Tory members favour a separate Scottish Party

Perhaps I should be more worried than I am but I do not sense that Scotland voted for independence last Thursday.  Those votes that were counted were largely cast for Unionist parties and all democrats can welcome the end of Labour's fifty year dominance north of the border.  The main worry is that a nationalistic First Minister will fan anti-Scottish feeling in England.

What remains worrying is the continuing weakness of Scotland's Tories.  Despite her energetic campaigning Annabel Goldie now leads a smaller parliamentary group than before last Thursday.  There are now 17 Tory MSPs when there were 18.  The Cameron effect - so evident against the LibDems in southern England - is absent from Scotland.

ConservativeHome believes that for the Scottish party to prosper it needs to be seen as distinctively Scottish.  As we have argued before:

"With its own distinct identity the Scottish Unionist Party (the name of the party until 1965 and a possible name for the 'new party') could be a leading advocate of The Union and would be more likely to be seen to be motivated by an unambiguous commitment to Scotland's interests rather than those of England.  The election of its leader - which should follow independence - would give the party the serious debate it desperately needs about its long-term identity.  Should it be defined by its Unionism, for example, or by a commitment to provide an alternative to the high tax, anti-business parties that dominate the Scottish landscape."

By 43% to 35% more members of the Conservative Party agree that a Scottish party with its policies, name and structure would be a welcome change.  The Scottish Tories who took part in the April ConservativeHome poll are evenly divided on the issue, however.  From a very small sample of 118 members, 47% supported a separate party but 47% opposed any change.

Bruce Anderson rejects the idea of independence for the Scottish party in his Monday column for The Independent:

"Mr Cameron has two contradictory objectives. He would like to give the Scottish Tories more independence. He would also like to sort them out. He should concentrate on the latter. In the short term, the Scottish Tories are about as ready for independence as the Belgian Congo was. Scottish Toryism has always been the party of the Union. It was also the party of business, and the party of Scottish patriotism within the United Kingdom. Those are still formidable electoral assets. It only requires formidable politicians to turn them into votes.  David Cameron understands this. Now, while the Scottish Tories are congratulating themselves on reaching third place, he must move fast and hard to rebuild the party. In so doing, he can create a vital component in the fight to save the Union."

I am not persuaded by Bruce Anderson's preference for central control.  It would only reinforce the sense that the party is controlled from England.  Also, CCHQ's attempts to 'sort out' the London Mayoral candidate do not offer much hope that the party will be adept at finding talent to rebuild the Scottish party.  Despite a lot of opposition from some of the party's most long-serving Scottish figures David Cameron should give the Scottish party its independence.  It should enjoy the same kind of relationship that the CDU and the CSU have in Germany.  If we truly believe in localism and the dangers of centralisation we should give the Scottish party this opportunity for freedom.  The current arrangements are certainly not working.

TOMORROW: BRIAN MONTEITH WILL DISSECT THE SCOTTISH RESULTS

Comments

[Chris]

I agree! I recently moved from London to Edinburgh and started wondering about the situation of the Tories up here. To win over any new supporters they need to change the Scottish people's perceptions of the party as an English party run from London. However they can't do that at the moment because if they took a readically different line than London on any policy the London media would use it to embarras Cameron. We need to establish in peoples minds that the Scottish party can take an independent from London and that can only come with a CSU/CDU type arrangment.

[Ted]

The Welsh Conservatives have established their welshness and freedom to act independently without a CDU/CSU arrangement. While I have argued for this in the past I believe the dismissal of this by many of the Scots posters on this site whose opinions I value needs to be considered.
If I was in the Scots Party I'd not do anything yet - the Lib Dems are going through crisis in both Wales & Scotland. In Scotland they have been damaged by their coalition with Labour and are now torn between Ming's anti-SNP/pro Labour views, those who want a coalition with SNP to retain a position in government and those who say plague on both their houses. Big opportunity for the Conservatives to become the real alternative to Labour and the SNP.
Let's concentrate on politics and for once not get distracted by examining our own entrails in either leadership or organisation. Voters like parties who care about their issues not ones always looking inwards. Leave that to the Lib Dems.

[HF]

The Scottish Party seem to be waiting around for someone to fix their problems. Making a break maybe the only way to get them to confront the challenge.

They need to get on and tackle the issues. Annabel Goldie should emulate Michael Howard and find the best Leader to take them forward.

[Cllr Iain Lindley]

I know Tim isn't in this group, but I do wonder how many of those who favour a CDU/CSU arrangement are only interested in it as a trojan horse to get rid of the Scottish altogether. That would be hugely misguided.

[simon]

I've said many a time that the strategy used by the Scottish Conservatives defied reason. What EXACTLY was the point in voting SCons when they have ruled themselves out of ANY coalition!?! Yep, their main 'policy' was to 'save the union', but what about proactively working with an SNP administration to argue for an overhaul in law and order, taxation ( ie ) getting rid of council tax), and other social welfare issues- the SCons could have said they would work with an SNP admin, but an independence referendum- forget it. To sit in the SParliament with arms crossed and lips pursed does not an effective party make. What would we rather have up here- a discredited Lib/Lab pact?

[Stephen Gash]

If there is such a need for a 'Scottish' Conservative Party in order for the Conservatives to succeed in Scotland and therefore preserve the "Union" then what is the point? I was in Monmouthshire for the Welsh Assembly elections and was immensely irritated to see rosettes with "Welsh Conservatives" emblazoned upon them.
Is it not enough that the English throw billions in taxes at the "Celtic" fringe? English people are literally dying to preserve this blighted Union, being denied life-saving drugs for example.
The Tories believe they are doing well in England, but all that is happening in English (not British) politics is that the electorate is staggering from one protest vote to the next.
The Tories have turned their backs on their natural constituency, England, and one day will pay the price.
Cameron spent more time in his beloved Scotland than in England, and to what purpose? I have no trust in Cameron's Tories to deliver for England. Instead they prefer to feed Celtic anti-English bigotry with more English taxpayers' cash while branding us as 'Little Englanders' merely for pointing out how we are democratically disadvantaged.
I was on a Justice for England march in London on 1st May, which Mick Martin re-routed away from the Palace of Westminster at the last minute.
This smug Scot is the Speaker of the House of Commons, and in whom the Tories expect the English to place their trust in deciding what is English and what is not, when implementing English Votes on English Matters.
If Martin can't even allow a peaceful English march in England's capital to pass by the parliament that is misruling (indeed abusing) England then why should we trust him to have England's best interests at heart?
When the Tories accept that the English will settle for nothing less than an English Parliament, that will be the time when the Conservatives will gain more than just a protest vote. Instead the Tories prefer to flog the long dead horse called the "United Kingdom" which is propped up by the people it singularly disavantages - the English.

[Yet Another Anon]

all democrats can welcome the end of Labour's fifty year dominance north of the border.
The Labour vote held up quite well in Scotland, what happened was that the SSP and Solidarity collapsed and the Greens and Liberal Democrats had losses - this happened in the Scottish Local Elections as well, the overall votes for Labour were within 1% of those of the SNP and even as a percentage vote only marginally down on 2003 despite high turnout.

So far as the English Local Elections go - it's a major extension of control of English Local Government for the Conservative Party, but following on from results in 2003 that were still before Labour were hit by a backlash over the War in Iraq - if the Conservatives had failed to advance from 35% in 2003 and Labour had held it's vote of 30% then it would have been remarkable, it's still slightly up on 2006 for the Conservatives and Labour have only recovered marginally so far - it's a sign of continued revival of the Conservative Party, but also of a Labour revival, disappointing news for the Liberal Democrats who lost support even compared with last year where elections were fought, heavy losses of support nationally compared to 2003.

Next year's Local Elections are going to be much more of a test and it could be quite close as to whether the Conservatives make gains or not in terms of seats and councils and in terms of percentage of the vote the actual difference between the percentage vote in 2004 and in 2008 could be just 1% or 2% for the Conservatives.

[Ian Campbell]

But if a the Scottish Conservatives have to become 'distinctly Scottish' to succeed in Scotland, does it not follow that the English Conservatives must become more distinctly English? See Frank Field's recent comments in The Independent. England's continued support for the Union cannot be taken for granted in face of increasingly separate identities for Scotland and Wales. Although the Conservatives propose to create a de facto English Parliament by restricting votes in the House of Commons on English matters to MPs from English constituencies, policies for England will be drawn up by UK ministers, some of whom may represent seats in Scotland or Wales. There is no-one to 'speak for England' as First Minister and it is not likely that the specific needs of England will be given consideration in legislation except as part of the overall interest of the UK. England is not synonymous with the UK and it is becoming more and more difficult to see why England should not 'go it alone'. David Cameron has said that he does not want to be Prime Minister of England, and so if England opts out of the Union he is presumably not interested in the job of PM.

[Simon]

I think that the ed. has got the 'anti-scottish' point the wrong way round. Most people in England don't care what goes on up here, and they will pay scant attention to any ScotsParl MSP. What will ferment anti-scottish feeling down south is the attitude of English MP's that think the 'status quo' is fine ( scots MP's etc. voting on English matters) and that the 'west lothian question' is irrelevant. The spending issue rankles too. As well as the fact that most MP's from all parties appear to think that England is Britain.

[Yet Another Anon]

David Cameron has said that he does not want to be Prime Minister of England, and so if England opts out of the Union he is presumably not interested in the job of PM.
What he is saying is that he doesn't want the breakup of the UK, however if England was to be a nation in itself perhaps with Dependencies and other overseas Territories I imagine he would try to become Prime Minister of England, although Labour and the Liberal Democrats would change leader as I can't see Menzies Campbell or Gordon Brown wanting to stand for an English seat and try for PM of England - more likely they would retire, although they might try to become PM of Scotland - I imagine that someone such as Stephen Byers would become Labour leader and probably Vincent Cable would become Liberal Democrat leader.

[Felicity Mountjoy]

In a way the Scottish Tories are much more influential today than this time last week. They have vital votes that could make the difference in crucial votes over the next few years of this new Scottish Parliament.

[East Anglian]

I also believe the Tory vote at the local elections was more of a reaction to the way Labour have been handling the countries affairs over the last 10 years. With the SNP now in a position of power and the potential for Scotland to vote on independence really the Tories in England should be re-considering their position on the UK and Unionism.
I for one do not want to see my hard earned Tax money being thrown around at the whim of an unelected Scot in Westminster or being used to appease the Scot Nat's in Edinburgh.
When the Conservatives give their full backing to England which includes our own parliament as well as a thought through economic policy should Scotland choose to leave the UK then you'll get my support. Until then you really offer me nothing worth casting my vote for.

[Graeme Archer]

Am second to no-one in my general love of all things Bruce Anderson-ish, but I think he's wrong to say that because Scottish Toryism has always been the party of the Union then it has no future other than so to continue. Clearly this doesn't follow at all (any more than the non sequitur from Ian @1115: if the Scottish Conservatives have to become 'distinctly Scottish' to succeed in Scotland, does it not follow that the English Conservatives must become more distinctly English? -- erm, no, it doesn't.)

Homing in on the results in Cunninghame North (known to human beings as "north Ayrshire & Arran"), not just due to the generally uber-splendid nature of our candidate Philip there, but because it's where I was born and grew up, I notice something when I look at the numerical results. It's just not the case that there are 10,000 fewer centre-right people now than there were in 1987 ... or 10,000 more nationalist voters than there were then (there used to be near zero interest for the SNP in our Tory-Labour seat) .... it seems to be the case that the Scottish analogues of those people whom one would label "natural Tories" in England have, either consciously or through some subconscious, cultural shift, started to identify Nationalism as a respectable anti-socialist place to leave their votes.

Actually, pace whatever the official, leftwing economic policy of the SNP is (who could be bothered to read it?!) this doesn't even strike me as absurd, since most centre-right parties - ours not excepted - are generally comfortable representing what one might label the "patriotic" or national pride community. Conclusion: there are more than enough anti-socialist, centre-right voters in Scotland to elect a centre-right government. They simply don't associate the party with the Scottish Conservatives. Given the highly sensible policies of that party, I can conclude only that it is that the nationalism of the Scottish Tories is seen to be too Londoncentric (not English-centric, by the way, though that's just a feeling I have) and forced to choose between the "patrio-nationalistic" driver and the "low-tax/localist/post-Thatcherite" driver (which both drive all of us on the right, to some greater or lesser degree), then the right-wing vote in Scotland splits 2:1 (based on the Ayrshire result) in favour of the former over the latter.

Conclusion: There's no reason at all not to realign the parties in Scotland. Devolve properly and rename and the party north of the border would be surprised, I guess, at how many "SNP" voters would actually be a lot more comfortable voting for a centre-right bloc that offers access to both emotional (nationalist) and intellectual (post-Thatcherite) satisfaction.

Why people will say this is nonsense: something about the Unionists in the 19th and early 20th century (response: I am from west of Scotland and culturally "Orange" & can't feel any tug in that direction at all); "England subsidises Scotland" (response: no, London subsidises lots of poorer parts of the UK, and though this issue must be resolved, it won't be by providing succour to the SNP, which is all we're doing by not changing).

[Editor]

Iain Lindley: "I know Tim isn't in this group, but I do wonder how many of those who favour a CDU/CSU arrangement are only interested in it as a trojan horse to get rid of the Scottish altogether."

Thanks Iain. My own strong view is that this renewed Scottish Party would remain a Unionist party and would (1) be in a stronger position to argue for the Union as in the interests of Scotland if it was seen to be free of English domination and (2) if a right-of-centre agenda/ party takes off and starts to create a more dynamic Scotland it will tackle the English sense of Scotland being eternally dependent on subsidy from the south.

But - perhaps more than anything else - I don't think we have much to lose from making this change. For the Scottish party to be regressing at this time of Labour unpopularity is very depressing.

[Richard Carey]

Spinning off the Scottish Party to allow it to have a more distinct indentity still looks like a good idea to me. I have to agree with much of Graeme's (as usual) very sensible post. Devolution is a done deal, as far as it's gone - why shouldn't we allow the Party there to reflect the reality on the ground?

Perhaps not immediately, perhaps not in the rush of the elections - take some time to kick the Party north of the border into even better campaigning shape if need be, and then look at it again.

And will the English Parliament/ED nutters please knock it off once and for all? If you honestly think we can sew up the next GE here and now by promising another layer of politicians and their supporting bureaucrats rather than delivering on issues, you really haven't been knocking on enough doors in the last month!

[Max]

I'm not all that sure that splitting up the party will achieve anything. Most of the people involved will be the same and I'm sure the electorate will be able to see that it is the Scottish Conservatives under a new name.

For me the problem is more about policy. I do think we have to go for fiscal autonomy so that we can offer a genuinely radical package of tax cutting measures to the Scottish people and to Scottish business. This may also help to attract the small number of right-wing SNP supporters.

As for Simons suggestion about working with the SNP it just isn't possible. Many of their members (inside and outside of the parliament) are rabidly left wing and the SNP still refuses to cooperate with us even at council level.

[Yet Another Anon]

London subsidises lots of poorer parts of the UK
London actually has always had money poured into it, a lot of it isn't classed as Regional Funding though - the Civil Service, the British Museum, National Physical Laboratory, Royal Society of the Arts, Royal Opera Company - there are vast numbers of organisations in London that exist through state funding which they see as being a right rather than a privilege for them - a lot of London based organisations as well as those in other parts of the UK could be closed, run on a more commercial footing as a private clg, privatised and decentralisation of a lot of such organisations is desirable - London frequently behaves if it is the UK and everywhere else is merely a province of it.

[Greg Laing]

No Richard, we do not want another layer of politicians and bureacrats, so get rid of the irrelevant and undemocratic `regional assemblies`. If anyone seriously thinks that the Tories or any other party can continue to ignore England as a political and constitutional fact in the face of increased self determination in Wales and Scotland, they are not just nutters but downright arrogant.

[Scotty]

Councillor Iain Lindley, as a Scottish conservative that is exactly how I feel!

"The Scottish Party seem to be waiting around for someone to fix their problems. Making a break maybe the only way to get them to confront the challenge."

I joined a national party and I thought we were all in this together.

Listen to Bruce Anderson on this because he sums up better than I can just why this would electoral suicide. Many people think a vote for the tories is a wasted vote, do this and you take away the reason why so many of its core voters stuck with them over the last 10 years.

I am not surprised at the blinkered overview that prompted Tim to run this thread today.
Had he been watching developments in Scotland over the last few days he might have realised that if there is one thing the party North of the Border did not need was to be seen having a debate on its future as a united party in Westminster!!!

If anyone is interested we are about to have a by election in Scotland because of Alex Salmond's election to Holyrood. Now while the Tories sit naval gazing and muttering about changing leaders and radical policies which further the agenda of the right in the party I can tell you that all they do is cause disunity and briefing within the party. We have been riddled with it for years and it has done us more harm than anything else. Instead of pulling together and building a base from the bottom up we ignored the foundations and tried to change our fortunes with a lick of paint. The SNP and Libdems will throw everything at this campaign and will bus activists in from all over Scotland, I bet that many tory activists in different parts of Scotland watch from afar and just simple wait for an signs of an improvement while the local association tries its best.
The party is fractured into pockets all over Scotland with no joined up activist base. That is why we get these odd successes instead of real momentum or an overall sign of improvement.
Can we please stop tinkering from the top and start building from the bottom, had we done that over the last 10 years then maybe we would not have made so easy for the SNP last week.
What we NEED is a united joined up party with a mobile campaign machine and some one like the Libdems Lord Rannard to run it.

[Max]

Scotty - I agree with a lot of that.

But I'm not sure we will have a by-election. So far as I know Alex Salmond will remain an MP untill the next Westminster election.

[Yet Another Anon]

So far as I know Alex Salmond will remain an MP untill the next Westminster election.
If there was a by-election in Banff & Buchan at the moment, the SNP would probably increase it's majority and share of the vote - certainly the SNP wouldn't lose it at the moment, although I'm sure the Liberal Democrats would have hopes.

[DrFoxNews]

TOMORROW: BRIAN MONTEITH WILL DISSECT THE SCOTTISH RESULTS - Editor

A hard-right Scot, renowned for briefing against the party leadership, with an axe to grind against the party leader?

Hopefully Liam F-... sorry, Brian Monteith won't be using that axe he's been grinding to dissect the Scottish results and perform a hatchet job on Annabel Goldie.

I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for a porcine aviation display in the unlikely event that Monteith manages to produce an article untainted by bitterness, rancour and spite.

[Fife Fox]

This really is such a dangerous point of view to take.
Firstly, we were successful in Scotland prior to 1965 because our vote was linked to 1) the secterian divide and 2) the working class imperialist/nationalist vote. Our grip on Scotland was lost in the 1964 election when we were stil the Scottish Unionist Party. The fact that we joined with our southern sister party is just a red herring.

Secondly, the organisation in Scotland is FAR too weak to go it alone. Last week's elections demonstrated that. We don't have the finances, organisational strength or personnel to do the job.

Thirdly, it could cause all sorts of problems for a UK Conserative government. For instance, if the English/Welsh party continued on a more One Nation direction uder Cameron, and the Scottish party maintained a more Thatcherite core, it could lead to all sorts of divisions and comprimises that comes with any coalition. This would be particuarly significant if there was a small majority, and the votes of the (probably small) Scottish party were essential for the government.

An independent party north of the border would just further the cause of separatism, stir up all sorts of problems for a Conservative government and do nothing to strengthen the party in Scotland, in fact it will weaken it

[Jonathan]

We need a federal UK parliament (instead of the HoL/Senate) and four national ones with complete tax autonomy. Only through this can we save the Union whilst preventing the unfairness to England which has been endemic in our political process for thirty years. As a matter of tactics we need to insist on EVfEL first so that the English parliament has FPTP not PR as its voting method. There is huge underground support for this in England, which Cameron is wilfully stupid not to tap.

On this basis, we could do a deal with the SNP to hurt the Labour government. If Salmond can turn them into a celtic economy party, as in Eire, then we don't really need a Scottish Conservative party to split the right wing vote.

After the fiasco of these elections at a time of Labour implosion everywhere else, it must be obvious that the Scottish Conservative brand is now as tainted in Scotland as the Liberals are in England. If we just soldier on we are doomed to a generation of uselessness. Either we rebrand or we find different ways of achieving the same ends.

If I were Salmond, I would accept the impossibility of coalition and, as minority First Minister offer a legislative programme of populist goodies and wait with the deepest regret for his opposition to vote them down or better still for Brown to declare them illegal and ultra vires and then ask the electorate again in 2011.
Only a complete federal structure is going to maintain the Union now.

[Richard Gadsden]

If you look at the results, independence parties gained about 1% as against unionist parties - the collapse of the SSP and Green vote to the SNP was the main explanation of the results, not even a declining Labour vote (not down much, actually)

[Henry]

And when this new sparkling Scottish Conservative Party emerges, which will be Scottish-focused, will we then see an English Conservative Party, which will be English focused?

No prizes for guessing the answer to that one.

Bought and sold for Scottish votes. Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

[V. A. Newman]

Richard Carey asks "will the English Parliament/ED nutters please knock it off once and for all"?

Firstly, I object to being called a nutter simply because I have a different opinion. Secondly, no, as someone who firmly believes that a proper parliament is the right of my country I will not knock it off!

Richard goes on "If you honestly think we can sew up the next GE here and now by promising another layer of politicians and their supporting bureaucrats rather than delivering on issues, you really haven't been knocking on enough doors in the last month"!

The lack of self determination for England is an issue.

Perhaps Richard has not taken any notice of the opinion polls published over recent months which show a rising demand for an EP. I assume by door to door he is referring to the local elections in England which inevitably elicit discussions on local rather than national issues.

With the National Health Service, schools and teacher training, further and higher education, local government finance and taxation, land-use planning and building control, the environment, passenger and road transport, economic development and financial assistance to industry, civil and criminal courts, much of criminal and civil law, prisons, police and fire services,food standards,certain areas of agriculture and fisheries,the arts and sport devolved to an EP along with the supporting bureaucracy a much reduced UK parliament would be needed.

By the way, I have been out with one of our Coservative candidates for the town and district councils doing my bit helping distribute leaflets.

It is possible to be a member of the Conservative party and believe that England should have a parliament. The Unionist reference in our party's title should pertain to countries which all have equal status as defined by the 1707 Act of Union Article VI:  That all parts of the United Kingdom forever, from and after the Union, shall have the same allowances, encouragements, and drawbacks

[Derek]

Will we then see a seperate English Conservative Party to deal with English matters?

[Alan S]

Surely, Derek, that will be one benefit of a seprate Scots party. The party left behind will be more focused on us.

[Harley]

As a semi-autonomous organisation the Unionist Party in Scotland consistently managed to maintain a good number of Westminster seats up until massive voter disillusionment and consequent merging with the national party in 1964-1965.

What would have happened had the Scottish Tories remained independent in the past 40 years? Would the SNP's rise have not been as meteoric? Would a Scottish Tory party have taken part in the Constitutional Convention? Would there have been a Yes vote in the 97 referendum?

My thoughts are, we either make the Scottish Party operationally independent (on the proviso they sit with us in Whitehall but have a free vote) or we reorganise the entire Conservative Party itself into a Federal structure, with a local government level split into MSPs, English Councillors, Welsh AMs etc. and then Westminster set on top.

Personally I prefer the idea of making the Scottish Party independent - if they want to change their name then good from them. I wish the national party would emphasise the "Unionist" part in our name as we did 100 years ago. The latter scheme, while in my opinion fairer, is also convoluted - and we have just seen in Scotland what happens when a system becomes too complicated.

[Torygirl]

The English feel ignored and angry that they are not allowed parity with the other countries in the Union. Why can't we have what Scotland has? One thing for certain, we do not want Regional Government as proposed by the EU, and this is what we will get if we don't have an English Parliament.

[Ted]

It would be nice if we could discuss the Scots Party without bringing England into it - the question is whether the Conservative brand is irredeemably damaged in Scotland nothing whatsover to do with WLQ/EVoEL or iniquity of any financial settlement.

Scotty is putting forward a strong case - the Conservative Party is the sole national UK Party operating in all four countries. In Northern Ireland after a reasonable start it has sunk, in Wales it has achieved a degree of autonomy both in public mind and in fact, in England it is doing well and in Scotland it has stopped the rot but remains a leper to other parties.

Goldie made the best of a bad job in declaring the Scots Conservatives would have nothing to do with coalitions - the SNP are constitutionally unable to work with Conservatives, a coalition with Labour beyond anything but a national emergency and the Scots Lib Dems would only talk to us in the direst of situations.

Prior to 1965 the Scots Unionist and Liberal Unionist brands kept a degree of seperation that served us well in parts of the country where the Conservatives were historically poor and reminded te party of its heritage from both Whig and Tory. I don't think we can turn the clock back four decades but we need to recapture the Scots nationalist identity we had prior to the disapperance of the Unionist Party.

The Act of Union itself was limited - Scotland retained separation in legal systems, education and other areas. Unfortunately through the 70's and 80's we forgot that (it wasn't only one way forgetfulnessThatcher appointed a Scots lawyer to head the English judiaciary). Our Scots MPs had been Scots nationalists, proud of their seperateness and careful of Scots priveleges.

I do not believe the name in the end matters, what does is that the Scots Conservatives have the autonomy that devolution brings. At UK elections we expect them to sign up to the UK manifesto - but we should be careful to separate the English & UK bits. In Scottish affairs yes the national party should support the Scots but they should decide. Just as Cameron gave a free hand to Bourne in Wales to make whatever deals he wanted we should be clear that in Scotland Annabel Goldie and the Scots party are free to devise and develop the Scots party as the membership there wants.

[Alan S]

DrFoxNews:- "Brian Monteith won't be using that axe he's been grinding to dissect the Scottish results and perform a hatchet job on Annabel Goldie. I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for a porcine aviation display in the unlikely event that Monteith manages to produce an article untainted by bitterness, rancour and spite.

The pigs will start flying sir (or is it madam?) when someone produces a CREDIBLE article defending Annabel Goldie! She has managed to lose a seat when Labour are in the doldrums. The Scots Tories performed notably bady in Lab-Con contests.

[DrFoxNews]

The pigs will start flying sir (or is it madam?) when someone produces a CREDIBLE article defending Annabel Goldie! - Alan S

That may be so, but I stand by my point that anybody expecting Brian Monteith to provide a balanced, objective (as opposed to objectionable) account of the Scottish election results is likely to be disappointed, given his past form of jilted lover behaviour towards the Scottish Conservatives.

[Denis Cooper]

It's now impossible to "discuss the Scots Party without bringing England into it",
just as it's now impossible to discuss the Scottish Parliament without increasing numbers of the English wondering why the Scots can have their own Parliament, but the English cannot have their own Parliament.

It seems that the best hope of keeping the United Kingdom together is through a clear federal structure, with a separate single Parliament for England, preferably located outside London, alongside Parliaments for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, under the over-arching "federal" British Parliament at Westminster.

I suggest that the Conservative Party should get ahead of the game by adopting
a parallel clear federal structure, with English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish parties all affiliated to a federal British party, but with each free to develop its own policies on devolved matters and also to argue for more powers to be devolved as appropriate, while the British party only decides policies on reserved matters.

[Editor]

I've seen the article DrFoxNews and it is not at all personal in substance. It is a detailed analysis of what happened in Scotland last Thursday.

[Max]

Editor - why Brian Monteith though?

Why not John Lamont (in particular) or Alex Fergusson who seem to know a bit about winning back support in Scotland.

I would think there views would be helpful in terms of what the Scottish Party has to do to rebuild.

[Editor]

Max: Anyone is welcome to submit a response to Brian's piece...

[Patrick Harris]

Richard,
Ask Sarah Dineage, Conservative candidate for the Milton ward in Portsmouth, if the English Democrats are nutters.

Ask Selina Corkerton, Conservative candidate in the Nelson ward in Portsmouth, if the English Democrats are nutters.

Ask James Williams, Conservative candidate in the Paulsgrove ward in Portsmouth, if the English Democrats are nutters.

Finally, ask Jim Fleming, Conservative candidate in the Baffins ward in Portsmouth, if the English Democrats are nutters.

Our share of the vote kept them all out and what's more we will be after your mates in Gosport and Fareham next year.

Unless of course your Party is willing to do something about the inequality of treatment of the English when compared to Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland.

[Struan Jamieson]

Nice to note that Henry (16.01) knows his Burns.

Reflecting on matters, it is a great pity that Annabel Goldie had seemingly ruled out taking on the position of Presiding Officer. I am aware it will mean one less Tory but frankly does it matter. In the present fragile situation and without any formal SNP/Fib Dem deals, the Parliament's Presiding Officer will be in the public eye more than ever. She does have ability and this would mean that the Scots people would be able to see a Tory making decision affecting Scotland and making such decisions well.
She should go home and think again on this one.

[Boy Blue]

Scotty makes some interesting points on party organisation, but his basic point that all we need to do is campaign a bit harder and we will turn around decades of decline is wide of the mark.

We ran excellent local campaigns in marginal Labour-held seats like Dumfries and eastwood yet, even with a labour Government at record unpopularity, could not win either.

We need more than better campaigns. We need a fundamental rethink, that repositions the party as a pro-Scottish patriotic centre-right group. An independent structure is an essential element in all this.

This Election saw the Scottish Tories score probably the lowest vote share (on the regional list) IN OUR 300 YEAR HISTORY. Re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic can't be the answer.

[One Nation Tory]

One comment...why does no-one argue for a separate North East party, or a separate Merseyside party....our fortunes are in just as dire a state there, if not worse!

[matt wright]

It seems to me that some are making this far more complicated than it needs to be.

Q: Is it a good idea for a party in a distinct area to be more local and have autonomy in making the right decisions for its area? A: Yes of course it is.

It seems to make absolute sense to allow different parts of the UK Conservative Party to develop their policy emphasis, campaigning and organisational structures to suit but based on a strong overall philosophy of Conservatism. This has absolutely nothing to do with division, being anti-union etc etc and would strengthen the party.

Something similar is true of tiers of Govt in the UK. At the most basic level it is madness that a parish/community council is almost powerless today. As for issues about the Union we need to be far more innovative and open-minded. Anyway I believe that if the Union didn't exist the same contrary people would be saying wouldn't it be a good idea to work together more!

I think things come down to localism and best use of tiers of Govt. There have always been several tiers of Govt there is no great need to get hung up about it - the issue is really about making them work better. Blair made a dogs breakfast of devolution because it wasn't real devolution. We should be giving parts of England, Wales and Scotland more powers not just shifting them betwen London, Cardiff and Edinburgh.

Its time to get our act together and lead the way. Britain anyway tended to have a structure that was historically based on areas more at the County level. It seems to me that the division of power between the tiers - from national to community are wrong and need changing.

Matt

[Blue Bandit]

I think a lot of people here don't actually understand the organisation of the party in Scotland. There is a Scottish Central office, with a separate party chairman and party director. All spending is paid for by Scottish raised funds except for the funding of by-elections. The Scottish party at devolved elections is completely empowered to set its own policy agenda, free from London.

Many people seem to be implyig that a separate party would enact the autonomy the party in Scotland already has. I feel we should lookk to a more regional structure throughout the UK, a north east command, a yorkshire & Humber command etc.

To have a spearate party will not make Conservatism in the UK stronger, i already has all the powers here that should ensure that, whilst none of the poweres that would endanger it. Remember the saying....out of the frying pan and into the fire!

[Mike Andrews]

so Boy Blue rules out a separate Merseyside Party. It would be OK if it would be ran by Wallasey but imagine if it had been ran by Wirral West who looking at two years results have lost the same ward two years running to the Liberals and failed to make a breakthrough in two other wards and this is a constituency that is nominally Tory on the new boundaries- it seems there's something seriously wrong in that Association.

[Mike Andrews]

so Boy Blue rules out a separate Merseyside Party. It would be OK if it would be ran by Wallasey but imagine if it had been ran by Wirral West who looking at two years results have lost the same ward two years running to the Liberals and failed to make a breakthrough in two other wards and this is a constituency that is nominally Tory on the new boundaries- it seems there's something seriously wrong in that Association.

[Scotty]

"Scotty makes some interesting points on party organisation, but his basic point that all we need to do is campaign a bit harder and we will turn around decades of decline is wide of the mark."

I have to disagree with you there and cite the example of the SNP. I think that if you look carefully at the fortunes of that party over the last 30 years and then the incredible march to the prize of being biggest party in Holyrood last Thursday you can see what made the difference this time.
Labour are unpopular but I do not believe that alone could have allowed them to overtake Labour in seats.
What we have seen is the building of a highly motivated and mobilised activist base and the result was that they gained the momentum they needed to sweep across Scotland.

Boyblue, Ask the SNP or the Libdems in the past 10 years if a highly organised, motivated and mobile campaign strategy works in the area's they target, and bear in mind that where they have been successful is often the tories rural heartlands.

[Scotty]

"But I'm not sure we will have a by-election. So far as I know Alex Salmond will remain an MP untill the next Westminster election."

Thanks Max, I knew that was his intention during the campaign and I noticed that he and the SNP had to defend that position on several occasions to journalists. IIRC we have a precedent set by Donald Dewar when he was elected to the first Holyrood parliament as First Minister?
I got the impression that he had changed his mind when he seemed to indicate that he would stand down to allow a by election in one of the interviews he gave after winning Gordon.
Speaking to a couple of friends who are active in the SNP, they would prefer him to stand down now and devote his time to Holyrood because they think it might harm them come the next GE in that constituency.
I would be surprised if he carried on as an MP to the next GE in 2/3 years time now that we are in the situation of the SNP being the largest party by one seat, that and the fact that they will be a minority government in Holyrood now talks with the Libdems have failed.

[Denis Cooper]

"... I feel we should lookk to a more regional structure throughout the UK, a north east command, a yorkshire & Humber command etc."

When will some people finally accept that the English do NOT want England divided into EU Regions? This is the main reason why I now believe that there has to be a single, separate, Parliament for the whole of England - because otherwise the euro-regionalists won't stop trying to break up England.

[matt wright]

This is not really about the EU although I accept that part of the EU plan has been to try and split the UK into regions. However we can and should think beyond that. As I say there has always been different tiers of Govt and we should be giving powers closer to people partcularly at the county and community level.

Matt

[Greg Laing]

A seperate party for each `English region`? That might make sense if there were seperate education, health, planning, policing etc in each area. Neither so far as I am aware is there a north eastern or merseyside common law. So a seperate party really does sound like nonesense on legs. What`s wrong with returning powers to existing tiers of local government? We`ll still need some form of English legislature, whether in London, Liverpool or Brum. For how much longer can England remain the only nation in Europe, for that matter the West, without a dedicated national forum?

[The Tired Tory]

I believe that arguing for or against a seperate Scottish party does nothing more than mask the dire tory performance at the Scottish Parly elections.

[Jim Fleming]

I have only just come across this reference to me, so thought I would answer the question put.

In my Ward the English Democrat vote largely switched from the Green vote from the previous year. i.e. 'Protest voters' were split, as this year they had a choice.

Having missed out on the seat by over 350 votes, the 180 odd that the EDs secured would not have made the slightest difference to the result.