of the Holyrood Constituency of the same name and Angela Constance (Devine's challenger 18 months ago) needs a swing of just over 6% to unseat Bristow Muldoon in May, and the opinion polls show that such a result is possible. Devine also represents about one fifth of the Holyrood's Linlithgow Constituency, where Fiona Hyslop needs a swing of less than 4% to defeat Mary Mulligan.

Perhaps I'm being unfair; perhaps this is just a co-incidence. But doesn't it seem odd that Devine acting on principle could also be seen as depriving the SNP of a stick to beat Labour with in a few weeks?

On second thoughts, if it is a political decision, it's a stupid one: this only really works if the House votes against the government and opposes the upgrade of UK nuclear capabilities. This is unlikely as the Tories are likely to vote with the government. Also, Devine can say that he voted against Trident, but he's not on the ballot paper: that falls to Muldoon and Mulligan, so Devine's own opinion is largely irrelevant, especially as both of those voted against both the SNP motion in the Scottish Parliament and the Liberal Democrat amendment to that motion, both of which opposed any government decision to renew Trident right now. "Vote Muldoon, because Jim Devine opposes Trident"? "Vote Mulligan, because Jim Devine will vote against upgrading the UK's nuclear weapons now"?

No, that's just too crazy. It must be principle. Fair play, Jim!

Northern Ireland

The final counts have been completed, and we are left with a result whihc provided numerous firsts:

The results (DUP 36, SF 28, UUP 18, SDLP 16, Alliance 7, PUP 1, Green 1, Independent 1) will produce an Executive, if one is formed, with a Unionist majority, in contrast to the previous 50:50 split. Ian Paisley would be First Minister, and Martin McGuinness would be his Deputy. The DUP would take a further 4 ministerial seats, Sinn Fein would take a further 3, the UUP would take 2 and the SDLP would have just one minister. The full Executive would therefore have seven Unionists and five Nationalists.

Northern Ireland has also seen its first Green MLA elected, in Brian Wilson. At this early stage, we won't know if he can repeat Robin Harper's success: Harper was of course the first elected Green parliamentarian in the UK, and the only one in Scotland until 2003, when he was joined by six others. Can Wilson follow suit? Only time will tell: at this stage we don't even know if the Assembly will even exist in April.

But the really radical first comes in South Belfast, where the Alliance Party's Anna Lo takes a seat at the expense of the UUP's Esmond Birnie. Lo is believed to be the first ethnic Chinese Parliamentarian not just in Northern Ireland or the UK, but the whole of Europe. She's also the first MLA from an ethnic minority, so Northern Ireland has stolen a march on the Scottish Parliament by two months.

The big questions now: can an Executive be formed? Will the Assembly continue to exist past April? We await the answers with bated breath.

Tory squabbling

Much has already been said about the leaked memo by David Mundell to David Cameron about the (dire) state of the Tory Holyrood Group, of whihc Mundell was a part until 2005. Was he therefore saying that he's the only Scottish Tory with any clout (bigheadedness), or was he admitting is that he's as useless as the others? Whichever, the memo itself isn't what I'm posting about.

Consider: with less than two months to go, Labour bloggers are on-message (not counting Terry Kelly, of course). LibDem bloggers are waxing lyrical about the joys of Menzies Campbell and Nicol Stephen. SNP bloggers are also behaving, so Party bosses needn't panic when they read what members are posting.

Now, in a way, this is disappointing: the internet is meant to be a place of freedom of expression and information, so it's a shame that the party machines have activated and people are behaving themselves.

But the Tories are interesting: Alan Simpson's blog seems to be an expression of despair at the state of his party, which would pretty much back up the contents of the Mundell memo, but it's provoked an angry reaction from Party colleagues. Y is a vowel seems to provide the strongest reaction. Opinion is polarised, and insults are flying. The comments sections of relevant posts on both blogs make for ugly reading.

Two months to go, and the Tories are flaming each other. If the online row is a fair reflection of the state of the wider party, if memoranda of despair are floating around Central Office, then there is a serious problem. While the discipline of other parties' blogs and bloggers might not make for as much fun to read, we still learn something. It shows that the other parties are going into May focussed, and bracing themselves for a fight: for them, the enemies are rival parties. For the Tories, they still feel that they have enemies within.

Terrywatch has a new home

Rather than post it all here (this blog is not about TelKel, really, it isn't), I'm going to stick my posts on the new TerryWatch blog, and just flag them up here.

I especially want to flag up today's effort: we all know what I think of his claim that he cares for the LGBT Community (he doesn't, he just wants to use us as a party political chew-toy), and he today asserted that he highlights cases of homophobic bigotry where appropriate. Turns out he's missed rather a big one.

The lying, hypocritical c**t.

Scottish Blogging Roundup

Duncan has unveiled this week's edition of what is rapidly becoming an institution - and an important one at that - in the weird and wonderful world of online Scottish Politics. As always, it's a fine piece of work.

Quality will take a bit of a nosedive next week as it's my turn to blend and distil the week's postings into one easily-imbibed tipple. The list of blogs I read is getting ever longer - as the new additions to the recently unearthed section proves - but my network isn't universal and I still miss the occasional gem. So, if there's any posts you want me to take a look at for possible inclusion next week, then drop me a line.

However rubbish you think I am, that other lot are worse!

This seems to be the message of the Labour campaign. Scotland on Sunday reports that Labour have in effect given up on running a positive campaign and will focus on two months of Nat-bashing.

The murmurs are that whatever they say about what they've done or what they're going to do, people won't believe them, so their best bet is to slag off the SNP and hope that they scare voters enough that they won't vote for them. But seeing as they've admitted that no one believes them anymore, why do they think that voters will believe this?

I am not a lover of negative campaigning, and I cringe when anyone stoops to the level of mudslinging. I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you provide people with reasons to vote for you, people will take them on board and they might well vote for you. If you provide reasons not to vote for the other guy, people will still take them on board and they probably won't vote for them, but they have no reason to vote for you either. The result: they stay at home. Labour should withdraw from all campaigns to increase the turnout now as their message is 'Don't vote for that lot', not 'Do vote for us'.

There is a logic to Labour not being in a position to talk about their future policies: they've been in charge at Westminster since May 1997, and have led the Scottish Executive since May 1999, so there's a sense in which anything they propose can be answered by saying, 'Why are you only doing this now? Why haven't you managed to do it already?' That said, having been in charge for a decade (as it will be by polling day), they should have a record good enough to stand on. Instead they have admitted, at least to themselves, that people don't think much of their record to date. What a humiliating admission!

So they are left with the option of slagging off the others. We have Cathy Jamieson spinning every question, every briefing, every press conference onto their perceived perils of independence. We have Jack McConnell criticising Alex Salmond for staying at Westminster (no mention of George Foulkes, who didn't even stand in 1999 or 2003, and even took a peerage before seeking election to Holyrood). Most baffling of all, we have Foulkes himself criticising Salmond for the same reasons! Oh, and we also have bloggers like Terry Kelly.

But let's look at their record. In 1997 Tony Blair could have stood on a platform and done the Birdie Song (and the Birdie Dance), and would still have got in. However, the other campaigns can best be summed up as follows:

1999 - Oh, my, would independence be a scary thing? Vote for us, and we'll keep it away.
2001 - Oh, my, wasn't Margaret Thatcher a horrible woman? Vote for us, and we'll stop her policies from coming back.
2003 - Oh, my, isn't independence such an uncertainty? Vote for us, we won't do anything of note but at least we're predictable.
2005 - Oh, my, isn't Michael Howard evil? You'd better vote for us, and he'll go away.

So really, we shouldn't be shocked by this move: it's Labour's modus operandi. They can't campaign without evoking memories of a Tory government that fell in 1997 (yet rather than seek to undo what happened in that period, they've instead bought into the ideas that came to the fore at that time), or evoking fears of what the SNP might do.

I was a fan of The West Wing, and I recall a flashback scene in one episode where Josh was on Senator Hoynes's campaign staff. Midway through a meeting, he complains: "I don't know what we're for! All I know is that we're for winning, and against someone else winning!" When I first saw that scene, I realised just how true that was of the current Labour party.

Of course, in The West Wing, Josh went to work for Jed Bartlet, who then won the Democratic nomination, and the Presidency. Hoynes had to settle for the Number 2 position. Labour activists, particularly those who love The West Wing (and there are a good number of them, I think), might wish to reflect on that.

The Party Line

...or rather, rail-line. Richard Thomson has been looking through the Electoral Commission's records of donations to Scottish Labour, and has two donations from Network Rail, totalling £11,000. What's interesting is that on the Network Rail website it says, "Network Rail is a 'not for dividend' company and all our profits go straight back into improving the railway"

Exactly how is donating £11,000 putting profits straight back into improving the railway?

West Dunbartonshire: a land of impeccable timing

In that the local Labour group on the Council, which has been riven with difficulties, appears to have finally pressed the self-destruct button. The Herald reports that four of their number have sided with the opposition to attack the new Leader, Martin Rooney, to keep the group's former Deputy Leader, Jim Flynn, in place as Housing Convener, and elect a number of opposition members to key positions.

The next move will take place within the next couple of weeks, as the SNP Group have called for a full Council meeting, and it's likely that a motion of no-confidence against Rooney will be tabled. According to the Herald, Rooney can only count on the support of six Councillors. There are sixteen in the Labour group: four have voted against him and the rest stayed away from the meeting.

But the rebels have another target in their sights: step forward one Jackie Baillie, the MSP for Dumbarton who criticised the former Leader and the way the Council was run. The Labour rebels want revenge and their aim is to force her resignation. They won't get it, and it'll have zero effect on her bid for re-election: it'll take a swing to the SNP of just under 12% to oust her (not likely), and even if an independent candidate emerges, a 50:50 split of her votes would see either her or the challenger elected.

Even if the Labour turmoil affects the Scottish Parliament poll, Baillie was an innocent party: she spoke out against the former administration following a damning report from the Accounts Commission and allegations that key spending decisions had been made in secret by a small group of Councillors, so any attacks on her can be viewed as an attempt to 'shoot the messenger', and she'll come out of the row in a fairly positive light, I suppose.

The Council poll, however, will be interesting to watch. Particularly as polling day is just nine weeks away.