The Green Ribbon

Alexander on the edge

The former Chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, Sir Alistair Graham, has called on Wendy Alexander to consider her position:

"Normally, when people face the danger - and I presume she does face the danger here of a criminal prosecution - then normally you step aside from your position so you can concentrate on clearing your name."

Sir Alistair said Ms Alexander had to make her own choices, but added that it was always better to do the right thing quickly, "rather than be pushed by circumstances". (BBC News)

Like Brian Taylor, Iain MacWhirter believes that Alexander would have resigned already but for the consequences for Labour at Westminster:

If Alexander had gone, Harriet Harman's position would have become untenable, since she also accepted, unknowingly, an illegal donation. It may untenable anyway, because the row over Alexander will not go away.

If Wendy hangs on beyond PMQs at Westminster on Wednesday she has the Scottish press to contend with. An angry beast at the best of times, the media is in wild mood because it believes it has been systematically misled over the donations scandal. Last Thursday there were extraordinary scenes in Holyrood as Alexander and senior Labour front benchers were literally chased around the parliamentary lobbies by correspondents demanding answers. Alexander has avoided them ever since.

But she cannot hide indefinitely and will have to surface on Thursday for First Ministers Question Time when she will have to face the SNP FM Alex Salmond. He will mercilessly expose the contradictions in her account of what happened. It certainly looks as if she has been economical with the truth. (Comment is Free)

Once again it seems that Gordon Brown's ambitions are intimately bound up with the future of the UK, because Alexander's troubles could have fateful implications for both.

 

Whose agenda for Scotland?

Wendy Alexander's lecture on Friday, A New Agenda for Scotland, was on one level an attempt to take the initiative on the devolution issue back from the SNP. Her proposed Scottish Constitutional Convention is clearly intended as a rival to the Scottish Government's National Conversation:

This Commission should have a mandate from Holyrood, unlike the SNP’s so-called national conversation. Hence next week Labour will use its Parliamentary time to bring forward such a motion asking for the support of The Scottish Parliament to set up such a Commission.

I believe any future commission must embrace the “listening” objectives that were behind the first Convention. So letting the Scots reflect on where we are 10 years on from our creation of the Scottish Parliament. It should have a strong UK dimension, in contrast to the earlier Convention. Looking forward most Scots are looking to secure both the devolution settlement and their common UK citizenship.   

I would like to see a Commission endorsed by the Scottish Parliament, and parties and Parliamentarians at Westminster so that it can draw in the best ideas that the UK and Scotland have to offer. As with the earlier Convention it will be vital to look beyond the politicians to bring together business people, civic leaders, the wider public sector, academia and the voluntary sector. (Scottish Labour)

In response, the SNP is arguing for Alexander's proposals to be co-opted into the framework of their own plans:

Donations row overshadows Alexander devolution call

Labour's Scottish leader Wendy Alexander has found herself embroiled in her own donations row over the last couple of days.

On Wednesday, it emerged that Alexander's leadership campaign team had accepted a donation from Paul Green, a businessman based in the Channel Islands. Her campaign manager Tom McCabe claimed the  donation had been made through a UK registered company.

However, today saw the disclosure of a personal letter from Alexander to Green, at his home address in Jersey, thanking him for his donation. According to Brian Taylor, Alexander was responsible as the 'regulated donee' for checking that the donation complied with the law, which it didn't because Mr Green was based outside the UK.

The row has overshadowed a significant speech from Alexander today, in which she called for a Scottish Constitutional Commission to consider the devolution of more powers to Holyrood:

Beyond Brown's Britain

One of the most striking indications of the sense of crisis currently engulfing  Gordon Brown's government is Jackie Ashley's suggestion that Brown could step down before the next election.

There is still plenty of time for Brown to turn things round, and it is probably too early for talk of 'Black Wednesday' moments. That said, the latest polls make grim reading for the Prime Minister, showing the Conservatives on course for an overall majority at the next election.

It is worth giving some thought to what that would mean. For one thing, it would pave the way for the scenario canvassed by Fraser Nelson last week:

'Informal deal' between SNP and Tories

Interesting coverage in Scotland on Sunday of the quiet rapprochement between the SNP and the Tories. Eddie Barnes suggests this is a no-brainer for Alex Salmond, but not necessarily for David Cameron:

as his party's grass roots will no doubt be reminding him, the Conservative Party still has the word 'Unionist' in its title. So should he really therefore be pandering to the agenda of a Nationalist purely because it will buy him some medium-term political advantage? Isn't that exactly the kind of cynical politics which Cameron has spent several months profitably accusing Brown of employing? (scotsman.com)

It certainly makes for a striking contrast with the recent tensions between the Tories and the DUP. I wonder how unionist the Tory grassroots really are these days?

Update: More on this point from Fraser Nelson at the Spectator.

Upping the ante over devolution

The Conservatives plans for an English Grand Committee are all over the news today, although The Sunday Times seems to have backtracked on a report that David Cameron had made Malcolm Rifkind's proposals official party policy.

Rifkind has written a paper and submitted it to Kenneth Clarke, the chairman of the party’s democracy task force. But the committee has yet to decide whether to adopt the recommendation in its final report.

Rifkind is keen, however, and floated the idea in a newspaper last night: “Since devolution there has been a growing English consciousness and that has given credence to the unfinished business of devolution.

“The issue is not an English parliament. It is how you reform the way in which the House of Commons operates so that on purely English business, as opposed to United Kingdom business, the wishes of English members cannot be denied.” (Times Online)

Brassneck on the Barnett formula

The gap between Scottish and English public spending seems to be moving up the agenda at the moment. Over at the Daily Telegraph's Brassneck blog, Mick Fealty argues that the Conservatives should embrace fiscal autonomy for Scotland.

Personally, I think if there is a real injustice to England in the current union settlement it lies in the West Lothian Question rather than the Barnett formula. However, Mick is probably right that addressing the latter is a politically easier route to capitalising on English resentment. If that were done by giving Scotland responsibility for its own taxes, it would probably enjoy support on both sides of the border. Indeed with Tory backing, the idea would have a clear majority at Holyrood.

The devil, of course, would be in the detail. Even Wendy Alexander has flirted with the idea of fiscal federalism, but Labour has set down a clear marker against devolving oil revenues.

Scottish Government hosts anti-Trident summit

The Scottish Government is hosting an anti-Trident summit in Glasgow today. Ahead of the meeting, Alex Salmond has written to the the signatories of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty seeking observer status at their meetings.

Although Trident is a reserved issue, Iain McWhirter argues that his hand is stronger than it may appear:

Salmond's vision: The Celtic Lion

(Hat-tip to Tartan Hero)

Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has outlined his ambition for Scotland to emulate Ireland's Celtic Tiger during a visit to the US:

"Our nearest three neighbors - Norway, Iceland and Ireland - are respectively the first, second and fourth most prosperous countries in the world according to the UN Human Development Index. Ultimately, matching their growth rates, and the rates of other small EU nations, is paramount. It is these nations that are remarkably outperforming the U.K. Initially, though, matching the growth rate of the U.K. is the fist step. By growing as fast as the UK, Scotland's 10-year growth rate would reach 2.8 per cent, translating to an additional £9 billion to the economy. (Scottish Executive)

A Westminster election: The Scottish factor

With the prospect of an autumn election firming up all the time, one issue Gordon Brown has to consider is the impact of the SNP resurgence in Scotland.

Ruaridh Nicoll argues that this factor has been over-estimated:

while it's true that an early election would cause Alexander difficulties, it could do Scottish Labour good. Like the Tories, they need something to focus on. And the truth is that, in difficult times, they would not do too badly, and certainly not as badly as everyone seems to fear.

'We know that in votes for the Scottish and UK parliaments, people vote very differently,' says James Mitchell, professor of politics at Strathclyde University. Sometimes, in the same poll, nearly a quarter of votes shift when people are asked about their desires for representation in Westminster or Holyrood. (Observer)

Alex Salmond is nevertheless talking up the SNP's chances:

Speaking on The Politics Show on BBC Scotland yesterday, Mr Salmond said he believed the Prime Minister would call an autumn election and that he was sure the SNP would do well.

He said: "I'm certain the SNP would make an advance and I think that would be a good thing for Scotland." (Herald)

Can they both be right? Well consider the figures quoted in the Herald article:

Recent polls put the SNP on 35% on a Westminster ballot, with Labour on 40%.

The Conservatives are on 11% and the Liberal Democrats on 9%.

Put those numbers into Martin Baxter's Scottish election calculator and you get a very interesting result: