Wings Over Scotland

This wasn’t online when we wrote this morning’s piece, but it is now:

“Labour now find themselves opposing a move welcomed by just about anyone with anything to say about education and the eradication of poverty.

Labour are now at loggerheads with charities and campaigners like the EIS teaching union, the STUC, the Unison union and Save the Children, not to mention the Child Poverty Action Group.

These are organisations Labour should surely be on the right side of.”

(“Record View”, the Daily Record, 8 Jan 2014.)

The Huffington Post, 15 December 2013:

“The number of Britons who think Ed Miliband is likely to be the prime minister after the next election has fallen dramatically, according to a poll.

Research by ComRes for the Independent on Sunday and Sunday Mirror found 21% believed the Labour leader would be in No 10 after the next election, down 10 points since May.”

This, remember, is after a summer in which the nation’s political commentators almost universally agreed that Miliband’s conference promise of an energy price freeze and subsequent talk of a cost-of-living crisis was winning the hearts of the country.

Last week three separate opinion polls showed Labour’s lead over the Tories down to a pitiful five points, despite 70% of the population saying they’d felt no benefit from Britain’s feeble economic “recovery”.

We don’t think Labour has ever sacked a leader who hadn’t contested at least one general election. Ed Miliband will lead them to the polls in 2015, and only one in five Britons thinks he’ll end up in Number 10. Don’t take our word for it. Don’t heed the experts. Don’t even examine the statistics. Listen to the people who’ll be voting.

And that’s something we can’t say every day.

Read the rest of this entry →

The Herald, 5 December 2013:

“A group of academics whose views on green energy underpinned a central plank of the Better Together campaign has published a shock U-turn report arguing that independence now offers the best way to meet Scotland’s renewables targets.

Professor James Mitchell of Edinburgh University, 2 December 2013:

“Under what circumstances would a UK Government (or Scottish for that matter) incline towards cooperation or conflict in its relations with its neighbour? The key is motivations.

Nobody should expect either Government to be motivated by good will. London will owe Scotland nothing and Edinburgh will owe London nothing.  Self-interest will dictate behaviour. Neither Government will act against its own self-interest but neither will act spitefully unless it wants to inflict harm on itself long-term.”

Read the rest of this entry →

Herald View in the Sunday Herald, 24 November 2013:

“The geriatric forecasts of the IFS are surely a vision of Scotland if it stays in the UK. Without a new immigration policy and economic policies that keep skilled Scots families in Scotland, how can we avoid an ageing population?

Carwyn Jones has also joined the clamour for the Barnett Formula on Scottish public spending to be cut. The message is clear: within the union Scotland faces a future of public spending constraints, falling population and economic decline. Scottish representation in Westminster will likely be cut under the McKay Commission into the consequences of devolution.

The Scottish Parliament will have to pay its way by raising taxes in Scotland, without having access to oil revenues or the ability to legislate for growth. Scotland may be dragged out of Europe if it remains in the UK.

This is the off-the-peg future offered by the unionists. They’d better have a care: Scots might actually start listening to what they say.”

It’s nice to know that – finally – we’re not the only ones paying attention.

That’s how often they tell us.

“The Barnett Formula, under which Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receive more public spending per head than England, has long rankled south of the border. Even Joel Barnett, who was chief secretary to the Treasury when the system was introduced in the Seventies as a temporary measure, subsequently disowned it.

 If the Scots vote to remain in the UK, as we hope they do, it cannot be as a result of a bribe from the English. A few years ago, the Calman Commission recommended scrapping Barnett, reducing income taxes in Scotland and then allowing Holyrood to levy its own rate on top, introducing an enhanced element of accountability and fiscal self-governance.

Such reforms should be openly debated ahead of the referendum: for the Scottish people are entitled to know that even if they vote to stay in the UK, the current method of financing public spending should not be allowed to continue.”

Our emphasis, from today’s “Telegraph View”.

The Barnett Formula is worth, by our sums, approximately £7bn a year to the Scottish economy. Bear it in mind when you’re being told about the “black hole” in Scotland’s finances after a Yes vote, because even if you vote No you can wave bye-bye to Barnett, and then Scotland really WILL be looking into a black hole.

We’re getting fair warning, folks. Pay heed.

As a counterpoint to this unpleasantness from a couple of weeks ago, this is Kevin McKenna in this week’s edition of the Scottish Catholic Observer:

“The difference between Scotland and the rest of the UK at this moment is the difference between “Come to me all ye who are heavy burden’d and I will set you free” and “Come to me all ye who are heavy burden’d and I will stop your benefits”. I know which country I want to live in.”

Click the quote to read the whole article.

Blair McDougall, director of “Better Together”, Dundee University, 30 October 2013:

“UK ministers are not going to fall into the trap of acting against Scotland until Scotland decides to leave the United Kingdom”

You heard it straight from the horse’s – well, let’s be kind and say “mouth”, folks.

Read the rest of this entry →

Eric Joyce, MP for Falkirk, 23 October 2013:

“The announcement by Ineos this morning that Grangemouth’s petrochemical plant is to close is terrible news. Hundreds of jobs lost directly, many more indirectly. The loss of a significant element of Scotland’s industrial capacity. Why has this happened?

Ineos has been flagging likely cuts for months but instead of engaging with the situation and organising a coherent plan to save jobs, Unite called a strike over a pathetic and petty issue related to Labour Party internal politics. By the time the union woke up to the reality workers faced, it was too late.”

Sounds about right to us. Mind how you vote tomorrow, Dunfermline folk.

The new Scottish Secretary, Alistair Carmichael, in Holyrood magazine in 2010:

“Getting rid of the Scotland Office is a ‘job waiting to be done’, says Liberal Democrat MP Alistair Carmichael, dubbing the current Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy as a ‘tax-funded campaign manager for the Labour Party in Scotland’.

In an interview with Holyrood magazine, Carmichael said that if his party got into power there would be no Scotland Office, asserting that he would instead head up a department of the Nations and Regions.

 He continued: “I think there is a job to be done but having the Scotland Office is not the right way to do it because it should be the clearing house between government in Edinburgh and government in London but now it is just a focal point for conflict.”

Read the rest of this entry →

The Scotsman, 19 September 2013:

“Only one in ten voters would prefer the next General Election to result in another coalition government, a poll has found as Nick Clegg sought to convince voters it was in the country’s best interests. More than two thirds (67 per cent) would prefer to see an outright victory by one party.

Even if the election does result in another hung parliament, more than half (51 per cent) would rather see the largest party rule as a minority administration than another power-share, the ComRes poll for ITV showed.

Voters gave a resoundingly negative verdict on the Lib Dems’ contribution to the coalition, with almost twice as many (46 per cent) disagreeing that it had been “good for the country” as agreeing (24 per cent).”

Read the rest of this entry →