ConservativeHome's ToryDiary

Lord Forsyth: England and Scotland should vote on the future of the Union in May 2009

Lord Forsyth was interviewed last night by Andrew Neil for BBC News' Straight Talk.  In a wide-ranging interview in which he attributed his political conversion to the Adam Smith Institute and urged the party to cut taxes for low income workers, the last Conservative Secretary of State for Scotland urged David Cameron to join with Wendy Alexander and other Unionists and hold a vote on independence next May, 2009.

Alex Salmond's agenda is quite clear, Michael Forsyth told Andrew Neil.  The SNP leader expects - "rightly" - that the Tories will win the next General Election but won't have many MPs from Scotland.  He calculates that that situation will maximise the chances of Scotland voting 'Yes' to independence in 2010.  Following Alex Salmond's timetable, Lord Forsyth argues, won't be in the interests of the Union.  Delay and uncertainty on this issue is "debilitating", bad for business, he says, and the Unionist parties should come together now and "lay the issue to rest" once and for all.  A referendum should ideally be held next May and both the English and Scottish should be able to say whether they want the Union to continue.  [Presumably the Welsh and Northern Irish, too?].

Lord Forsyth said that he was confident that the Union would be affirmed in any such vote.  The SNP, he said, didn't come to power because of their opposition to the Union but simply because it was the party best placed to end Labour rule in Scotland.

Cameron presses Brown again on his split with Wendy Alexander

We don't often do this but the letter that David Cameron has just sent Gordon Brown about Wendy Alexander's referendum u-turn is worth reading in full:

Labour's Scottish nightmare

One of the great difficulties for the Tories in 1997 was that the party faced challenges from both Labour and the Liberal Democrats.  The challenge facing Labour at the next Election could be just as serious.  Research for The Guardian from last Thursday's results suggested that voters have abandoned voting tactically against the Conservatives and are now ready to vote tactically against Labour.  In Scotland this may mean voting for the SNP and Alex Salmond is aiming to win twenty seats.  Scottish Labour have not recovered from last May's defeat and their leader, Wendy Alexander, has both poor approval ratings and has been beset by ethics questions.  Her U-turn on an independence referendum (this video records her previous position) was a desperate attempt to turn things round and she has been dubbed 'bendy Wendy' by amused observers.  More serious for Labour is that she hadn't cleared the u-turn with Gordon Brown.

At Prime Minister's Question Time yesterday Gordon Brown pretended that Wendy Alexander hadn't switched position but David Cameron asked what her "bring it on" remarks could possibly mean?   In a letter, he challenged the Prime Minister to clarify the position:

"Anyone who listened to Wendy Alexander’s remarks could be in no doubt that she meant a referendum should be held – and it shouldn’t be delayed.  To pretend otherwise is once again treating people like fools.  The Conservative Party north and south of the Border has been clear in opposing a referendum.  We do not want to break up Britain.  In contrast, not only do you appear unable to lead your Party in any one direction on this issue of vital importance to the whole of the UK, but you also seem unable even to acknowledge what the Scottish Labour Leader is calling for.  So is there going to be a referendum or not?"

SNP leader Alex Salmond told The Herald: "I don't know whether Wendy Alexander is trying to get rid of Gordon Brown or Gordon Brown is trying to get rid of Wendy Alexander or they are both trying to get rid of each other, but the effect it's having is to destroy each other."

Tories accuse Wendy Alexander of "knee-jerk panic" after she supports early referendum on Scottish independence

"Enough of huff, puff and bluff - bring it on."

Those are Wendy Alexander's latest words in her challenge to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond to hold a referendum on Scottish independence.  Ms Alexander, leader of Labour in Scotland, made her surprise call for a referendum at the weekend - one year after the SNP became Scotland's minority government.  Many see her call as a desperate attempt to boost her poor ratings and to distract from the question marks that still hover above the funding of her 2007 leadership campaign.

A Tory spokesman told The Herald:

"Scotland's future should be the subject of calm and considered debate, not knee-jerk panic by a Labour Party in political meltdown. The Calman Commission should be left to get on with its health check on devolution."

The Calman Commission is an official inquiry into the devolution settlement, involving the Scottish Tories.  Scottish Labour say that they wouldn't support an independence referendum for one year, by which time Calman will have reported.

Most recent polls suggest that a referendum on independence would be won comfortably by Unionists but the consensus amongst Conservatives is that a vote would be unhelpful.  Sir Malcolm Rifkind worries that the nationalists would claim the very fact of holding a referendum as a major victory - a sign that there really was a serious risk to the continuation of the Union.  And they wouldn't accept a 'no' vote, he fears.  A process of "neverendums" would begin until the "right result" occured.

Conservative opinion is not united, however.  Tory candidate Richard Cook has favoured a referendum in order to end the uncertainty that, he believes, is undermining business confidence: "I'm personally in support of a referendum bill at the earliest possible opportunity, to remove the uncertainty already being created to business.  There are plenty of business people who are delaying taking business decisions at the moment, and that is jeopardising Scottish jobs and wealth creation in Scotland."

Mixed news from Scotland

Before we get our live blogging underway later today let's have a quick look at one important part of the UK where there are no elections: Scotland.  The latest YouGov survey of voting intentions has mixed news for our party:

• In terms of General Election voting intentions the party remains subdued.  The Cameron effect may be spreading throughout the north of England but we're stuck on 17%.  The more difficult news for Labour is that its own support is down 6% on its 2005 support.  Scotland may have a Scottish Prime Minister but they are warming to the SNP.  The SNP got 18% in 2005 but are winning 30% now.
• Annabel Goldie, leader of the Tory MSPs, is impressing Scottish voters, however.  Just 21% thought Labour's Scottish leader Wendy Alexander was doing a good job.  Ms Goldie's positive rating was 41%.
• The best news of all appears to be declining support for independence.  According to The Telegraph: "Only 19 per cent of Scots would support independence in a three-option referendum. Nearly three quarters backed keeping a devolved Parliament, either with its present powers or with more responsibilities."

Meanwhile David Mundell, Shadow Scottish Secretary, is in hot water.  An article has appeared in the Scottish edition of The Telegraph (not online) suggesting that Mr Mundell has been trying to lobby for George Kynoch in the election of the Scottish Party's Vice Chairman - the most senior position representing activists.  Mr Mundell, it is said, wants the incumbent Bill Walker ousted.  Mr Walker has been a sometime critic of Project Cameron and the central party may prefer Mr Kynoch, a former Scottish Office Minister.  David Mundell has denied intefering in a contest that Annabel Goldie has said should be for grassroots members to determine.

Rifkind: Unless we address the West Lothian Question the United Kingdom is in great danger

At the Centre for Policy Studies yesterday evening Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP gave an unscripted address entitled The Unfinished Business of Devolution.  In his wide-ranging remarks he explained why his proposal for an English Grand Committee was superior to that reported to be Ken Clarke's preferred answer to the so-called West Lothian Question.  His key messages (not verbatim) are summarised below:

It is wrong to see this as Scotland V England.  The "unfinished business of devolution" is more complex than that.  Wales and Northern Ireland MPs also have an ability to vote on laws that only apply to the English.  When it comes to reviewing the Barnett formula it is important that it is not portrayed as providing justice for England as against Scotland.  There should be a more sensitive analysis of how different parts of Scotland and different parts of England need to be treated differently than now.  Sir Malcolm contended that, in some respects, the Home Counties have more in common with Edinburgh and Liverpool has more in common with Glasgow.

Devolution has changed a lot but far from everything. At least half of what is relevant to Scotland is still determined by the UK Parliament.  Public expenditure, social security, foreign policy, EU policy and immigration are still determined at Westminster.  What is more: the UK is not a federal state but power has been devolved - meaning that the Westminster parliament can at any time, in extremis, over-rule Cardiff, Edinburgh or Belfast - or even revoke devolution completely.

Scotland and Wales are not moving remorselessly to independence.  Every poll showed that support for independence was in the minority and relatively flat.  The SNP are a minority government in Scotland - outnumbered by unionist parties.  Scots voted SNP for a variety of reasons last year and in the same way many opponents of the euro voted for Tony Blair in 1997, many opponents of independence voted for the SNP.  Alex Salmond knows that his best hope for independence is a breakdown in English-Scottish relations.  That is why he opposes proposals like an English Grand Committee because such proposals tackle the injustices that, unmitigated, could eventually produce a breakdown.

Ken Clarke to recommend that MPs from Scotland and Wales should retain final say on English laws

Philip Johnston writing for The Telegraph suggests that Ken Clarke's Democracy Taskforce hasn't only, as expected, rejected an English Parliament but it has also rejected Sir Malcolm Rifkind's plan for English Votes for English Laws.

What will emerge from the Taskforce, Johnston predicts, is "a compromise" that will retain a final say on laws that only affect England for MPs from non-English constituencies.  MPs from English seats will have an exclusive right of amendment but nothing more:

"It is a compromise between those who want English votes for English laws and those who would leave things be.  Legislation affecting only England, an education Bill, for instance, would receive a second reading by the entire Commons; but its committee stage, where the measure is subjected to line-by-line scrutiny and can be amended, would be for English MPs only.  When the Bill came back to the Commons for its report stage and third reading, all MPs would again have a vote. But the Government would be bound to accept amendments agreed by the committee, or risk losing the legislation."

At the end of last year there was Scottish Tory relief when David Cameron appeared to emphasise "Unionism" rather than Englishness.

Related link: On today's frontpage there are links relating to Alex Salmond's ambitions for the SNP to hold the balance of power after the next General Election.

Fraser Nelson, ConservativeHome Writer of the Year, on David Cameron as Prime Minister of England

Another great column by Fraser Nelson in this week's Spectator and this seems to be a good time to announce that The Spectator's Political Editor is the Writer of the Year according to the more than 8,000 people who voted in ConservativeHome's 2007/08 movement awards.  Fraser beat The Telegraph's Jeff Randall and ConservativeHome's very own Graeme Archer.

Fraser's focus this week is the success with which Alex Salmond is progressing his plans for Scotland to become independent.  He paints a picture of a small Conservative majority that passes English votes for English laws and then focuses on passing laws that are only focused on England because on those issues David Cameron would have a much larger majority as Prime Minister of England than as Prime Minister of the UK.

"What would put rocket boosters under the issue," continues Fraser Nelson, "would be reform of England’s financial ties with Scotland. Government figures show a £13 billion annual subsidy from England to Scotland."  In the recent ConservativeHome survey of Tory members we asked: What should the next Conservative Government do with the Barnett formula that sees some transfer of taxpayers' money from England to Scotland?

Your answers were clear:

• Only 7% wanted it left as it is.
• 37% wanted to reduce the transfer.
• 49% wanted it eliminated.

The Tories, ahead in the polls, may not want to touch the issue but its potentially as potent as inheritance tax.  Voters respond best to action against unjust taxes.  By promising to phase out even half of the subsidy the Tories could say that they'll use the proceeds to pay for lower taxes on poorer workers - correcting, say, the injustice of the abolition of the 10p tax band.

PlayPolitical: English Democrats' London broadcast

Scottish Conservatives call in police over missing £150k

A Scottish party worker is suspected of having filtered off £150,000 of party membership subscriptions over the last year.

The missing funds were discovered after a routine financial check, and The Scotsman says the blackhole has sparked a financial crisis forcing the party to ask donors for help covering the shortfall. A source within the Conservatives was reported to have said:

"The whole thing has been a major embarrassment. It has shown the accounting system was not too robust – which is why no-one noticed until it was too late."

As the SNP schemes a way to independence, could scrapping the Barnett formula be George Osborne's next electrifying move?

Alex Salmond, leader of the SNP and First Minister, yesterday proposed that Scotland could become independent even if independence wasn't voters' first choice.

Alex Salmond (MSP and MP) - who is under fire for costing taxpayers the equivalent of £26,000 for each of the six visits he has made to the Commons in the last year - is proposing that voters could rank independence alongside the status quo and an option for more powers for Holyrood in a three option referendum.

Annabel Goldie, Leader of Scotland's Conservatives, dismissed the ideas as "tripe":

“This is tripe – the wild words of a panicking man. Alex Salmond is clutching at straws for his minority whim. It may have escaped his notice but you don’t have a referendum to preserve the status quo – devolution is the status quo... Salmond’s proposal is born out of a recognition that independence is a minority view held by a minority party. His so-called ‘National Conversation’ has no Parliamentary mandate and is a one-party, one-country initiative. By contrast the Constitutional Commission is independently chaired, cross-party, cross-border and has Parliamentary authority.”

Mr Salmond's announcement came a day after Scotland's other main parties announced that Sir Kenneth Calman would chair their wide-ranging new inquiry into new powers for the Scottish Parliament.  A majority of MSPs have approved the inquiry.  Part of its remit will be the financial settlement - the so-called Barnett formula - that Scotland enjoys with the rest of the United Kingdom.  There is strong support within the Tory grassroots for a review of the formula.  Four-fifths support a "fairer" settlement for the English taxpayer.  On his blog yesterday Nick Robinson suggested that scrapping the Barnett formula may have the same electrifying effect of George Osborne's abolition of inheritance tax for non-millionaires.  That is why, speculates Mr Robinson, Labour may pre-empt Tory moves later this year.

Prospect of former spy as Chairman of Scottish Tories ends good week for Annabel Goldie

The Daily Telegraph is reporting that David Cameron and Annabel Goldie are considering a former top MI6 man, Andrew Fulton, as the new Chairman of the Scottish Conservatives.  This is what the article tells us about him:

1. Last posting was head of station in Washington.  He also served in East Berlin, Rome and Saigon.
2. He is now a visiting law professor at Glasgow University.
3. He is an advisor to Armor, a private security intelligence firm, that also employs Sir Malcolm Rifkind.
4. "More George Smiley than James Bond" according to The Telegraph.

The news come at the end of a notable week for Scotland's Conservatives.  Earlier this week the Scottish Tories won £114m of concessions from the SNP in return for supporting their budget.  Cameron Watt of the Centre for Social Justice was particiularly pleased that one consequence of this budget deal will be a re-balancing of drug treatment towards abstinence based programmes aimed at recovery rather than maintenance.

Iain Duncan Smith's report on the social problems of Glasgow also won widespread attention and produced considerable soul-searching within a Scottish welfare establishment that has persisted with welfare policies that have failed to reduce dependency

The Economist pays tribute to the Scottish Tories in this week's edition:

"The Tories' reappearance on stage after ten years in the wilderness is a sign of big shifts in Scottish politics. The once-dominant Labour Party is out of power. Its leader in the Scottish Parliament, Wendy Alexander, is mired in two investigations into party donations and unable to oppose the SNP effectively... Of the three main opposition parties, the Tories played the cleverest game. “I argued two years ago, to much derision, that we could achieve far more of our policies with a minority than a coalition government without compromising our principles,” says Annabel Goldie, the Scottish Tory leader.  Indeed, she reckons she has forced the SNP's hand on a number of important issues—money for another 500 policemen, restoring the original SNP pledge, cuts in local taxes for 150,000 small businesses to be made by 2009 rather than 2010 and a new strategy to combat drug addiction by concentrating on abstinence and recovery rather than on replacement therapies such as methadone."

In return for budget votes, SNP agrees to Tory policies on more police officers, drug treatment and business tax relief

Annabel Goldie MSP, Leader of Scotland's Conservatives is celebrating a number of concessions valued at £114m tonight.  The concessions were won by Tory MSPs in return for successful passage of the budget of the minority SNP government.  Ms Goldie issued the following statement:

“The Scottish Conservatives have changed this budget for the better.  We have used our influence to deliver key policies which will mean more police, lower taxes, and a new national drugs strategy.

On police, our pressure has resulted in 500 more new Officers than the SNP had pledged - with 300 being recruited next year alone. Scotland will be safer.

For Scotland's 150,000 smallest businesses, our determined demands will cut their local tax bills by hundreds of pounds each over the next two years. Scotland will be more prosperous.

On drugs abuse, our robust approach will deliver a new National Drugs Strategy for Scotland, more funding and a greater emphasis on abstinence and recovery. Scotland now has a chance in the fight against drugs.

And we have also secured a better deal for Scotland's bus operators, taking pressure off fuel prices which is good for passengers and good for the environment. Scotland will be greener.

Taken together, this is a package of concessions worth more than £114million.  Nearly two years ago, the Scottish Conservatives first argued for a new politics, and an end to coalition government. We fought the Holyrood Elections promising to work issue-by-issue, vote-by-vote, doing what was right for the people of Scotland by sticking to our policies and principles.  We have done that today, and Scotland is the winner.”

Related link: Scotland's Tories are relevant again (but at what price?).

3.30pm, 7th February: 'Three cheers for Annabel' - Cameron Watt writes for CentreRight

Rumblings in Scotland over Conservative support for greater autonomy

The Telegraph's Alan Cochrane reports online this morning that there are tensions in the Scottish Conservatives about Annabel Goldie's support for full fiscal autonomy and a commission to look into what further powers should be transferred to Holyrood:

"Leading Tories told her that she risked alienating traditional supporters by throwing her weight behind Labour's plans for a Scottish Constitutional Commission to examine the transfer of powers from Westminster.

They are also concerned that the Tory group of MSPs at Holyrood is poised to back plans for full fiscal autonomy, which would give the Parliament the right to raise and spend all its tax revenue. This, some fear, would be a major step towards the break-up of the United Kingdom.

One former senior office bearer in the Scottish party, with over 30 years of service to numerous leaders, has written a personal letter to Mr Cameron describing Miss Goldie's plans as both a "blunder'' and "nonsense'' and suggesting that, taken together, they represent a threat to the Union. Thus far, Mr Cameron has backed Miss Goldie to the hilt.

The issue erupted at a meeting in Glasgow on Saturday of the Tories' Scottish Council, made up of the chairmen of all of the party's area associations. This is the voluntary arm of the party, as distinct from the paid officials or the MSPs at Holyrood or the solitary MP in the Commons. As such it claims to represent the views of ordinary party members and supporters in the constituencies."

Cochrane quotes "a senior Tory" saying that "at least three chairmen expressed grave reservations about the route Annabel is taking and are worried that we are following in the footsteps of the SNP", but a spokesman said that there was only a handful of questions about it and that "none of them were in any way critical". He also says that the President of Scottish Conservatives, David Mitchell, is preparing a paper outlining his opposition to fiscal autonomy but this is also denied.

Once again the key debate between unionists here is whether the United Kingdom is best preserved by sating appetites for full independence by offering semi-independence, or by taking a stand and opposing all additional powers.

10pm update: The Telegraph's Iain Martin offers a seven point guide to how the Scottish Conservatives "got into this mess"

Is Alex Salmond Britain's most useless MP?

Scotland's First Minister is under fire today from Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser.  Research by the Scottish Conservatives is being well reported north of the border, including by the BBC and The Herald.   The Scottish party has calculated that the MP for Banff & Buchan has participated in just four votes out of a possible 149 since 8th May.

Murdo issued the following statement:

“We warned before the elections that if Alex Salmond became the MSP for Gordon then the constituency would be saddled with a part-time MSP, dividing his time between London and Edinburgh. The reality is that it is his Westminster territory of Banff & Buchan which has suffered. He must be the most useless MP in the House of Commons, in terms of attendance and actual work done for his constituents.

People in Banff and Buchan did not vote for Alex Salmond in 2005 with the view that he would go on to completely ignore them. He is treating them with contempt and with the Prime Minister now having bottled a General Election, it is likely they will have to put up with another two and a half years of this nonsense.  Alex Salmond should do the decent thing and resign as an MP. He would still be left with two jobs to do – a constituency MSP and First Minister of Scotland, which should be more than enough for his ego.  The current tally of three is most definitely a crowd and I hope that if he truly does care about people in Banff & Buchan he will pave the way for a by-election in the very near future. As it currently stands, there is no hard-working MP for Banff and Buchan, which is the least that any constituency deserves.”

Related links: Signs of warmth between the SNP and Scotland's Tories but also Scottish Tory leader supports cross-party Commission to discuss 'Stage Two' of devolution

Highlights of David Cameron's Stronger Together speech: "Better an imperfect union than a broken one"

Further to the earlier thread, here are highlights of David Cameron's 'Stronger Together' speech in Edinburgh earlier today.  It has a strongly Unionist flavour.

A great history: "Together, we turned a small, off-shore European island into the one of the most powerful countries known to the world.  In the 18th century, the Union helped create the sense of possibility that inspired the titans of the Enlightenment.  In the 19th century, what was Europe’s first common market brought unparalleled prosperity to both our countries.  And in the 20th century, we not only remained stable in the face of…the totalitarianisms that were the scourge of mainland Europe…but we confronted them side by side."

The challenge of separatism today: "We must confront and defeat the ugly stain of separatism seeping through the Union flag.  This is where I stand, here in this great and beautiful capital, an English politician in a Scottish city saying clearly today and for all time that Britain comes first.  For I believe that we are stronger together.  Stronger together: Scotland and England……more, much more than the sum of our parts.  And in every part of these islands I want people to hear me when I say this.  That if it should ever come to a choice between constitutional perfection and the preservation of our nation, I choose our United Kingdom.  Better an imperfect union than a broken one.  Better an imperfect union than a perfect divorce."

Together, we are stronger, safer, richer and fairer: "Britain is one of only five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.   We have a seat at the top table and are listened to in a way that other countries can only dream of.   So yes, together we are stronger.  It means saying loudly and proudly: together, we are safer.  Scotland and Wales punch above their weight in Britain's armed forces….and Britain punches above its weight in the world because of the expertise and bravery of those armed forces. So, yes, together we are safer.  It means saying loudly and proudly: together, we are richer.  The City of London overtaking New York as a global powerhouse……Edinburgh’s role as a great financial centre.  So yes, we are richer.  And it means saying loudly and proudly: together, we are fairer.  The NHS is the best of British……created by a Welshman and benefiting from the skills of doctors trained in the great medical schools of Scotland.  Stronger.  Safer.  Richer.  Fairer…together."

Scottish Tory "relief" at Cameron's decision to emphasise Unionism, not Englishness

This is an interesting time for Scotland's Conservatives.  For the first time in a decade they are enjoying limited power as they work with the minority SNP administration in Edinburgh to secure the passage of individual pieces of legislation.  Last week also saw the party commit more solidly to devolution than at any previous time; when Annabel Goldie, Scottish Tory leader, joined with Labour and LibDems to support a Constitutional Commission on 'Stage Two' of devolution.  None of this is producing an upsurge in fortunes for the Scottish party, however.  A poll last week showed the Scottish Tories languishing at just 12% or 13%.  Plans for a distinct Scottish Party have been shelved for the time-being.  A number of senior Scottish-born Tories - both at Holyrood and Westminster - raised strong objections to the idea.

David Cameron heads to Edinburgh today to speak to Scottish Conservatives and Edinburgh businesspeople.  In advance of his visit he has given an interview to The Telegraph in which he promises to be a Unionist first before 'pandering' to the possibilities of winning English votes.  He urges voters to get the Barnett formula and the transfer of money from the English to Scottish taxpayer "in perspective".  He says that the Tory manifesto will address the West Lothian Question but the solution will not necessarily be the one recommended by Sir Malcolm Rifkind.

One Scottish Tory MSP speaking to ConservativeHome feels that the mood of the London Conservatives has changed in recent weeks:

"We were worried that Cameron might have risked the Union when the party's opinion poll rating was so weak.  There was a strong temptation to go for the English vote and play the Scottish card against Brown.  That temptation has faded as the Tory opinion poll rating has risen.  We now believe that Cameron's Unionism is coming back to the fore and that is a huge relief." 

A YouGov poll for The Telegraph shows that 62% of English voters do not think that Scots MPs should have the right to vote on English/ Welsh legislation.  63% do not believe that Scotland's higher public expenditure is justified.  27% of English voters think that the Conservatives are more likely to stand up for England's interests compared to just 10% trusting Labour.  57%, however, think it will make no difference.

Scotland's Tories are relevant again (but at what price?)

Two days ago Scotland on Sunday's Eddie Barnes wrote a fascinating story about the SNP-Tory relationship.  The article offered three main points:

1. Alex Salmond has been giving advice to George Osborne on winning votes in Scotland.
2. The SNP is about to ditch its long-standing opposition to coalition deals with the Conservatives [although Annabel Goldie is determined to stick with her no-coalitions pre-election promise].
3. David Cameron and Alex Salmond are due to meet to discuss how they might work together if Cameron becomes PM and Salmond is still First Minister [- an increasingly likely scenario].

What does all of this mean?  Both parties have narrow partisan interests in causing Labour trouble.  Neither want the return of Labour to Scottish Government and the boost that would give Gordon Brown.  You can rely, therefore, on the Tories keeping Alex Salmond as First Minister.  Annabel Goldie and Murdo Fraser are exacting real gains for this support, however, on an issue-by-issue basis.  Cuts in business rates and a freeze on council tax are the stand outs.  More police officers and extra drug rehab places are the other big Tory policy aims.

One senior member of the Scottish party told me yesterday that the "decontamination of the Scottish Conservatives was nearly complete".  The good working relationship with the SNP, in particular, had ended the party's "pariah status".  That, my contact said, could be very good for Tory prospects at the General Election.

The Scottish Tories are also working with Scottish Labour and the Scottish LibDems on a package of measures that might increase the potency of the Holyrood Parliament and reduce support for independence.  That, above narrow party interest, must remain the key aim of the Conservative and Unionist Party.  Ultimately the SNP must not prevail.

David Cameron likely to adopt Rifkind plan to address West Lothian Question

The BBC reports this morning, based on a story in The Observer, that the Conservatives are likely to formally adopt a proposal, originally made by Sir Malcolm Rifkind, that only MPs representing English constituencies will be able to legislate on English matters:

"The proposal would allow MPs from England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to continue to sit together in the Commons to vote on UK-wide matters such as taxation, foreign policy and defence.  It would be up to the Commons speaker to decide which matters should be referred to the English Grand Committee, which would sit in the House of Commons chamber."

If the Tories go down this path it will become an explosive issue at the next General Election.  The Tories would be effectively saying that Gordon Brown, as Prime Minister, had no authority to vote on large parts of legislation affecting England.

Scottish Office minister David Cairns MP told The Observer that the proposal was "utterly unworkable":

"Taken to its logical extent it would create multiple categories of MPs. Where does it end? Do the Tories think only London MPs should vote on Crossrail, only countryside MPs vote on fox hunting, only coastal MPs vote on fishing? It is utterly impracticable.  'Take the English smoking ban. This was proposed in clauses in a bill which applied to the whole of the UK. Would the Tories seriously take those clauses out into the grand committee for consideration?'"

The proposal is likely to be warmly greeted by Conservative members.  A ConservativeHome.com poll in July 2006 found that 82% "favour English and Welsh MPs being given sole control of laws affecting England and Wales".  Many will regard this commitment as only the first step, however, in putting the England-Scotland relationship back on track.  63% support complete elimination of the UK taxpayers' subsidy of Scotland.  A higher proportion would likely support its reduction.

On yesterday's Platform, Murdo Fraser MSP recommended that the party proceeds cautiously in these matters but that new solutions were necessary:

"It is not for me as a Scot to say whether there should now be a wholly separate English Parliament, but I detect little serious enthusiasm for it.  I suspect that most English voters would be happy with Westminster continuing to both as a UK legislature and as a de facto English Parliament, in the latter case with the exclusion of the Scottish, Northern Irish and (if appropriate) Welsh MPs, if a way could be found to make this work. The financial arrangements require to be looked at too."

Murdo warned not to fall into traps set by the SNP's Alex Salmond.  In, The Observer, Ruaridh Nicoll thinks that the Tories may be ignoring this warning:

"The truth is that Salmond is working out how to avoid Scotland's voters. He is needling the English at every opportunity. He complained about Scotland receiving too little cash while ensuring English students will be the only ones who have to pay. He is bringing down class sizes and offering free school meals for all (a trial has just begun). Eventually, he figures, English Tories will turn against Scotland, and a split become inevitable. Our front-page report suggests this is already beginning to happen."

Live PMQs blog: Cameron challenges Brown on plan to confiscate the surpluses of well-run schools

Editor's verdict: Another win for David Cameron.  Third in a row.  Good choice of topics: The attempt to penalise well-run schools and the Scottish elections fiasco.  Cameron is also successfully weaving in the same themes into every PMQs: Brown is a centraliser who is less than candid with the British people.  Brown is doing a little better, however - often standing at the despatch box without his guidance book.  Good question from Graham Brady.  If the frontbench won't touch the Barnett formula you can expect bankbenchers to do so - authorised or not."

Not verbatim:

[Speaker rebukes Ian Austin again - Brown's PPS.  Cameron says: That's another one of Brown's cronies who won't behave properly].

12.14am: David Cameron stands up for his second round of questions and invites the PM to apologise for the Scottish elections fiasco.  He says that Douglas Alexander has been criticised for playing politics.  Gordon Brown responds by saying that David Cameron is "misleading" people about the report.  All parties were implicated, he suggests.  Look at p17, responds David Cameron.  The report directly criticises ministerial conduct.  Brown promised a new kind of politics.  He promised candour.  That was in his leadership election.  It feels like a hundred years ago.

12.12am: Graham Brady pops up again for the second time in two weeks and asks: Why should my constituents pay more tax so that his constituents don't have to pay prescription charges?  Brown challenges the Tory frontbench to say whether it supports the Barnett formula or not.

12.09am: Vince Cable asks Brown about doubts over the Government's renewables target.  'Isn't Brown less green than Blair?', he asks.  Brown jokes that he is pleased to see Mr Cable still in position given the turnover in LibDem leaders.  Brown promises to consult on the achievability of the target.  Cable responds by saying that Brown will soon be as green as George Bush.

12.05am: David Cameron says that he should trust the surpluses to headteachers and not interfere.  The PM says the real issue is the Tory plan not to match Labour spending and leave a £6bn hole in the public finances.  Cameron says: Scrap the consultation and let headteachers keep their surpluses.  When will the PM give up his mania for state control?

12.02am: David Cameron asks the Prime Minister why he plans to confiscate 5% of the surpluses of good schools.  Gordon Brown replies that the Government is consulting on how best to use the considerable (£1.7bn) surpluses that exist.

Watch it live via Sky.

Telegraph calls for end to "Scottish nationalism fed on English taxes"

The main story in this morning's Telegraph is the news that residents of Scotland can expect free prescriptions within four years although residents of England will still have to pay.  Conservative MP Ben Wallace, a Shadow Scotland Minister, said that this was "another example of how devolution is all at one end at the moment."  Labour had not delivered fairness, he said.

Matthew Elliott of The TaxPayers' Alliance got to the heart of the issue in his comment to The Telegraph: "Either Scotland should be made to raise the money it spends or these measures should be rolled out nationwide."  The fact is, as The Telegraph points out, Scotland does not raise the extra money it needs to pay for the extra public services that Scottish voters receive.  The average resident of Scotland receives nearly £1,500pa more per head than the average resident of England from the UK taxpayer.  This is because of the Barnett formula devised in the 1970s which, among other things, takes account of Scotland's special characteristics - including its geographical expanse and rural character which raises the costs of providing public services.

The Conservatives need to proceed sensitively in addressing this issue.  Expressions used by The Telegraph - like "The public services ''apartheid" between England and Scotland" - should be avoided.  We are a Unionist party and we must not take risks with the Union.  We must be pro-Scottish and that is why the party in London should revisit plans to give the Scottish party more autonomy over its affairs.  But we cannot allow a sense of English grievance to grow.  David Cameron has already said that he supports English Votes for English Laws.  It is now time to modernise the Barnett formula.  A subsidy may still be appropriate but it has become too large.  London, in particular, with more than its fair share of very poor communities, should be able to retain more of the tax that its citizens pay.

In a leader, The Telegraph makes the point that many Scots do not even feel the benefits from the England to Scotland subsidy.  The money is eaten by the quangoes and other bloated public sector institutions that have grown fat under Labour.  A reduction in the Barnett formula may be the shock that the Scottish public sector needs to begin reforms that have been delayed for far too long.

Labour will, of course, accuse our party of playing politics with the Union.  We should hit back hard at those suggestions.  Recent evidence shows that Labour has been using UK taxpayers' money to disproportionately benefit its own voters in Wales, Scotland and northern England.  It has been buying votes.  We should consistently use the word used by Ben Wallace: fairness.  More prosperous parts of the UK should be happy to help less prosperous parts but the extent of subsidy has simply become too great.

Scottish Tories join Labour and LibDems to oppose referendum on independence

Pasted below is a joint statement by the leaders of the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Tory groups within the Scottish Parliament.  Jack McConnell, Annabelle Goldie and Nicol Stephen have come together to oppose
SNP plans to take Scotland out of the United Kingdom.

Former Scottish Secretary Michael Forsyth has, however, called on Scotland's Conservatives to call the SNP's bluff and back a Scottish-wide referendum on independence.  A poll of Scottish voters last week found only 31% support for leaving the UK.  Lord Forsyth told The Daily Express:

“Saying to [Alex Salmond] we won’t have a referendum is just playing straight into his hands, because that’s what he wants.  I think that’s a huge mistake.  He is desperately hoping no-one will take him at his word. Mr Salmond and his colleagues want to delay a referendum because they think they will get a better vote than if they were to have a referendum now, so the unionist parties should call his bluff.”

A Scottish Tory spokesman told The Express that "continual referendums would be a road to continual uncertainty." 

In June we reported a call from Tory candidate Richard Cook for Tories to back a referendum.  A key advantage of holding and winning referendum would be the opportunity to build a more normal politics north of the border.  Freed from the Unionist-independence debate the Scottish Tories could be freed to become the country's leading party of small government, enterprise, public service reform and a tough approach to crime.

'Playing the English card'

Mark Field MP has answered your questions on today's interviews blog.  In his answer to a question from 'Harlequin.dane' he writes:

"Since the expulsion of most of the hereditary peers, I have, in principle, favoured the option of a fully or largely-elected House of Lords. However, I recognise that such an outcome is unlikely to be within the realms of practical politics, not least as the House of Lords as currently constituted is likely to be hostile and there would be little agreement as to the timing or form of elections. I would prefer to see the creation of a completely new federal parliament. Four, full, national parliaments in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland with most of the existing powers of the House of Commons and over them a federal United Kingdom parliament, which would debate defence and foreign affairs, make treaties and administer a cohesion fund for the poorer parts of the UK. It would be funded by a per GDP levy on the national parliaments. There would be no need for extra politicians, as the national parliaments would send representatives to the UK parliament and meet together for its debates, which could be held in the old House of Lords chamber.  I appreciate it is a bold, indeed a radical, suggestion but I believe that the only way to restore the balance of the British constitution, which had served us so well for so long, is to offer the British people this fairer alternative in a referendum once we have won the next election."

Brown's Scottishness does not yet appear to have undermined him in any serious way with English voters but there are a number of CCHQ tacticians - and key figures at The Daily Telegraph - who think 'the English card' is the best way of putting David Cameron into Downing Street.  David Cameron raised the West Lothian question in his first parliamentary encounter with Brown and backbench Tory MPs have pummeled Mr Brown on the issue at PMQs.

In the Q&A Mark also critiques the A-list:

"Whilst I strongly agree that the Conservative Party should reach out to embrace a broader range of candidates, my biggest objection to the ‘A List’ (and any other Party list system such as applies for European elections) is that it encourages many Conservative candidates and future MPs to regard their role first and foremost as a mouthpiece for the Party leadership or CCHQ. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the constitutional role of a backbencher, which is to hold the Executive to account (a role every bit as important for government MPs as it is for Opposition backbenchers as this country has learnt to its detriment over the past decade)."

Two reasons to be cautious about an autumn poll

I'm pretty worried that Gordon Brown might call an autumn poll but here are two good reasons why there might not be a September/ October election:

1. The SNP are doing well in Scotland.  A YouGov poll reported by the Scotsman notes that the SNP are doing better today than in May when they became the largest party at Holyrood.
2. Labour didn't do that brilliantly last Thursday.  That's not my view but that's the verdict of Mike Smithson over at PoliticalBetting.com.  His post is well worth a read.

PS While referring to Scotland there was an interesting article in yesterday's Scotsman about the Tories by Peter Jones.  Here are two key sections from his article:

"Goldie, with her justice spokesman, Bill Aitken, was in First Minister Alex Salmond's office within days of the election to put the Tories' argument for the agenda in the battle against drugs addiction to move much more firmly towards rehabilitation. Those points have been accepted by the SNP. Aitken has similarly made proposals about the handling of sexual offenders. Again, they have been generally accepted by the SNP.  This is enormous progress. From being the untouchables of Scottish politics, the Tories are now again acceptable citizens. It means that the MSPs now have real political purpose to their work, being able to make real achievements rather than just hoping to get the odd mention in the newspapers.

Much more is likely to come. Apart from the justice agenda, where there is considerable agreement between the Tories and the SNP manifestos, there is also much similarity between their thoughts on business rates (big cuts for small firms) and on the need for Scottish Enterprise to be slimmed down and reshaped...

One other sign of the Tories' return is worth mentioning, and that is the election of a Conservative MSP, Alex Fergusson, as the parliament's Presiding Officer. This may not look politically significant, since he has to divest himself of political trappings. But I recall listening to a ferocious argument between two Labour MPs over who should succeed Betty Boothroyd as Speaker of the House of Commons - Michael Martin, a Labour MP, or Sir George Young, a Tory.

Never forget, said one vehemently anti-Young MP, that Boothroyd's deft handling of the job had helped to convince a dubious electorate that Labour could handle big public offices. Did George Reid, while impeccably impartial, do that job for the SNP? And might Fergusson also do it for the Tories?"

Scottish Chairman Peter Duncan resigned today.  BBC Online has the story.  Let us hope that this opportunity will be used for a reorganisation of the Conservative operation in Scotland and the appointment of a full-time CEO-type figure.

Could Scottish Conservatives give the SNP their independence referendum?

An article in Scotland on Sunday suggests that there is some support within the Scottish Conservatives to give Alex Salmond the votes he needs for the Holyrood parliament to authorise a referendum on independence.  The minority SNP-Green administration lacks the votes to honour Mr Salmond's pledge to hold a referendum within the next four years.  Richard Cook, Tory Vice-Chairman and the fast-tracked Westminster parliamentary candidate for East Renfrewshire (pictured),  believes that a referendum is needed, however, to kill the uncertainty caused by the independence debate.  He told SoS' Eddie Barnes:

"I'm personally in support of a referendum bill at the earliest possible opportunity, to remove the uncertainty already being created to business.  There are plenty of business people who are delaying taking business decisions at the moment, and that is jeopardising Scottish jobs and wealth creation in Scotland."

There are huge dangers in such a course.  Although the majority of votes cast in last month's Scottish elections were for unionist parties, there must always be a danger that a vote for independence becomes muddled.  Scottish voters might use it as a referendum on a Prime Minister Gordon Brown, for example, if at the time of the vote he is crashing in the polls.  On the other hand, the advantages of a vote - in addition to those stated by Richard Cook - would include the positive message it would send to the English about Scots' commitment to the Union and it would also give the Scottish political parties the freedom to address the real bread'n'butter issues.  With Scotland's place in the Union settled, for example, the Scottish Tories could be freed to become the country's leading party of small government, enterprise, public service reform and a tough approach to crime.

The SoS article notes that Annabel Goldie, leader of the Conservative MSPs, is "reluctant" to support the SNP's ambitions for a vote.

3pm update: I have been texted by a senior MSP that this story is "complete nonsense."

And how do you rate the Conservative Party's out-of-Westminster leaders?

We've already published the results from the April survey that showed rising member satisfaction with David Cameron and for most of the shadow cabinet.  We also asked what you thought about the three people who lead the Conservative Party in Europe, Scotland and Wales: Timothy Kirkhope MEP, Annabel Goldie MSP and Nick Bourne AM.

Nick Bourne AM, leader of the Welsh Tories since 1999, was least known by respondents.  71% said they did not know enough or anything about him.  Of the 29% willing to express an opinion 22% were satisfied and 7% dissatisfied.  There had been speculation that Mr Bourne might face a leadership challenge after delivering what some thought were below-expectation gains in the May elections but his likeliest successor - Jonathan Morgan AM - told Wales on Sunday that he was 100% behind Bourne's continued leadership.

55% were don't knows about the leader of the Conservative MSPs, Annabel Goldie.  35% were satisfied (10% very) and 10% were dissatisfied.  Ms Goldie hopes she will soon have the opportunity to implement some Conservative manifesto promises.  Refusing to enter any formal pact with any party she has long promised to work with a minority administration - including Alex Salmond's SNP - on implementing Tory manifesto ideas.  Ms Goldie reiterated that promise for yesterday's Scotsman.  Ms Goldie's trickiest decision will be whether or not to proceed with a more separate Scottish party.  In yesterday's Herald, Political Editor Douglas Fraser agreed with ConservativeHome's belief that "splitting could help Tories find their way back from the political wilderness".  Indications are that organised resistance from former Conservative Scottish Secretaries has cooled David Cameron's initial enthusiasm for the split.

Timothy Kirkhope, leader of the Tory MEPs, has a similar dunno rating to Annabel Goldie (56%) but of those willing to express an opinion it is much more negative.  29% are dissatisfied (17% very) and just 15% satisfied.  Awareness of this level of member concern about MEP performance motivated the MEPs' successful attempt to severely limit member involvement in readoption.  ConservativeHome has twice attempted to ask Timothy Kirkhope to answer questions from members but hasn't received any reply.  He is the only elected Conservative to ever decline an opportunity to be accountable to members through the interviews blog.

We'll ask these questions again on occasions.