Post Salmond

So this afternoon Alex Salmond has announced that he stepping down as leader of the Scottish National Party and First Minister of Scotland. So as well as asking what next for the UK nation as a whole we are now asking what next for the SNP?

Firstly as has long been muted Salmond himself has already been grooming his successor, it was she who had a major role in planning the referendum agenda and steering the Yes Campaign. Nicola Sturgeon the MSP for Glasgow Southside has been the Deputy First Minister since 2007 and been the Depute Leader of the SNP for the last 10 years. If she were to fulfill what many see as her destiny, if a little earlier than they expected she would be the first women to lead any devolved power in the UK.

But the question is would there be a coronation or would there be a challenger? If the latter who might the competition come from.

One possibility is like Alex Salmond an alumni of Linlithgow Academy and with his was also expelled from the party for being part of the 79 Group his long term friend Kenny MacAskill. While Alex has mellowed on the demand for a republican socialist stance, MacAskill has said that once Scotland voted for Independence there would be a referendum on whether to keep the monarchy. He stepped down from standing with Sturgeon on a joint ticket to be her Depute when Salmond decided to restand for the leadership himself on a ticket with her instead. It is possible that that loyalty may be repaid with him become her deputy ten years on so that may be one reason why he wouldn't want to upset the apple cart.

Another alternative might be John Swinney who had been leader between Alex Salmond and Alex Salmond from 2000-2004. Since 2007 he has been the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth a job which many within the party would say he has be great at. Especially in his first four years when he had to get through his budget as a minority administration. He is closely associated with the gradualist wing of the party, which in light of the failure to secure independence might come to the fore of people's thinking as something that is needed to make the most of the negotiations that will ensue for more powers for Scotland. The down side to a Swinney bid is that in his previous term in charge, unlike Salmond  who had been successful first time, he saw the parties fortunes slump.

The only other person with potential serious intent to lead the party is the man who challenged Swinney back in 2000. Alex Neil had the backing of the fundamentalist wing of the party. Instead of looking for a gradulaist approach it may be that some within the party are seeking a figure head to keep up the fundamentalist approach, if so Neil would be the natural figurehead for such feelings. Some may well feel that Salmond wasn't seeking to separate enough from the rest of the UK and was really fighting on a ticket of keeping the best bits of being in the UK and therefore the voters knew it wasn't real independence. Only if that is the case would Neil stand a serious chance of taking the leadership but it is the mood of the party that is important.

Nicola is in pole position, but as she also was heavily involved in the referendum campaign it is unlikely that she will go totally unchallenged from within. It depends which wing of the party is most angry with the way the referendum campaign was built up to be a success only to fall 10% short that may well decide who will take her on, and such a challenge may even come from both wings.

One thing though is certain. We live in interesting times.

The wider impact of the loss of Grangemouth peterochemical jobs

Around 800 people across West Lothian and Falkirk are to lose their jobs with the announcement today that Ineos are to shut down the Grangemouth petrochemical plant with immediate effect. The fate of the remaining 570 jobs linked to the refinery on the same site are yet to be determined.

It is one of the biggest loss of jobs in the area following on the the 3,100 lost with the shutting of the Motorola plant at Bathgate in 2001, the same number lost their jobs at NEC, Livingston the same year. More recently 500 lost their jobs with the shutting down of the Bausch and Lomb plant at Livingston.

But the danger of losing jobs in the petrochemical plant is nothing new. Indeed back in May 1992 my some time sparring partner the MP for Linlithgow and East Falkirk mentioned then recent job losses at the plant in his maiden speech:

"The town of Grangemouth is at the centre of Falkirk, East and has been noted for some time as a petrochemical town, boasting substantial production facilities for BP Oil, BP Chemicals, ICI, General-Electric Plastics, and Rhom and Haas (Scotland). My constituents are pleased at the commitment to investment by those companies, notably the £600 million investment by BP Chemicals in an ethylene cracker plant, the process technology labs of ICI and the Rhom and Haas plant upgrade. However, all is not what it once was. Harry Ewing noted the vast expansion of Grangemouth in 1971, but in 1971, when speaking about new employment, he said that the position was rapidly changing. I say without criticism of local management in Grangemouth that, in 1991–92, more than 1,000 job losses were announced in the town. Some 300 jobs have gone at the BP refinery, 250 have gone at ICI and 200 more redundancies are being sought. In addition, there were major job losses in the timber yards, which were made much of in 1971 by my predecessor."

It is sad day for the 800 who have lost their jobs today. However, both sides have been acting like stubborn mules in recent days, if not years. The owners seem to be doing all they can to get what they view as a white elephant off their books, while at the same time the workers are not prepared to take any chance in pay and conditions, fearing their own job without considering that all the jobs in the sector could be gone.

When Ineos came with what they called a survival plan, you would have thought that alarm bells would have been ringing with the workers. The fact that the plant has survived so long without a major change in conditions when others the area have had to accept such adjustments, knowing that if they didn't their job could disappear.

But the Grangemouth plants is almost a fifedom of Unite. The same union that has been at the centre of the Fallkirk Labour Party's election shenanigans. The Union appears to have been promising the workers take a stand and we'll see that everything will be alright, only to have found that Ineos were also not going to budge. it appears that the 570 jobs in the refinery are now also in danger. But with that there is also other jobs in the oil industry and possibly the ability of Scotland to actually process the oil that lies off its shore.

The last element is going to be of extremely great concern to Alex Salmond because part of the way he was going to fund an independent Scotland was through the production and processing off 'Scottish' oil within Scotland. If the Grangemouth plant were to totally close and be mothballed or decommissioned it could take years if at all to be able to get the processing of oil within Scotland up to the speed that would make it capable of supporting Scotland's economy to the extent that Salmond wants it to. If the oil is going to have to be processes and refined elsewhere that would be extra costs and less value added within Scotland causing a rather big hole in his economic plan.

Alex Salmond and the Royal Mail

So in his speech today Alex Salmond said that after independence he would return the Royal Mail to public ownership. Now I make no apology here for being a philately geek as this is where the issues arise from what Alex has said in such a blasé manner.

First up there is the name, he would have no powers over the Royal Mail. The only postal service in the World that does not need to use the nation's name in its title is that of the United Kingdom as in 1840 they were the first to offer a universal set price postal service. Every other nation from the USA to South Sudan has to have the name of the country in its postal service name and on its stamps.

I have no qualms about Alex salmond saying he would restore a public postal service, but I do when he says that it would be the Royal Mail.

However, on the subject of a public postal service, does that mean that the franchised counters out to grocery stores or other shops in our rural communities would also be brought back into public ownership and therefore into a custom state run enterprise. You see if Alex truly means that all units of the Scottish Mail Service are to be public we cannot have rural post services run in the local shop. Nor can we have grocers delivery groceries and mail as an all in one service. You see the post service has not been entirely publicly owned for some time. Sometimes the franchised counters do not live up to expectations or occasionally the store into which they have been franchised run into difficulty. Then the Royal Mail has had to find some alternative arrangement, and this has not always been immediate, nor it is always fit for the purpose that those locals would like to expect, initially.

Then we have the matter that Alex Salmond's post service would have to operate outside of the UK. People will know that the cost of posting to the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man is the same as to the UK. But these are crown dependencies. What Alex Salmond is wanting is a fully independent Scotland within the framework of  the UK.

While in the UK to post a letter up to 100g currently costs 60p first class and 50p second class. If I wanted to post something from Londonderry to Letterkenny, it would cost 88p minimum (up to 10g) but rise to £2.38 for between 90 and 100g. This is because Ireland counts as being in the EU. I know of people close to the border who have family in Northern Ireland who will order to the Northern Irish address as it is cheaper by quite some way.

Independence and the mail will have an affect on Scottish jobs.

Amazons largest fulfillment centre is in Dunfermline. But with increased mail costs to the rest of the UK will it be economically viable to keep both the one there and the one at Gourock? Probably not. So they will probably close the Gourock centre and scale down the one at Dunfermline. The same applies to other distribution networks that have based themselves in Scotland because of the space. With increased postage as shown above being quite steep for even small items the cost of distribution by mail order would mean a scaling back of these type of industries. That would mean a lot of lost jobs in the central belt where the M8, M9 and M80 triangle have prided themselves in becoming a distribution hub.

Independence would affect these jobs, these industries. Therefore is not enough for Alex Salmond to merely say that under independence the Royal Mail will be returned to public hands. Under independence mail will cost a lot more to send outwith Scotland and that has an impact on the cost of running companies and on people's jobs.

The Royal Mail is an essential service to people all across the UK. But under independence 5.25 million of those citizens will find it has an impact on them, the work they do, keeping in touch with family and friends and maybe even their job. People in the borders will be able to get around this, they'll use the address of their family or friends in Carlisle or Berwick to order stuff from English based firms. You don't believe this. This already happens with people from the Republic ordering stuff from UK companies to their f&f in Derry/Londonderry, Newry or Enniskillen.

There are more questions that Alex and his SNP team have to answer about postal services under an independent Scotland, because this is another area where we are Better Together.

Donald where's yer towel mon?

My friend Caron has posted about how disappointed she was that the Alex Salmond and other white men launched a Yes to Independence campaign.

They also as she points out launched it on Towel Day.

Clearly they missed a trick, they needed someone like the guy on the left to really launch it in style today, instead of in some dingy cinema with a whole pile of men talking at us.

Although one phrase that I did hear on the news about the launch was that Salmond had come to a launch without any clear policy. Yes that is how the BBC reported it nationally. Of course wanting a referendum is one thing, but what you are going do once you have it is another think.

When the SNP started talking about it in the 1970s they wanted a republic, a new Scottish currency, but most of all they wanted their hands on North Sea oil which had been recently discovered. Now they seem to want to keep Elizabeth as Queen of Scots, keep the pound as it is far cheaper for them than having to set up a Scottish Central Bank. They also seem to not be too sure what they are wanting to happen to Scottish troops, or air bases, they appear to want to keep them all as they are, with one exception the nuclear base at Faslane.

The G8 of course are also meeting at the  discuss the small matter of some of the small nations that Alex Salmond talked about holding their own in this world. We know that Spain a somewhat bigger nation that Scotland more or less equivalent to the size of the whole UK, is in difficulties. But he seems to ignore the fact that Scotland's banks were themselves bailed out and will still be working to pay that back come 2014.

No doubt over the next 2 years we'll learn more about just how dependent this independence will be, but for now for Towel Day a little gratuitous chest nudity of what appears to be a white man seems to be in order, even if Alex has missed a trick for the ladies and gay Scotsmen there.

What Alex Salmond said?

The best way to look at the emphasis of what Alex Salmond said as he launched his bid for a referendum on Scottish independence is through this Wordle.

In all that is 2312 words during which he said some of the keys ones this many times:

• Scotland 39
• referendum 32
• people 25
• Parliament 16
• government 15 (of which UK 5, Scottish 4)
• Scottish 13
• independence 12
• country 12
• question 10
• consultation 9
• UK 7
• Burns 6
• fair 5
• Electoral Commission
• Union 3 (One the 1707 Union, one European Union and one a new social union)
• legal challenge 1
• mandate 1

One of those words above I highlighted was question. In his speech he has outlined what he wants the question to be. It is a very simple non-ambiguous question:

"Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?"

There can be no confusion as to the extent of that question. There would be no need for a follow up question is the question had been the convoluted, "Do you want the Scottish Parliament to open negotiations to lead towards an Independent Scotland" which at one point was muted.

If that is the question so be it. That question is clear. It is a straight yes/no. It is not confused by an option of devolution max, which though my preferred option is not one that is being offered at this time. Therefore I think the Secretary of State for Scotland should allow that question to be put to the people, the Electoral Commission will be running the practical side of the referendum. Let's get the Scottish and Westminster Parliaments around a table to discuss the niggling issues.

Game on.

Not even Salmond expects the Spanish Inqusition

The latest obstacle to Alex Salmond's vision of an independent Scotland within Europe comes from a rather unexpected source: Spain.


They have indicated that they would veto accession of an independent Scotland into the EU. The separation of other European states is something that Spain in the past has taken a dim view on, they have refused to recognise Kosovo as an independent state.


The Spaniards have real fear that a peaceful split in the United Kingdoms 300+ year Parliamentary union could lead to increased calls from the Basque and Catalonia regions for independence. The Basque region in particular has only recently ceased to be an internal terrorism threat, with Eta calling its ceasefire on 20 October of last year. The fear is that even though Scotland might head into a peaceful settlement, if Spain refuse to allow the same for these two regions the violence could return.

Already they are facing demands for a stronger financial deal from the Catalan premier Artur Mas, based on the Scottish agreement with London and the threat of the splits.

Of course Alex Salmond has a number of things that he is relying on for his vision of independence, one is that he will retain the Monarchy, though there are rival claimants for the Scottish throne that may seen the Jacobites return for a claim. The other is that the Parliament in Scotland has, in his opinion, the right to call the referendum itslef, despite this power NOT being devolved from Westminster. central bank will still be the Bank of England and they will still use Sterling. And of course his determination that Scotland will remain in the EU.


The reaction of the Spanish however, puts another kibosh on Salmond's plans. But no doubt he will continue to bluster on through despite this.


For those of you, like Tom Elliott from earlier this week, bluster from Salmond is the default position for the SNP to attempt to get their way.There was bluster about centralising a Local Income Tax rate in Holyrood, that is until it was found that his Government had defaulted on the payments to Her Majesty's Revenues and Customs that allowed Scotland to alter Income Tax by up to 3% from the UK rate. There was bluster to get a Council Tax freeze in the Concordat with promises to provide for the shortfall centrally which while the first has been observed the second is certainly selective in its effectiveness and many councils are making cuts to keep key services going.

The lost opportunity because of that stupid cartoon

There was much made of the stupid cartoon that came out the Scottish Lib Dem press machine, but there is something to just what dreamworld Alex Salmond is living in over his quote about Scotland and Qatar. What he said was:

"As nations, we both have considerable expertise in oil and gas production, but as we look to the future and a low-carbon economy, we must increasingly develop new technologies.

"We discussed the remarkable similarities between our respective nations.

"Although both Scotland and Qatar have common strengths in the oil and gas sector, we are both seeking to develop our low carbon energy industries.

"This is where Qatar's focus on becoming a global knowledge hub links well with Scotland's considerable reputation as a world-leading education nation."

Scotland a world leading nation in education? Where is that league table. According to the Programme for International Student Assessment that is just average. Edinburgh may be the 36th Rank University in the World this year, with St Andrews 85, but out of 12 UK universities that is just 2. Glasgow does come in at 102, Aberdeen 151and Dundee 176, none of this is totally top of the world stuff, though not to be sniffed at.

So the real issue that the Scottish Liberal Democrats should have been attacking Salmond on was education from that cartoon. That and the commitment to green energy as Patrick Harvey did the other week. Unfortunately those ships have sailed.

Now maybe my former colleagues in Scotland are trying to pretend it is business as usual, maybe they are scared of the impact that the elections in may had. But there is something that has to be done it is choose where, when and how to attack. Sadly such insight was lacking on this occasion. With backs against the wall trying to avoid seeing Scotland swept away on a Nationalist tide you need to be smart in how to stem that tide not give it more power to the waves that come with it.

Patrick Harvie calls Alex Salmond on his green credentials

At the start of last weeks Scottish National Party conference last weekend First Minister Alex Salmond said:

"We [Scotland] are leading the global revolution in clean, green renewable energy, and we can and should be at the cutting-edge of pioneering carbon capture technology."

This week however, co-convenor of the Scottish Greens Patrick Harvie asked just how green can Alex and his SNP be? In his speech he said:

"Alex Salmond now has a very clear and simple choice - he must either fail on Scotland's much-vaunted climate change targets, or he must drop his unconditional support for the fossil fuel industries. 

"First, the new coal-fired power station at Hunterston must be blocked. Then he must rule out shale gas extraction, which his energy minister has refused to do. 

"Then, because CCS [carbon capture and storage] can never be applied to most uses of oil anyway, he must drop his support for dangerous deepwater oil drilling in Scottish waters."

The SNP are of constantly on about how they are not benefiting enough from the North Sea oil and gas industry. "Black gold" is the jewel in their crown for their being able to finance their dream of an independent Scotland. There has never been any secrecy about that not from the 70s the whole way through to the present day you will hear some SNP elected representative or candidate harp on about it being Scotland's Oil. Yet they continue simultaneously as Patrick has pointed out to try and balance appearing green with energy while looking to extract as much money as possible from fossil fuels.

So Patrick is right to ask what is it to be Alex? Oil, gas and shale or renewables?

Big Eck's SNP bigs up a Facebook unscientific poll - Statistics Not Partisanship

I just saw this headline on the SNP website

Facebook poll shows majority for independence

For a start we all know the 'accuracy' of Faebook polling, indeed I was surprised that I hadn't picked up on it before now. It turns out it is one of those questions that get asked on facebook from time to time

Even the SNP report claims that 45% of such a poll is a majority with 42% failing. Now that places the result within any statistical margin of error. But not a clearance of 50% within a margin of error, especially as a Facebook poll cannot be weighted to take out any irregularities or non-representation of the sample group.

When I checked the figures for first preference as this is not a two question option as Caron has been blogging about, were:

Yes to full independence for Scotland 7447 44.3% of decided 46.4%
Yes to devolution max 1356 8.1% 8.4%
No 7239 43.1% 45.1%
Undecided 761 4.5%

Hardly a majority by any measure and too close to call by most I say. Obviously the SNP don't stand for Statistics Not Partisanship.

Salmond may not have gone mental but still in denial

As I blogged late on Wednesday there was a little dispute between First Minister Alex Salmond and Dunfermline and West Fife MP Labour's Thomas Docherty. Well his special advisor Douglas Chapman, leader of Fife Council and candidate from the 2006 by election candidate for Docherty's seat has stepped in to deny that the First Minister went mental.

In fact he went so far as to say that Mr Docherty had prepared a fantasy press release. This is good from the man who's team on polling day in Dunfermline and West Fife pulled together a fantasy stake board message that suggested that there was going to be a shock SNP win on the day. His full statement that appears in the Dunfermline Press is:

"Any suggestion that Mr Salmond lost his temper is absolutely incorrect.



"I was in the room along with guests and senior council officers and nothing untoward happened, other than Mr Docherty's approach was totally inappropriate given that the focus of the visit was making children feel really proud of their new school.


"In fact, most people in the room were unaware of any supposed incident and Mr Docherty and his press office are guilty of pure fiction. If anything, it was Mr Docherty's inappropriate approach to Mr Salmond that was aggressive and the First Minister's response was a model of restraint.


"Mr Docherty's childish behaviour was questionable in raising a political issue at the opening of a new school, which was a day for the proud pupils, parents and teachers.


" Mr Docherty then left - presumably to prepare his fantasy press release - and didn't even have the good grace to stay to share the day with the children.


"These actions will be seen by many of his constituents as being not only juvenile and inappropriate but wholly crass and opportunistic.

Mr Docherty's response was:

"If Douglas Chapman's happy putting his name to this statement for Mr Salmond that's fair enough but he was in the room and he knows what really happened."

What I find strange about the whole thing is that  both Alex Salmond's statement on the day and Douglas Chapman's statement now are about image management of the leader and not of the party. There has still been no SNP leadership about the question of Mr Walker's comments yet they are scurrying to build the image of Alex Salmond. From the stories I have heard on doorsteps of Linlithgow while campaigning there I can fully believe that Alex Salmond could lose his temper when he believes he is in private.

Salmond! Calm down and go and wait outside the headmaster's office

 "You don't bring politics into a school, that's just daft."

Was the comment made by a politician at the end of a visit to a school. Yeah, you heard that right some daft politician tried to stop an opponent asking him a question while he was on a school visit. The daft eejit to say something that daft was none other than the first minister of Scotland Alex Salmond.

Here are the facts, well at least both STV and the Dunfermline Press are having to report what happened as the incident happened away from teachers and pupils and possibly also the press.Thomas Docherty the Labour MP who defeated Willie Rennie in 2010 apparently asked the First Minister to condemn the Nazi comments of the MSP for the area Bill Walker (who was also present) about some of the LGBT groups challenging his support of the John Mason amendment to the Equal Marriage consultation. This is the sort of action that any MP or MSP could expect to recieve on an regular basis.

Apparently the First Minster apparently got angry and asked Docherty, 'How long have you been an MP son?' before one of his minders stepped in.

The full quote from Mr Salmond to the press afterwards was:

"I think he's only been an MP for a year or so and he'll learn as time goes on that there's a time and a place for everything and you don't bring politics into a school, that's just daft.



"However, it certainly didn't mar the day. I think it's a reflection of his inexperience."

Ironically the man he was defending Bill Walker has been an MSP for only 3 months as opposed to 15 of Mr Docherty. Mr Salmond could have said the comment from Mr Walker, which the Dunfermline MSP has since retracted, was a reflection of HIS inexperience. Yet the First Minister has yet to pass any comment after this issue has been going on for a week.

Maybe Mr Salmond needs reminding that his party have currently only promised to consult on the issue as in their manifesto. Surely he could have reminded Mr Walker of that, while reprimanding him for his comments. However, there may a million reasons why the First Minister isn't prepared to take a public stance on the subject of equal marriage, or maybe any LGBT issue, if he is in the pay of Brian Souter on such issues he is not fit to serve as First Minister of a diverse and progressive Scotland, either as part of the UK or as an independent state.

Of course this isn't the only time that the brasqueness, duplicity and stupidity of Alex Salmond has caused tensions this week.

Update Friday 19 August Today the First Minister has denied "going mental" as Mr Docherty put it, however there is still no cendemnation.

When Less is More for Alex

Speaking to COSLA's annual conference last week Alex Salmond said:

"This Government will not sit idly by and accept cuts imposed from Westminster."

Looks to me like the no cuts message the SNP have been spouting for months.

Yet on Saturday at his party's General Election launch he said:

"Because at this election the message is simple.

"MORE NATS MEANS LESS CUTS"

It may be simple but it is not clear.

He's been accusing the other parties and even in this speech of having the "axe sharpened and poised" yet for all his rhetoric he has just announced that even voting SNP there will be cuts. Where was the clarion cry of "U-Turn"?

I'll be fair earlier on he did also say:

"The London parties talk about cuts as though it was all about numbers on a balance sheet. But we know different. Behind those cuts will be real people, real services, real jobs.

Thing is the Liberal Democrats are aware that having to make cuts to make up for Labour and the bankers folly can make an impact on people lives. That is why we are balancing cuts with holding back on some of our objectives. Balancing taxes so that the lowest paid don't suffer while we find ways to pay for things fairly. We've also promised to balance cuts with investment in employment and education opportunities so that those that have been suffering will have a way to make things better both for themselves and for our economy.

Salmond says "we as a community know the value of looking out for each other; the value of investing in education, in housing and in health." Dare I ask where is the new investment in school infrastructure since the SNP came to power, the investment they they promised to match brick for brick has not been forthcoming.

STV = Salmond Televion?

Is Scottish Televion (STV) truly an independent broadcaster or has the Scottish Government been manipulating it for its own PR?

The reason the question has to asked is that a letter has come to light between STV chief executive Rob Woodward and First Minister Alex Salmond. The letter gives a commitment tot STV coverage of the Scottish Government's Homecoming festival last summer and mentions plans to introduce more Scottish programmes. However a telling line is:

"I will write separately to Linda Fabiani (then the culture minister] to introduce our commercial director, David Connelly, to explore how we can incorporate our innovative thinking around television exposure to the benefit of the government."

What can the phrase 'to the benefit of the government' mean? Well The Times Scottish edition is saying that a redacted amount of taxpayers money was being used to sponsor three television series made by STV under the banner of Homecoming Scotland. The shows had an overall budget of £5 million. This from a government that is complaining that Westminister is not giving them enough money for essential elements.

I did comment that a recent SNP party political broadcast looked like a Visit Scotland advert. Is it true that three whole series have been paid from from taxpayers money to be a elongated advert for Scottishness and the SNP agenda?

As Iain Smith the Liberal Democrat Culture Spokesman said:

"Independent braodcasters aren't there to act as PR agencies for the government."

The shows in question which included Made in Scotland and Scotland Revealed replaced The Bill and Doc Martin in the schedules. The former highlighted Scottish icons and the second looked at scenery, however the first did have a over nationalistic approach in some of its subject matter and presentation.

Was this another staging post of independence by stealth?

Nicola - I Made a Mistake Over 'Mistake'

"I regret the use of the word 'mistake' to describe Mr Rauf's offence.

"As I hope will become clear from other parts of the letter, I did not intend to downplay the seriousness of the crime that had been committed.

"However, I accept the use of the word mistake was open to that interpretation."

So said Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon yesterday in her ministerial statement about her letter to the court regarding Abdul Rauf. She also went further to say that her appeal to the sheriff to consider an alternative to a custodial sentence was more in keeping with her former occupation as a solicitor than as an MSP.

The other week the First Minister saying he supported his deputy's letter 110%. Saying she was duty bound to write everything that she did. As Annabel Goldie pointed out admitting that she did not do everything right showed her candour, humility and courage. She contrasted this with the last First Minister's Questions before the recess saying:

"We got the usual Alex Salmond decibel delivery of rhetoric and arrogance.

"Where there should have been humility and reflection all we got was bluster. Where there should have been an apology, all we got was defiance."

The problem of delaying a statement from Nicola until now, and not having a plan to deal with this on Thursday 11 February when it broke was now that the First Minister has shown his knee-jerkedness once again. Instead of being a head of reason looking at the full picture, he jumped immediately to the defensive. If Ms Sturgeon had indeed been prepared a similar statement to Parliament she should have been allowed to make it then. As it was the First Minister was prepared to let this boil fester.

Sadly this is the head of the Government that is meant to be dealing with Westminster on a number of issues regarding Scotland's future. How can we trust a calm approach from him to such sworn enemies. We already know the mantra he shouts at Westminster, they are cutting Scotland's budget he proclaims, while at the same time he is arguing that Scotland can stand on its own two feet as he heads onwards with his desire for independence.

Maybe all the calls for resignation after that particular Thursday were for the wrong head. Maybe the First Minister should resign making way for the candour, humility and courage of his deputy, then maybe things can get done a little easier around here.

This Wimmen Tis Fa Turning

Once upon a time, not so long ago, a grey haired leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party said:

"You turn if you want to. The Lady's not for turning."

What would Baroness Thatcher make of this?

Before 12:30 during First Minister's questions Annabel Goldie told the First Minister:

"Many questions need to be answered and must be answered if Miss Sturgeon is to retain the confidence of this Parliament."

Yet within a couple of hours when an emergency meeting of the Bureau met to discuss the possibility of an emergency statement, the SNP said no and when it went to the vote the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Nationalist Party as they have done so often voted with the SNP so those questions will not be answered swiftly.

Annabel is not so much the iron lady, as the ironing lady, dashing away with the smoothing iron, to smooth the path for a increasingly trouble Alex Salmond and the SNP who have also announced that their plans to introduce the Referendum Bill plans were now shifting to after the general election.

A Positive, Serious Contribution Deserves a Serious Answer

No my ears were not deceiving me. That is what Alex Salmond replied to Tavish Scott's question regarding colleges admission (or not) findings and youth unemployment in Scotland.

Basically Tavish pointed out that 85% of colleges in Scotland have had to turn away applicants this year, many for the first time ever with some having seen a 800% increase in applications. In West Lothian the number of applicants has increased by 41% over last year, Oatridge college who have never had to turn away applications before saw a 74% increase in applications and turned away 300. These findings came from a Liberal Democrat survey of the the 43 colleges in Scotland looking at the numbers of applicants each has had to turn away over the last 3 years, the first of its kind to be published. On top of this the number of our young people claiming Job Seekers allowance over the past year has risen by 35%.

Jeremy Purvis the Finance Spokesperson has said about the findings in the report:

"Too many young people have been hit twice. They can’t get a job and now they can’t get a college place. What government can do is give them the opportunity to gain the skills and experiences that will help them get the most from economic recovery when it comes. Scotland as a whole will benefit from having more people ready and active for the workplace."

An increase in college places and training opportunities is one of the issues that the Lib Dems have been applying pressure on the SNP Government to provide for to help in this recession.

Alex Salmond's response to the actual question "Will the First Minister agree that action taken by his Government in this Budget must increase college places across Scotland?" is encouraging as is his acknowledgement that a recession inevitably increases the demand on college places.

Jeff has already pointed out that he thinks the answer "dropping the jousting" he gave Iain Gray and Annabel Goldie is a "clear signal that the budget would reflect Tavish's concerns" I would tend to agree, it seems that lessons have been learnt over the last 12 months on both sides.

Bursting Dale's Bubble

Yesterday modesty almost forbid Mr Dale posting some glowing comments about himself from the Daily Mail including this (readers of a delicate anti-Dale deposition should look away now):

"There are many reasons to celebrate Iain Dale. The author, journalist and aspirant politician for the Conservative Party is not only a much-valued contributor to GQ, he’s also the publisher of Total Politics magazine and has become something of an online deity because of his celebrated blog, Iain Dale’s Diary."

Well of course Total Politics is holding its own Election Question Times* at a selection of City Inns.

• 4 February, Birmingham - Andrew Mitchell MP, Jacqui Smith MP, John Hemming MP, Marc Reeves (ex-editor Birmingham Post)
• 11 February, Manchester - Hazel Blears MP (tbc), Graham Bradley MP, Mark Hunter MP, David Ottewell (Manchester Evening News)
• 18 February, Leeds - David Davis MP, Hilary Benn MP (tbc), Greg Mulholland MP
• 25 February, London - Tony McNulty MP, Eric Pickles MP (tbc), Lynne Featherstone MP, Steve Richards (The Independent)

You notice something about that list?

Not a single venue is Scotland....and....not a single SNP panellist on any of them. But do I hear Alex Salmond up in arms? Was my February copy of Total Politics confiscated at the border in its clear sleeve? Are Nats taking Total Politics down from the shelves of WH Smiths across Scotland and burning this promoter of only the Unionist parties and their politics in the streets outside?

So I guess Iain Dale is just a minor deity. One that fails to register on the great ego that is Alex Salmond's radar. In the words of Terry Pratchett but a small god.

*Panel line-up may change without notice.

What If Alex Faced the Cameras on National TV

Ok it must be Alex's time of the month. Yeah you guessed it once again he his making headlines regarding the Prime Ministerial debates. The BBC are in a sit down chat with the man who not only has no aspirations to be Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but who also at some point next year will no longer want to serve it from its Parliament.

I've mentioned before the different claims of other parties, UKIP the Green, the DUP and even the BNP on various factors over the man who leads the challenge in a mere 59 seats. But today I'm going to humour him and the SNP supporters and imagine that Alex Salmond actually gets to be in the debate. Now the format has not been set out for any of the three debates so questions may come the audience in attendance, a chairman or may come from the other leaders in the studio. So here we go here are some of the questions or supplementaries that Alex may have to answer.

When you become Prime Minister what would you party do for....?

I'm leaving the rest of this question blank. The only time any SNP leader becomes Prime Minister would be when they started to win seats in England, or if unfortunately after entering a coalition the SNP deputy leader took on the caretaker Prime Ministerial reigns while the larger partner went about the process of selecting the actual next Prime Minister. As this may well be the preamble to any number of questions in this debate how is Salmond or any other SNP spokesperson going to be able to play these with a straight bat without looking stupid.

Mr Salmond, you fought hard to get into this debate yet you are leaving the commons, what is the point?

It is bound to come up isn't it. Alex Salmond has been fighting long and hard to get into these debates yet is stepping down in the election. Indeed any press release from the SNP says that they want Alex Salmond in the debates so there are variations on this question. It may have the addition that many people cannot vote for you yet you have fought for your democratic right to represented (what about other UK wide parties etc).

You want a referendum on Independence but are going to have to join with the Conservative and Unionist Party to do so, is this a marriage or rather a divorce of convenience?

This could well be a question that makes both Salmond and Cameron squirm. Of course well now that such an Alliance is merely a convenience for both side. If a referendum passes the Conservative hold on power in Scotland increases, if it fails they would like like being the good guys in certain Scottish eyes and may be able to squeeze the odd nationalist vote in certain seats. For Salmond to admit that his fate lies in the hand of the Conservative and Unionist Party shows just what a level of inferiority he actually holds. He hasn't got the majority of seats or votes in Scotland that would force a hand he has to go begging bowl in hand to get the whole reason d'etre of his single issue party (let's face it there only one issue of their 2007 manifesto that is still standing in tact) moved upon.

The danger as any Lib Dem will happily tell you of appearing too eager for one specific side, other than your own, to succeed in an election but not by enough that they need your help always leads to trouble.

It leads to the follow up.

Suppose you get you referendum and it fails, will you remain in coalition and what will your party do for the people of the rest of the UK seeing as Mr Cameron won't let you vote on devolved issues?

The clash of the West Lothian answers will again have them both squirming. The Tories have suggested that they will stop Scottish MPs voting on English only matters. (I do wonder if the same will apply to only let Northern Irish, Welsh and Scottish MPs take votes on the future of their various devolved states). So shoring up a majority with the support of a Scottish only party surely defeats the object. Stopping maybe three of his own members and (I'll amuse the Nats further) 20 SNP MPs may not be enough to get any legislation through, including stopping Scottish MPs having a vote on English matters. Of course Salmond's answer to the West Lothian Question looks straight forward, do away with the Union. But thankfully most Scots are of the option that isn't the way to go.

However, the answer of what an SNP aligned with the Tories could possibly do could well harm not only the SNPs chances, and as for the Tories they will not want the Salmond claims of we can only do this with Dave's help to cause their own votes in marginals to do a wobbly and vote for the other guys. Salmond's grand plan to say Dave is our man may well unravel under the heat of the studio lights and lead onward to the ballot box.

Actually you know now that I think of all the booby traps of question for both Salmond and the leader of the Conservative and Nationalist government to answer the more I want to see Salmond in the debates. It will help the sitting Lib Dems in Tory marginal hopes. It could well lead to a hung parliament of even greater need for a strong third party to back it up, it could actually lead to Nick Clegg getting some fairness into a programme of Government. I think Salmond's persistence is going to be his undoing and in a good way with it that of Dave's agenda of words.

You know I just may have been wrong to want to steer Salmond away from the spotlight of the National stage. I do hope the questions are up to speed to show up the ludicrously of the SNP being there, their failure to keep their end of the bargain for Scotland, and makes them into a laughing stock on National TV.

All They Want for Christmas is Votes

Earlier in the month Jeff said that the "storm over Alex Salmond's choice of Christmas card really quite remarkable and not a little bit depressing." Here is the card that he is talking about from the Scottish First Minister.



He went on the say:

"The accusation that Salmond has politicised Christmas is part of a growing trend for everything to be reduced to a petty level, and I do mean all parties for that."

So he seems to admit that there is a little politicising going on with Salmond's choice of imagery, however today the Times have run a report on what the other National leaders have sent out this year.

First we have the Prime Minister Gordon Brown, his card designed by the 19 year-old winner of an environmental photography competition.



Well there is a bit of Christmas in there with the Holly and a decoration hanging on it. Though maybe this is one decoration that the Brown's will come to when unpacking them next Christmas, and years thereafter and say "do you remember when?". But then again when he is in so much danger of not living behind the famous imagery of that door is he using it as a subliminal political message to return him through that door at some point this year.

David Cameron's scene is a snow covered tree.

But obviously he has been taking advise from Tory supported Kirsty Allsop in that it is all about 'location, location, location'. The tree of course is situated right in front of the clock tower of the Palace of Westminster*. The image is also cut out into the shape of the Conservative Party's symbol.

So maybe Jeff is right all the parties are clearly at it in politicising their Christmas cards. Except we haven't seen Nick Clegg's yet.

This wasn't designed by a child in a local school in the constituency, though Jeff did condemn Ian Gray for doing what a lot of Parliamentarians do in choosing their Christmas cards in this way (including SNP ones, whoops). It is actually is drawn by 8 year-old Antonio and 5 year-old Alberto Clegg. I guess in future years the proud dad will not be allowed to employ his family members in this way.

On a personal level I like the fact that Nick's card really is a family Christmas card. My elder nephew's school produce a card for each of the kids each year (may mean I get two this year as they are both at the same school). These are now a constant part of my Christmas decoration box. They are charming and cute, a reminder of what Christmas is about or at least who it is most special for. The other three no matter how you look at it contain some sort of political subplot. The Clegg card is something that many families send out every year.

Meanwhile my two nephews are seeing their Uncle Stephen and Aunt Jacqui in the same room for the first time ever in their lives this Christmas (apart from the elder's dedication service). She does work as a paediatric Doctor in Australia so coming back at this time of year isn't always possible.

* Any of you who though it was in front of Big Ben better not be hoping to win that QI game under the tree this Christmas. Big Ben is just the name of the deepest sounding bell of the peel in the tower.

Time For Alex to Wake Up and Cut the Big Bosses Pay

Alex Salmond keeps telling us he has the right to govern Scotland and to an extent he is right, he party does have the largest block in Holyrood. But his decision in 2007 to form a minority Government means that he has to work with others to get things done. If Aaron Sorkin were to really want to top The West Wing in behind the scenes dealing he should really look at the foot of the Royal Mile.

When Labour announced the Pre-Budget Report the SNP immediate reaction was to snipe about the cuts that would end up being made to the Scottish budget. That is the reaction of opposition not Government, and here comes the rub. We are in a recession, not just in the UK but also in Scotland. Therefore the ability to raise taxes, whilst stimulating the economy and keeping up levels of spending is difficult. If Salmond doubts that he should ask any person trying to make ends meet on a tight budget.

Today Tavish Scot has offered a hand to ensure the 2010-11 budget passes. Many across the country have taken pay cuts either in actual terms or real terms over the last year just to survive. Many of these have been on the lower pay levels and took the cut to ensure that their bills would continue to be paid, after all a job is better than no job. Yet at the top end of the scale the people who have some responsibility for the budgets, the policies the initiatives that we have gotten into are insistent on maintaining the level of pay increase they have become accustomed to.

The proposal is simple, cut the pay for the top earners working for quangos, health boards, councils, universities and government agencies by 5%. By doing so it protests the pay of those working in the front line and frees up some money to maintain other budgets. As Tavish said:

"We need to see the highest paid across Scotland in the public sector taking their fair share of the financial pain that we are all in.

"And we want to make sure that we protect people on the lowest incomes working in the public sector by taking something out of the top level."

As I blogged earlier it was the question that Tavish raised with the First Minister on Thursday. There are 1,200 in NHS Scotland alone earning over £100,000.