Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Archive for category Constitution

Can Salmond granny Osborne?

Mar 22

Posted by Jeff in Constitution, Economy | 19 Comments

The SNP has enjoyed strong support over the past few years from two specific groups – the young and the male. Poll after poll has shown that the SNP, or quite possibly Alex Salmond in particular, has a woman problem and, possibly due to the ambition of independence, an elderly problem, problems that require to be dealt with if a Yes result is to be achieved in 2014.

We have seen a Mothers’ Day assault from the Nationalists with (*cough*) Joan McAlpine spearheading the attack. While it is sad that the provision of 600 hours nursery care is boxed into ‘female issue’ rather than ‘parent issue’, particularly when the SNP boasts of being a progressive beacon, the policy is nonetheless attractive and will go a long way to improving the party’s appeal to all Scots, including females. Similarly, a National Minimum Wage guarantee is something of a female-friendly policy by dint of such a high proportion of part-time work being taken by women. There are doubtlessly more female-friendly, recently concocted policies that an SNP activist could rhyme off on a whim.

So that’s the laydeez taken care of, what about the oldies? Well, this was always going to be a tougher challenge for Alex Salmond. How do you tempt a tranche of Scots away from the union and into a modern, fast-paced, export-driven independent Scotland when they are largely decided on the United Kingdom and/or stuck/set in their ways?

Well, perhaps George Osborne has given Salmond a helping hand there.

First things first, ‘granny tax’ is a horrendous phrase. It wilfully talks down those silver-permed, hair-netted, shed-dwelling dearies, but it is nonetheless effective, as today’s front pages testify, castigating the Chancellor for his tax cut on the elderly to pay for millionaires’ tax cuts as they do. Britain woke up today to learn, rightly or wrongly, that Osborne has shafted old people with his budget.

The First Minister’s tactics for winning independence often involve a well-rehearsed double whammy of making his party as ‘big tent’ as possible while fiercely attacking Westminster over anything and everything when they leave themselves vulnerable. He can employ both aspects over the next few months by rolling out a ‘granny friendly’ (I do apologise for how un-PC this post is) set of policies that will help to paint Osborne (and by extension the UK) as a place where the elderly are taxed to give the super-rich pay cuts while Scotland is a place where, I don’t know, free care for the elderly is guaranteed, bus passes are safeguarded and A.N.Other policy (I personally believe there is a role for the retired in schools, hospitals and colleges to provide expertise and experience on a voluntary or low paid basis; a sort of army of Non Exec Directors for the public sector and the young. It would work better if pensions were significantly more comfortable than they currently are of course).

Whatever policy Salmond may choose to entice the aggrieved victims of Osborne’s tax grab with, the First Minister may find that his independence deficit has ironically been filled in by the Chancellor trying to plug the UK deficit while keeping his right wing chums happy.

Won’t somebody think of the English?

Mar 20

Posted by James in Constitution | 82 Comments

Having just spent a pleasant week in Englandshire, a sad truth has become apparent. In general, the English people I don’t like – for example: Jeremy Clarkson, Melanie Phillips and Richard Littlejohn – want Scotland to go. They’ve had enough of our sponging ways, our chippiness, our ingratitude. I have actually heard Paxman tutting over the pipes (OK, that one I understand).

Conversely, the English people I love – my generally lefty associates – tend to be anxious about independence and to want us to stay for their sake. We’re like the chaperone who can sometimes stop the Tories’ hands going too far up their public sector.

Frustrating as it is to know you’ll vote in a way that alarms your friends and delights your enemies, both sides have misunderstood the current situation and, I believe, failed to grasp the true consequences of Scottish independence for the rest of the UK.

Columnists on the Mail and Telegraph really think they’re paying taxes to prop up some kind of Fidelista fantasy in Edinburgh, and that renewables are a massive waste of money. When independence comes they will wait in vain by the door for their resulting dividend cheque.

Conversely, the idea amongst the English left that Scotland has played some kind of progressive role in the UK is a bit of a myth.

Look at the representatives we’ve sent to Westminster lately: Labour’s most tribal dinosaurs, Nats without a shred of interest in what happens south of the border, the odd patrician Tory, and some equally patrician Liberals who’ve resolutely blown in the wind.

You won’t miss them. We won’t miss them either.

The social union will largely survive independence, too, we can reassure them. Sure, it won’t be quite the same, but the English tuition fees regime will prove more divisive than a border, ending as it does the post-war borderless student boom which helped to stir the UK up. And if Scotland elects post-independence governments which are genuinely progressive to succeed the current centre-right SNP administration, we will show very clearly what a practical alternative to the three soggy flavours of Toryism currently vying for office could look like in England.

Once free tuition for Scots is paid for entirely by Scots taxpayers, it’ll be a much more persuasive example down south. If we get rid of nuclear weapons from Scottish soil it will be an inspiration to anti-nuclear campaigners across the rUK. If we move away from the anti-immigration consensus and thrive socially and economically, that’ll be one in the eye for the three UK parties that have espoused it. We can close down coal and gas and nuclear, go genuinely 100% renewable, and show how successful a truly sustainable economy can be.

In short, a pluralist and genuinely democratic independent Scotland, if that’s what we get offered, could be just the boost the left across the rUK needs, and a profound disappointment to those wish us gone.

Some taxing questions for Scotland

Mar 12

Posted by Guest Blog in Constitution, Ideology | 35 Comments

Image by TaxBrackets

Andrew Smith is a London based Scot. He has previously written about the NO campaign and The Scottish Sun. He grew up in Edinburgh and studied at Dundee, and you can read his blog at www.blackberrybanter.wordpress.com

With George Osborne’s budget on the horizon the usual array of briefings and whispering campaigns are in full swing. The horse-trading is no longer happening behind closed doors; in fact it’s being done very publicly. In the past weeks we have seen the usual suspects in the Tory party being joined by business leaders in urging the government to scrap the 50p rate and the media only too happy to help. The position of the Liberal Democrats is unclear, although recent interventions from Vince Cable and Nick Clegg would suggest that they are happy to reach a compromise.

Whether or not it happens this year it is looking likely that it will happen soon. This raises a host of different questions and scenarios about what the impact would be on Scotland.  We already know that the probable ‘replacement’ for the 50p tax rate is unlikely to affect Scotland without separate legislation, although scrapping the 50p tax rate would.
I am in favour of the 50p rate, if for no other reason than the fact it is worth £6bn to the economy. I am also in favour of a mansion tax for the reason that it will have no impact whatsoever on the great majority of the population and will also bring a lot of money into the economy.

Cutting corporation tax is a shared goal of governments in Scotland and Westminster and is something that will happen with or without independence. The wisdom of this is open to dispute, quite possibly the best line of Ed Miliband’s otherwise lacklustre speech to the Scottish Labour Spring Conference this year was when he said “you can’t have Scandinavian public services on Irish rates of corporation tax”, which was an effective way of underlining the contradiction that many see in the SNPs vision for Scotland.

Cutting corporation tax and freezing council tax are may be high profile policies but the SNP 2011 manifesto does not mention income tax once. There is a precedent for the discussion though, of course there was the notorious ‘penny for Scotland’ campaign, but more recently John Mason MSP raised the prospect of raising the top rate and was slapped down by the First Minister.

With all these factors and others being taken into consideration it’s not impossible to imagine that by Autumn 2014 the UK government will have removed the 50p rate, brought in a ‘mansion tax’ and removed tax for the first £10k. Would the SNP approach a referendum by pledging to raise taxes? It’s very unlikely. Would they go into the referendum without touching any of these changes? Where would that leave free tuition, free prescriptions and the council tax freeze?

If policies in Westminster have been moving into more classically neoliberal territory (NHS bill, education reforms and local services provision) then the Scottish parliament has been moving in a more traditionally centralised/ social democrat direction (free prescriptions, free care for elderly, extra tax on bad things and scrapping university fees) all of which are long standing commitments of successive Scottish governments that I fully support. Should the parliaments keep moving in their own directions then it makes the politics of independence seem more inevitable. However, Osborne, who is running the NO campaign for the Tories, will be gambling that if people see a Green Investment Bank in Edinburgh and extra money in their pockets from income tax cuts at both ends of the scale then they’ll think twice about voting for a split.

What do you think? I have looked through the website and can’t find anything about what they want from the forthcoming budget; at the time of writing (3pm on 10th March) the only comments from the press office are about introducing a fuel regulator. Would the Scottish Government oppose scrapping the 50p tax rate and all tax on incomes below 10k? By 2015 could Scotland England have two totally different tax policies? Would the social democrat and neo liberal policy split continue or would it be the starting gun for the race to the bottom?

Is independent Scotland’s foreign policy already in place?

Mar 8

Posted by Jeff in Constitution, Defence, International | 53 Comments

The Scottish Parliament is a devolved body and is answerable to the UK Parliament, a Parliament that has reserved powers over the constitution, defence, treason, the funding of political parties and international relations.

Of these reserved powers, it is Defence and International Relations that have been the focus of attention as many of the SNP’s opponents seek to suggest that foreign policy in an independent Scotland is somewhere between unworkable and unpalatable.

It’s not often that political parties communicate through actions rather than words but, if one looks around, it’s quite possible that the SNP’s view of what an independent Scotland’s foreign policy would be has already been put into practice.

There is the low hanging fruit of how an independent Scotland would look of course – Scotland inside the EU, quite possibly no nuclear weapons and we’d have the Queen as Head of State but let’s look at some examples of an existing Scottish foreign policy that many may not have noticed:

The Scottish Government is already promoting the development of a sub-sea electricity transmission super grid with Norway, Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, assisted by several visits to Norway by the First Minister. (Incidentally, no UK Prime Minister has visited Norway in 25 years)

The SNP is considering the economic and military changes that the melting ice caps bring and is seeking to work alongside the countries that have seen this challenge as a top priority for a while now – Iceland, Faroe Islands, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Canada etc. This is not an area that the UK has dedicated much attention, if any.

Scotland could and should join the Nordic Council if it does become independent. The SNP regularly talk up membership, Alex Salmond mentioned it in his recent Hugo Young lecture, and Lesley Riddoch has an excellent piece exploring Scotland potentially joining.

Alex Salmond’s visits to China and Abu Dhabi bore the hallmarks of state visits and would be much the same as visits from a Scottish Prime Minister.

One issue that many claim remains outstanding is how Scotland would defend itself if independent. For me, there is an easy solution to this and we only need to look to other similarly-sized, anti-nuclear countries for it. Norway is leading calls for Nato to be nuclear-free while still enjoy the security of full membership. The SNP simply needs to change its policy on Nato, if it hasn’t already, and a clear picture of how an independent Scotland could look in an international context is locked into place. I maintain that the SNP changing tack on Nato is a no-brainer.

The image that most people have in mind when it comes to Scotland defending itself is an attack on our airpsace and how we would unilaterally action a defence. And yet, the current ‘Quick Reaction Alert‘ system (involving scrambling fighter jets to intercept unidentified aircraft) is already split into North Britain (from Leuchars) and South Britain (from Lincolnshire). Contact is then made from HQ to Nato allies, typically via Denmark. Would the system work any differently under an independent Scotland, particularly if the north-south divide already exists?

The SNP will be launching its Preparation Prospectus soon but don’t be too surprised if its contents look familiar. We are surrounded by similar-sized prosperous countries who have the means and the alliances to defend themselves. Scotland isn’t just well placed to join those same alliances and create the same means, it is doing so already.

Joan of Ack

Mar 6

Posted by Kirsty in Constitution | 107 Comments

I assumed that a political party as astute at communications as the SNP would be familiar with the term ‘damage control’. But, given Joan McAlpine MSP’s Daily Record column today, it seems such political acuity hasn’t filtered down to the backbenches.

In her column, McAlpine’s compares the union to a “marriage of a talented, well-educated girl with good prospects and her own income, to a domineering man”.  A man who thinks she “can’t be trusted to manage her own money” and who will cut the pin money “if she gets uppity”. But fear not gentle reader. For Scotland eventually “recognises the relationship for what it is – an abuse of power”.

Coming just over twenty-four hours after the Sunday Herald’s revelations alleging how Bill Walker MSP mistreated his three ex-wives and step-daughter, McAlpine’s invocation of spousal abuse and control is utterly crass. Comparing politics to domestic violence is at best tasteless, and at worst deeply insulting.  Labour MP Owen Smith apologised for making similar comments in 2010, and I think McAlpine should do likewise, instead of declaring herself proud of such ill-thought polemic.

And it was all going so well. It was even going well in yesterday’s Daily Record feature, where McAlpine herself states:

“We all want a more successful, fair and equal country where everyone shares the success.

“That’s what Daily Record readers want and what I want as well but you can’t make the case for that by moaning – you have to be positive.”

So where’s the positive agenda? I don’t think I need to remind the SNP of their ‘women problem’ facing them when it comes to a vote on independence – plenty of others have catalogued it. I suspect however successful the local election results in May, the new troops of SNP councillors will remain male, pale and stale.

I know there are SNP members, both activist and elected, who care deeply about the problems facing Scottish women. But when I read drivel like McAlpine’s column, it just leads me to think that the only goal for too many nationalists is independence and independence alone. Not day 2, or year 2, or the second decade after independence.

Despite Nicola Sturgeon noting yesterday that independence is the means and not the end, such distasteful and negative comparisons like those drawn by McAlpine between Scotland and England makes me think that for some, winning the referendum is the only thing that matters.  Scottish passports as more important than supporting the 1 in 5 women who experience domestic abuse in their lifetimes. Saltires given more prominence than getting rid of the 12% gender pay gap. Wrangles over the constitution instead of righting the wrong of child poverty.

It may seem the Scottish people are now more receptive than ever to arguments for independence, thanks to the Scottish Government’s ability and expertise, and its positive and progressive outlook, but women remain more dubious.  Lesley Riddoch rightly identifies the turn-offs: “constitutional nit-picking and ego-ridden banter”, instead of the big ideas and ambitions that drive politics and change. McAlpine’s column is yet more ill-put grievance, when the SNP needs to keep talking about vision and ambition.