STV have leaked the results of Scottish Labour’s list-candidate rankings. Alert readers will recall that Kezia Dugdale promised that her leadership would see an influx of “new talent and fresh faces” to the beleaguered branch office’s ranks.
So let’s see how that panned out.
Something kept nagging at the back of our minds as we read today’s front-page lead story in Scotland On Sunday about a battle between finance secretary John Swinney and a number of Scottish councils.
And then we remembered what it was.
It’s never usually terribly difficult to get a Scottish Labour MSP to express a view on anything. It’s hard to open a newspaper without being forced to hear Jackie Baillie or James Kelly’s opinion on something or other.
(Admittedly it’s generally the SNP, and the opinion is invariably that they’re bad and whatever they do is wrong – but still, they’re not shy about coming forward with it.)
So when Neil Findlay attacked the SNP for all having the same view on bombing Syria last night (about which he was inexplicably furious, even though that view was exactly the same as his own opinion), we thought it’d be easy enough to find out how many of his MSP colleagues were on the respective sides of the debate.
It turned out that we were wrong.
Today’s Herald reveals that the new Labour leader of Glasgow City Council, Frank McAveety (who was last seen in the headlines leering at a 15-year-old girl visiting the Scottish Parliament), has hired Bob Wylie as a special adviser.
Wylie was communications director of the scandal-riddled Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT), which readers may recall from last year’s banning of an advertising campaign for this site on the city’s Underground after receiving one complaint about it.
But he’s somewhat more famous for his part in an expenses junket which saw several of the quango’s senior management bill taxpayers for a 2008 “fact-finding” mission to Manchester whose timing just happened to coincide with the UEFA Cup final between Rangers and Zenit St Petersburg being played in the same city.
Wylie’s appointment follows the controversy which arose when Labour gave convicted drunken arsonist Mike Watson a job as education spokesman in Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow cabinet. And the two hirings threw some light on a thought we’d been thinking since reading a Kevin McKenna column in last weekend’s Observer.
In the spirit of straight talking, honest politics, I’m going to put my cards on the table right now: I’m a Corbyn voter. As a classic hand-wringing, middle-class, North London leftie, the mad fact of Jeremy Corbyn’s candidacy compelled me to register as a Labour supporter; empowered me to bet £3 on the foolish notion that Something More might somehow, suddenly, be achievable.
In no small part, I was inspired to do this by what happened in Scotland this year. I’m sure many of us were: finally, a viable political force south of Berwick was willing to show two fingers to austerity.
And if anyone called us out, if they told us we were crazy and that nobody would vote for such a “loony”, “radical”, “hard-left” candidate? Well, then we had a perfect example just north of the border to throw back at them. The SNP had hoovered up 50% of the vote on an anti-austerity ticket, and after all, aren’t we one nation? One people fighting for a common cause, et cetera? Couldn’t we put labels aside and work together?
Earlier today we highlighted some of the social-media charm of Labour blogger and BBC pundit Ian Smart, after the Scottish branch office deputy leader Kezia Dugdale demanded that the First Minister should take a more pro-active role in policing the comments of party members on Twitter and Facebook.
Mr Smart’s history of incredibly abusive and offensive comments stretches back many years. But of course, it wouldn’t be reasonable to berate Scottish Labour for its failure to act if it wasn’t aware of them. So we had a trawl through his Twitter followers list just to see if there was anyone who might have noticed and brought it to the leadership’s attention so they could have a quiet word.
Credit is due to those of the Scottish media who have taken up this site’s challenge to ask Labour the key question of the 2015 election debate in Scotland – “Are Labour prepared to form a government if they’re not the largest party in a hung parliament?”
(Because if the answer is yes then Labour’s entire Scottish election strategy – “Vote SNP get Tories!” – crumbles to dust, and if it’s no then Labour is saying that it’d be prepared to abandon not just Scotland but the whole UK to another five years of Conservative government purely out of spite against the SNP.)
Three of the party’s elected representatives have now been asked the question on air – James Kelly MSP by John Mackay of Scotland Tonight a week ago, branch office leader Jim Murphy by BBC Scotland’s Gary Robertson yesterday, and the shadow Scottish Secretary Margaret Curran last night (below), again by STV’s John Mackay.
As you can see, Scotland’s voters still await an answer. But on this page we’ll keep track of all the swerves, evasions and dodges until we get one, if we ever do.
Respect to John MacKay of STV, who on last night’s Scotland Tonight asked Labour MSP James Kelly the question this site has called for about whether Labour would stand aside and let the Tories rule if the latter were the largest party after May’s election, but Labour had enough seats to win a confidence vote and form the government with backing from the SNP and/or other parties.
Kelly, unsurprisingly, flapped and blustered and totally evaded it. But then we doubt he has the authority to make the tea in Scottish Labour, let alone speak for the party on key policy issues. If the question isn’t put repeatedly by all of the media to more senior Labour figures until an answer is produced, we’ll be wanting to know why.
With reference to our post from earlier today, we couldn’t help but notice Scottish Labour whining loudly this morning about the award of the ScotRail franchise to Dutch state-owned railway company Abellio. (On what sound like very good terms.)
We asked the party’s infrastructure spokesman James Kelly what Labour would have done instead had they been in power, and got no reply. So we went and had a look, and it turned out there was a clear and simple answer.
It feels almost insulting to you to even mention this, readers, so we’ll be brief.
“Balls seeks to reassure business by pledging to maintain low rate of corporation tax
Shadow chancellor commits Labour to retaining “the most competitive corporation tax rate in the G7“
Do we need to fill in the rest?
There’s been a fair bit of crowing from “Better Together” about some recent poll results. Which is fair enough – almost everybody likes to shout when they get some good news (though this site has consistently urged caution over polling findings months before a vote, whether favourable or not).
It is, however, always wise to look at the small print.
Referendum polls now seem to be arriving on a daily basis, but this morning sees the appearance of two that offer some rather striking contrasts in more than one sense.
The less interesting, despite showing a remarkable swing of 5% to the No side, is an ICM one for Scotland on Sunday, which the paper gets predictably excited about and illustrates with an extreme close-up of a No activist with his face plastered in “Better Together” stickers (despite the man seeming to be in his 50s) and contorted into a provocative, mocking sneer.
The more unsettling one, however, is in the Sunday Times.
Wings Over Scotland is a (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)
Wings Over Scotland
