Snp

Although I’ve long felt that the Unionist parties would have been well-advised to call Alex Salmond’s bluff and have an independence referendum as soon as possible (like, er, this year), the notion that Gordon Brown might decide to hold a referendum on Scottish independence the same day as a general election strikes me as a typically Broonian too-clever-by-half wheeze that, upon closer inspection, turns out to be utterly daft. In other words, James Macintyre’s story in the New Statesman is sufficiently silly that one cannot immediately discount it. Here’s what Macintyre writes: Meanwhile, a separate idea, bold if controversial, is quietly being considered for the same election day: a referendum

Away from the BNP and the Woes of Brown (which sounds like an Aberfeldy tea-room or something) the other notable european result came in Scotland where the SNP’s handsome victory (29-21 over Labour) confirmed that Labour can no longer automatically consider itself the natural governing party in Scotland. Given that the 2007 Holyrood election was essentially a tie (the SNP winning on away goals), this was the first time the SNP had ever routed Labour in a national election. Sure, Labour’s difficulties at Westminster played a large part in this, but only a part. Their inability to counter Alex Salmond’s merry band at Holyrood was also a factor. This, even

Alex Salmond may argue that Scotland is “two thirds” of the way towards independence (though even if Salmond is correct that doesn’t mean independence is necessarily imminent) but the Royal Navy doesn’t seem to agree. In fact, the MoD must consider independence unlikely, otherwise why* would it be basing all of Britain’s submarines at the Faslane naval base on the Clyde? According to the latest plans, the Trafalgar class of subs will move from Devonport to Faslane by 2017 and the new Astute class submarines will also be based in Scotland. The SNP’s defence policy, of course, is a mess. The party is vehemently opposed to nuclear weapons and considers

How would the SNP have delat with the banking crisis? The FT’s Jim Pickard points out that “This is a valid question. The rescue of the Scottish banks has cost British taxpayers an estimated £2,000 per household. If Scotland was independent, the figure could have been closer to £13,000. How would it have coped?“ Mike Russell, the minister for the Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, replied: “It would have been slightly different, it would have probably been done in co-operation with other countries…we would have done it in partnership with everyone involved.” Now perhaps the ECB might have helped and perhaps the Nationalists could have rustled up some cash from

It’s not been a great couple of weeks for Alex Salmond, has it? First there was the budget hullabaloo, then the SNP was compelled to abandon (at least for the time being) its plans to replace the council tax with a local income tax and now the leaders of the opposition parties have each confirmed that they will vote against the nationalists’ referendum bill. As matters stand, then, there will be no independence referendum next year. The Tories, Lib Dems and Labour all say it would be “inappropriate” to have an independence debate in the midst of an economic downturn. Well perhaps it would and perhaps it would be a

David Cameron’s op-ed in Scotland on Sunday this week was interesting. Not because of anything that Cameron said but because it appeared at all. It’s another small indication that the country is preparing itself for a new Conservative government. To put it another way, I don’t think SoS would have been very interested in an op-ed from Iain Duncan-Smith or Mixhael Howard. What would have been the point? What could they have said to the country that anyone wanted to hear? Not much. So Cameron’s proposals for how he would work with Holyrood are, while scarcely earth-shattering, useful to have put on the public record. Nonetheless, they are sensible, modest

I doubt many Nationalists would welcome the comparison but facts are stubborn things and the fact is that the SNP and Mr Rove have quite a bit in common. Just as Rove orchestrated campaigns in 2002 and 2004 that portrayed the Democratic party as being, in some odd sense, fundamentally unpatriotic (principally for the crime of not being Republicans) so the SNP’s default presumption is that any opposition to any of their policies is somehow an attack on Scotland itself. They are the only patriots in town. No-one else really has the country’s best interests at heart. How can they, after all, when they’re in thrall to a “foreign” power

Someone needs to tell Tom Harris MP that the “Unionist” in the “Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party” referred to the Union with Ireland, not that between Scotland and England. Equally, the fact that the Conservatives (in London) and the SNP (in Edinburgh) sometimes seem to be reciting similar talking points should scarcely come as any great surprise: the Labour party is their common enemy. True, the Conservatives oppose the Nationalists north of the border but as far as the UK party is concerned that’s a secondary front and one, more particularly, on which there’s little need for a fresh offensive this year. If, as Alan Cochrane hints, the Scottish Tories

Commenter Rab O’Ruglen  doesn’t have much sympathy for the crisis afflicting the Tartan press: While I have every sympathy for those who find themselves in employment difficulties through no fault of their own I cannot say I have any sympathy for the Scottish print medium whatsoever.  If you are looking for an example of a people less well served by its press than Scotland’s, you have to go to totalitarian states to find it. It is incredible that when the Independence movement has reached the stage of forming a government, all-be-it a minority one, that every single one of Scotland’s public prints is pro-Union.  Sometimes vitriolically so.  These instruments in

It’s all very well and good getting excited about the American elections. But let’s face it, they were but the appetiser before today’s Westminster by-election in Glenrothes. The Kingdom of Fife is a strange place indeed, a sentiment confirmed by the whispers we now hear that Labour have managed to hold the seat. On the face of it, defending a seat against the 14 point swing needed for you to lose is no great triumph. And yet on this occasion it is, in fact, a rather spectacular victory for Gordon Brown. True, it’s his back yard (he represents the neighbouring constituency) and both he and his wife have campaigned in

Since Camilla Cavendish makes some points in her Times column today that are similar to some I made about David Miliband’s leadership challenge yesterday, I obviously think she’s written a fine, penetrating piece. As she says, In policy terms, it is the Conservatives who have so far seemed optimistic about the ability of people to make decisions for themselves, and Labour that has made devolving power to a few hospitals and headteachers look like an am-dram production, involving more histrionics and agonising than Racine. The irony is that where it has devolved most power – to Scotland and Wales – it has let nationalists hollow out its core vote. This

A reader has chided me for failing to publish more political comment lately. But what more – despite the acres of newsprint devoted to the matter – has there been to say about the Obama-Clinton match-up that was not said six weeks ago? Precious little. She still can’t win; her continuing campaign makes Obama’s job in November more difficult. Meanwhile, in Scotland Wendy Alexander, the pocket-sized Scottish Labour leader, announces that she’s fed-up with Alex Salmond winning all the headlines month after month and, consequently, says she’s quite happy to have a referendum on independence after all. This, despite constant assertions that it was the last thing the country wanted