Alex Salmond intends to break up the Union by encouraging Scots to vote against Tory plans on welfare, Trident and Barnett

The Scottish party - backed by Conservatives in London - has decided against an early referendum as favoured by former Scottish Secretary Lord Forsyth and Scottish Labour leader, Wendy Alexander.

One of the reasons Lord Forsyth favours an early referendum is that he doesn't want Alex Salmond, SNP First Minister, to be in charge of timing.  Alex Salmond hopes to turn his planned 2010 referendum into a verdict on what may be a new Conservative government in London - supported only by a handful of Scottish Tory MPs.

The possible battlelines are clear from an interview given by Mr Salmond in The Sunday Herald:

"The SNP leader says his administration, as well as civic Scotland, will resist Cameron's plans to cut welfare benefits, replace Trident and slash the country's funding settlement - and oppose any attempt by future Tory ministers to set fisheries and marine policy."

Eddie Barnes of Scotland on Sunday also imagines how Alex Salmond will react to the election of a Conservative government and reaches similar conclusions.  Salmond, he writes, will ask the Scottish people to vote for independence on the basis that he rather than David Cameron should take the big decisions for Scotland.

Speaking to Scottish Conservatives in Ayr, on Friday, David Cameron said that as Prime Minister he would not frustrate SNP initiatives in Holyrood but he would never risk the Union.  Although he said that a review of the Barnett formula for the distribution of public funds across the UK was "essential" he would not support a reform that endangered English-Scottish relations.

Comments

[Ken Stevens]

Predictable and understandable tactics by Mr Salmond in furtherance of honourably declared aims.

The danger is that Mr Cameron will be so assiduous with bribes & inducements to counteract them, that he will concede anything to keep Scotland in the Union -- then turn round and find that he has lost England by neglect. Continued favouritism will weaken, not strengthen the Union.

"Whoever is Scotland's first minister, I would be a prime minister who acts on the voice of the Scottish people, and will work tirelessly for consent and consensus so we strengthen the Union." (D.C. @ Ayr)

But who will act for the people of England?
Not Mr Cameron, obviously.

An equitable solution for ALL of the Union requires that an English Parliament be re-established.

[Alan S]

We need to have a referendum asap if we are to avoid Salmond breaking up the Union on the back of making it a choice between the SNP and Cameron.

[voreas]

Cameron has to grasp the nettle of the union, that means creating a proper federal united kingdom. I appreciate he does not want to give up power but silly nonsense about keeping an imperfect union will in the long run cause the break up of that union. It is neither in Scotland's nor England's interest to perpetuate a situation where the Scots think they are a subjugated people and The English feel hard done by. It will take more than changing the Barnett Formula and fudging the West Lothian question to solve the union problem.

Cameron has a choice either he is the Prime Minister who fudged the question of the Union and -at the very least - failed to prevent its eventual collapse or he is the Prime Minister who sees there are fundamental structural problems and resolves them in the interests of all peoples of the UK.

[Ted]

If the Conservatives, Lib Dems and Labour had continued to set themselves against a referendum then there would not be one in 2010 whatever Salmond says. They could then go to the next Scots elections on basis of implementing the outcome of the Commission on widening Scots Devolution (or not), a strong Unionist message against SNP's negative one.

With Labour out of office in Westminster the protest vote for the SNP would be weakened by 2011 anyway.

Bendy Wendy though has thrown that away and given the SNP catre blanche for a referendum when they want one - and Gordon tries to claim Labour is a party for the Union.

[Iain]

"silly nonsense about keeping an imperfect union "

What he is saying is that the State is more important than the equality of its citizens, and that if the Scots kick up rough English people will have to be content with their second class constitutional status. That is a morally bankrupt position, it gives the Scots the right to constitutionally black mail the Government, and gives them the whip hand over English peoples constitutional rights. If there is a case to be made to have done with the British state, then Cameron has just made it, for to make a states existence dependent on keeping a section of the people constitutionally second class citizen then the state has lost any right to exist.

But one must ask what is it with Cameron and constitutional issues, that he fails to deal with the issue in England when they are being effected by its discriminatory settlement, yet trots off the Scotland to bad mouth English people one year , the next he goes there to give Sots the trump card on the constitutional settlement?

It is time for the Conservatives to stop pussy footing around. The current situation is not sustainable or equitable, going back is not possible, so they should get on and federate the Union, for the Union is in more danger with Westminster fiddling, prevaricating and messing around, for their failure to sort out the mess just feeds the SNP as well as deep discontent in England. The trouble is we have a political class of such minnows that the end of the Union is pretty much a done deal, for they are of such limited vision that they will only see the problem when it smacks them in the face, and realised the solution when the opportunity has passed them by!

[voreas]

To me Ted this is not about party politics and shooting the SNP's fox. The SNP exists because there is a situation where the Scots feel subjugated (regardless of the truth) surely Cameron should be looking to deal with this belief and fundamentally that means putting the Scots (and the English) in control of their own destiny. By creating a proper federal UK people will start to feel in control of their own destiny. Whilst still retaining the positives of the union. i.e free trade and defence.

[englandism.com]

Sorry to join the chorus but...

'If it should ever come to a choice between constitutional perfection and the preservation of our nation, I know my choice. Better an imperfect Union than a broken one.' DC

Mr Cameron talked of "the ugly stain of separatism seeping through the Union flag" and positioned himself as protector of the Union in contrast with the Labour leadership.

Let's just hold our horses a wee minute. All that England is asking for is an equitable post-devolutionary settlement where the relative over-representation and under-representation in our Parliamentary democracy is addressed fairly.

The 'fair' solution, as also acknowledged in Scotland, is an English executive and legislature in line with those at Holyrood, Stormont and Cardiff.

This is not 'ugly' separatism or a bone-headed rant calling for an independent England: It is a call for the same sense of fairplay that is supposed to be a core Conservative principle.

David Cameron states that:

" I would be a Prime Minister who acts on the voice of the Scottish people and will work tirelessly for consent and consensus so we strengthen the Union and never put it at risk,"

The voice of the English people is subservient to the Union. An equitable settlement for England is subordinate to the Union and yet all the constituent nations within the United Kingdom see an equitable democratic settlement for England as the best means of preserving the Union.

While Salmond threatens:

'Salmond expects the Tories to win "three or four seats in Scotland", a tally he says will give the party almost no legitimacy to scrap the Barnett Formula, the scheme that determines increases to Scotland's block grant.

"The reality is that David Cameron intends to cut Scotland's finances but a Conservative government will certainly have no mandate to force this policy down Scotland's throat," he said.'

Salmond is using overtly provocative language with an explicit agenda intended to break the Union on the back of Labour unpopularity combined with an assertion that the will of Scotland will be denied by a Conservative UK administration.

In other words:

Elect a Conservative national government and Scotland will end the Union.

'Hands off' our money or Scotland will end the Union.

So David Cameron replies:

'If it should ever come to a choice between constitutional perfection and the preservation of our nation, I know my choice. Better an imperfect Union than a broken one.'

In other words:

We will not address the English question because it will end the Union.

Or in Iain's words:

'if the Scots kick up rough English people will have to be content with their second class constitutional status'

[Ken Stevens]

"..widening Scots Devolution..", while doing nothing to introduce English devolution (as a nation, not as a collection of Regions)threatens continuance of the Union just as much as the independence movement. Politicians cannot continue to take England for granted. The pro-England movement might seem inconsequential to UK politicians now -- but then so was SNP a few decades ago. However, the skilful tactics of SNP could well accelerate English sentiment towards a Czech/Slovak style of separation, where the one simply got exasperated by the niggling demands of the other.

Pay attention to England as well, Mr C!!!

[Daniel Furr]

Salmond wants a Tory government more than anything.

Cutting the Barnett Formula is smart for showing weakness of the SNP. The Scots want independence, but still want to be funded by England at the present time.

[Edward Huxley]

The SNP leader will.... oppose any attempt by future Tory ministers to set fisheries and marine policy.

Funny, I thought they were decided by those unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.

[RichardJ]

Why are the Tories opposed to an early referendum? Getting it sorted now would prevent a Cameron government being de-railed by a constitutional crisis.

In the event of Scotland gaining independence they would lose the English subsidy so if their subsidy is cut they won't gain anything by breaking "free".

I am keen on the maintaining the Union but not at the expense of the English taxpayer.

[Steve]

GOOD! what "Union" is that anyway?, the one thats been null and void as of 1998?.

£ngland needs Scotregion for NOTHING!, lets not forget that, hopefully they will be an "Independent" (hoho) puppet region of the the EUSSR in a few years.

[Ken Stevens]

I have to confess that when I first saw the title of The Scotsman's piece on Mr C's speech, I misread it as a word that rearranges the 'sh' and the 'i' and has a 't' on the end.

"Cameron bullish on Scotland"
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Cameron-bullish-on-Scotland-39There.4117381.jp

Does he not perceive how alienating it is south of the border when he shows off at Scottish conferences (as also with a previous 'sour little Englander' jibe)?

[ChrisD]

"To me Ted this is not about party politics and shooting the SNP's fox"

David Cameron's speech was just what Salmond did not want to hear, especially after the mess Labour have made of things.
Alex Salmond has been playing politics with the future of Scotland, and David Cameron just shot his SNP fox with that speech on Friday.
Cameron was a astute and turned Salmond's strategy back on him. Alex Salmond has given many people who would not normally vote for us a good reason to vote Conservative, and David Cameron told them he would not let them down.

[Iain]

"Cameron just shot his SNP fox with that speech on Friday."

And consigned England to this discriminatory constitutional arrangement, giving Scots the veto on any constitutional or financial arrangement they don't like, and in so doing let down English people.

What is the point of the Conservatives to English people if they have undertaken to pay Celtgeld, and give Scots a Constitutional veto? There isn’t any, for there is one rule in life, Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, and with Scots already getting a showered in tax payers money, as well as given a pre-eminent constitutional position, they aren't going to vote for anything less, unless forced to, and with Cameron, on his jaunt to his homeland, having just undertaken not to do anything they don't like, it looks like more of the discriminatory same for English people!

[ChrisD]

Iain, to be honest I am bored with this constant nasty anti Scots rant from the usual suspects, it runs through every thread that attempts to debate politics in Scotland from a Conservative perspective.
The threads get shorter and shorter, and usual end up with just the same handful of posters feeding each other the same often offensive crap.
Just about all the regular ConHom posters, both North and South of the border no longer even bother to comment anymore.
This kind of input from the same posters time and again adds nothing to the debate, other than to give succour to their obsessed prejudices.
The irony is, it damages rather than furthers your cause.

[Ken Stevens]

ChrisD | May 25, 2008 at 13:42

"that attempts to debate politics in Scotland from a Conservative perspective."

Whilst you may be pleased regarding "..a good reason to vote Conservative, and David Cameron told them he would not let them down", how can we not be angry when the effect is that DC is prepared to subordinate my democracy to your problem? It is not a self-contained Scotland-only situation and you cannot reasonably regard it as a purely domestic matter.

[ChrisD]

"how can we not be angry when the effect is that DC is prepared to subordinate my democracy to your problem?"

Ken, There are over 60 million people living in the UK and about 5 million live in Scotland, yes that's 5 million.
Get a grip, and stand back and look at that figure when you accuse people of being prepared to subordinate your democracy.

[Ken Stevens]

ChrisD
Yes, I know. So why does only that small proportion have a parliament, in addition to over-proportionate representation in the UK parliament? The composition of the present Administration indicates that being elected in Scotland is no barrier to holding high office in the UK as a whole.

If the answer is that it is a necessary counterbalance to the great disparity in our respective populations then some sort of federal arrangement would be a far better option. England & Scotland could do their own thing domestically, i.e. Devolution Max for both. The small federal administration could much more equally balance the two nations’ representation on matters of joint interest.

I’m certainly not anti-Scottish; just pro-English, in like manner as the Scottish Conservative party is pro-Scottish.

[englandism.com]

'There are over 60 million people living in the UK and about 5 million live in Scotland, yes that's 5 million.'

Ummm...I think we knew that. Didn't we? And your argument for DC loving it up with a lost and insignificant cause at the expense of the overwhelming majority of the UK electorate is?

How many MPs? One is one and all alone and ever more shall be so.

ChrisD. Note to self. Don't go into marketing.

[Iain]

"Iain, to be honest I am bored with this constant nasty anti Scots rant from the usual suspects,"

Well as I am just noting the basic facts of the current constitutional arrangement, that Scots do get showered in tax payers money, that they have been given a pre-eminent position in our constitution, that Cameron has just gone to Scotland and given them a veto on any changes in the constitutional arrangement, then if you think what I am saying is nasty, then you are saying the constitutional arrangement is nasty. So perversely, and I am sure it wasn't your original intention when you put up the post, but you are in agreement with me. Thanks, I’ll take the support where ever I can get it!

[Jim Mcleod]

I am in Scotland 4 days a week on a monthly basis. I am English I had Scottish ancestors hence the name, so we will get that out of the way first and foremost.
Take it from me, most Scots detest the Conservatives and for Salmond to side with the Conservative is political suicide for Salmonmd who I do believe is a one term first minister only. One seat separates him and the Labour party and there are doubts as to the validity of that one seat majority in a lot of high up quarters.
Salmond will never and I mean never get people onboard with this crazy idea that this idea with the help of the Conservatives he could break the Union up. Wendy Alexander will make political capital out of those remarks knowing full well that it would not bode well with the electorate, not even with some SNP supporters, The very name Conservative up there is still a dirty word. This will alienate the Conservatives even further.
Do not take my word for it sound the ordinary Scot out and I do not mean the very few who would vote Conservative to start with. Read look and learn and listen to those who hear it on a regular basis.
I have heard Mr Cameron and all of the Scots born Conservative MP's being called a good many unspeakable names up there, they dislike anything Tory with a vengeance.
Try this tactic at the Conservative peril.

[Ken Stevens]

Jim Mcleod | May 25, 19:48

I understand your analysis.
I am interested in what you see as the solution to the problem in hand.

[Jim Mcleod]

Ken just a silly pun, but that question is well beyond my ken.
Quite honestly I do not have the answer as Brown will be going on the same tac and he will play up the Barnett formula for all it is worth.
Cameron is on a hiding to nothing touching the Formula, or even suggesting same, Scots would go beserk and I cannot say I would blame them in all honesty.
But hey, who am I, just an ordinary guy in the street who would not presume to offer Cameron advice regarding the Scots, he will have to learn that lesson the hard way, he is not popular in Scotland and I doubt if he ever will be.
Bear in mind these Scots are mustard at voting against what they do not like, if they are natural Labour supporters in a say Tory seat and by voting for the Liberal they will remove the Tory, they will do it and have done so in the past.
That was the reason that Scotland was a Conservative free Country after the 1997 GE only the fact that they had PR allowed any Conservative a place in the Holyrood Parliament. They would never have achieved it by first past the post system.
Before anybody condemns these Scots, I think it might be a good idea to ask why the Scots feel that way.
It is for me to know what the Scots think but for others to look into the reasons themselves, I have no wish to become involved in the detail of that state of affairs, better people done their own research and perhaps they can understand the reasons why for themselves, not for what I think and have been told.
Things are better that way a truly independant opinion is by far better than any hearsay.

[Edward Keene]

I don't know why Conservatives get so hung up on the union. What is so sacred about it?

[J Hutchings]

Ironic how, fresh from exuberation over Crewe and Nantwich,the unsatisfactory background constitutional situation of the UK comes out and hits the Conservatives in the face like a cold wet flannel. No matter how much the Conservatives would prefer to dwell on topics they like and will be good at ie economics,finance,crime,health manegement etc it is always going to be like this until the the profound inequity and warped lack of democracy of Blair's devolutionary mess is adressed.

The days when Conservatives could breeze through life ignoring such issues and trading on English aquiescence are long gone. They are not going to return.
In fact DC has implied he has done some thinking on the matter. He openly accepted that there is a "more perfect" constitutional solution than the EVOEM in the British parliament which he championed even though it is a fudge. He also openly accepted that "an imperfect Union" is the arrangement the English must be forever content with. He is plumping for damage control as a long term policy . He must know this is not sustainable. It is the sort of thing we criticise Labour for doing.

DC really has to get outside the Westminster bubble and, if necessary, free himself of his current advisors and do some serious thinking about things constitutional. If not he will become British PM unprepared for the crisis that is likely to hit him in 2010.

There is only one satisfactory endpoint and that is a federal United Kingdom. The UK has always been partially federal anyway
(different systems of law, education, local government in England and Scotland)
It is what should have been put into place in 1707 and is what Scotland and England wanted then but did not articulate enough at the time. What we have now is broadly what was bounced onto us then by the tiny but powerful emergent British class + the Scotland Act 1998. It has never been satisfactory.

The way to kill Salmond's fox is to realise all this and also take note that Salmond himself is edging towards semi-open acceptance of a federal UK. He has already committed himself to a "social union". From being a republican he is now a warm supporter of the Monarchy. He envisages a common British armed forces. He wants retention for Scotland of British freeom of trade.He sees it as obvious that there should be an English parliament and government in the same way as Scotland has.

Mr Salmond's next demand is likely to be fiscal independence, details unspecified. Bearing in mind that the Barnett Formula is becoming increasingly indefensible(DC knows this too), there is an opportunity here to defuse a rotten situation.

The Conservative now have the initiative. They should trade on it and show the leadership which the British nation now exepct of them and which Labour have demonstrated at length they cannot provide. Along with the array of policies on other matters there should be a central proposal on the constitution. It involves doing for England what was done for Scotland ie an English referendum and and an England Act.

The component nations of the UK have to feel comfortable with their governmental arrangements. They do not at the moment. This is the way forward for preserving the UK. It wont be the same as what was in postion from 1707 to 1998.
Nevetheless,it will still be the British Union and still be the vehicle for doing what the British have to do in the world.

[Jim Mcleod]

Edward Keene | May 25, 2008 at 22:03
In my opinion the union is sacrosanct, and something to be treasured by any politican, it has served this country well in good time as well as bad in bad. Our armed services have stood shoulder to shoulder with one another and they have stood firm and proud to do so. We are stronger united than divided and most people in the UK realise this.
Do not throw it away cheaply , it is a phenomena, one never gets the likes of this back again it is an unique happening and very much a one off
That is my opinion sir, you are entitled to yours, I think it is such a shane that you would even contemplate the break up of this wonderful union.

[Matt Wright]

Edward at 11.56 has a good point in that fisheries and marine issues are largely set by the EU and the thing that always amazes me is that the Nationalist leaders in Scotland and in Wales are generally big supporters of the EU. In effect the SNP and Plaid elite perceive England as subjugating them but want the EU to subjugate them even more. In fact this is a fault line with significant numbers of their members/supporters less keen on the EU. In Wales key supporters have defected with this as the main issue and in parts of Wales break away Nationalist groups in the past cited they wanted true independence and noted their objections to the EU.

[ChrisD]

"Take it from me, most Scots detest the Conservatives"

Jim, I don't recognise that analysis anymore.
In fact, there will always be a die hard Labour core who feel like that, but you will meet the same opinion from politically like minded people throughout the UK. I suspect that there are few in the former mining villages of Wales or elsewhere who feel any differently just to give an example.
No, something major has changed in Scotland over the last couple of years. Labour is no longer popular, in fact their is a real groundswell of brewing anger which saw them ousted by the SNP last year. And the negative feeling for Brown that I am experiencing is not at the level of that expressed against Mrs Thatcher, but its enough to make me realise that Labour have at the moment lost his stronghold on Scotland.
Although, I find it hard to believe that the Tories are at the levels that the small subsamples suggest in the polls, I do believe the general shift upwards is happening. Most of it has occurred since the elections last year, and yes, in the Westminster samples that means that Cameron is connecting with voters. And as long as that happens in the constituencies that matter, then we are looking at some gains in the next GE.
But, I genuinely do feel that the Tory brand is now being detoxed at quite an alarming rate in Scotland as the Labour party implodes at Westminster.

[Goldie]

You know. "the Scottish Party" wouldn't be a bad name for the more independent Scottish Conservatives we desperately need so we can pick up some more votes up north.

[Jim Mcleod]

ChrisD | May 26, 2008 at 00:

Sadly you could not believe just how wrong you are on two points or I am missing something on a regular basis.
Firstly,the Scots are not nearly so enamoured with the SNP even those who voted for them in as you appear to imagine. They have no stomach yet for an early election either and are still waiting for Salmond to fulfill his promises and see what he can come up with. These Scots are far too hard headed to be fooled by anyone for very long and Salmond certainly is not fooling them, but they are prepared to bide their time and wait and see.
A lot of those who did vote for Salmond, done so in the hope of removing from power what was then known as "West Coast Jack" from being the leader of the Labour Party and the First Minister of Scotland. They achieved their goal, once again, here is is perfect example example of what is known as "tactical voting", they are past masters at it.
Chris you say quote "Jim, I don't recognise that analysis anymore.
In fact, there will always be a die hard Labour core who feel like that, but you will meet the same opinion from politically like minded people throughout the UK.
I suspect that there are few in the former mining villages of Wales or elsewhere who feel any differently just to give an example".
You probably are right regarding Wales I cannot comment on that as I truthfully do not know.
Nothing could be further from reality in Scotland.
Four nights and three days per fortnight I stay in a small very well run Hotel just outside of Edinburgh, I would use no other,I have used it for years with the same Hotelier, mostly I wake up to different breakfast companions each morning and people mix up there and converse with each other even strangers, at evening meal there are more, quite a few regulars use it in the evening and I have made a lot of friends and listened to their honest heart felt opinions, The hotel is practically always full, week in week out with travellers in need of good food and there are one or two like me who come on a regular basis from England, also in the evenings as it serves excellent food and the prices are not exorbitant, there is as one would expect the out of City regulars and first time users who mainly come back. In the evening 2 doors away there is a very nice old fashioned pub where I meet a lot of the locals and quite a few passers by.
I have never heard any of that mixed plethora of people go pro Conservative, quite the opposite in fact, so much so I tend to keep my tongue between my teeth and my opinions to myself, the truth being I am still neither Conservative nor Labour. Mr Cameron has not got me convinced yet that his recent good fortune is more a pro Conservative vote rather than a well deserved kick up the backside to Mr Brown I listen and learn, I will decide but only two years down the line and Mr Cameron has a lot of persuading still to do to convince me. That is my genuine heart felt opinion, I am open to change do not like what we have at present, but Conservatives have to show me real changes and not a carbon copy of the status quo, unfortunately and sorry to say until I see and hear some meat on the bones I remain sceptical and unconvinced. In the meantime the Labour party have still time in my considered view to alter their ways. That does not mean to say I will not alter and vote Conservative if I like what I hear, what it does mean to quote the Scot " I am biding my time"
Please bear in mind I have been doing same job for years, running my own small business and no I do not detect any sea changes towards the Conservatives in Scotland, quite the opposite in fact, sorry to disillusion you but those are the facts of the matter,that is the reality of the situation.
Labour will be returned at the next Scottish election make no mistake about that, Salmond is there on trial and please do not pay any attention to opinion polls you see up there as the Scot laughs at those and tells the canvasser or polling organisations what they wish them to hear. Sometimes that is as far removed from reality as one could imagine. They are certainly a canny lot.
Sorry my friend there is certainly no change upwards and NO the Scots still find the Conservative as toxic as ever, even sorrier to say, as I have never found any Conservative toxic, but then I perhaps mix with more Conservatives here in England, where they are not becoming an extinct species for the want of putting it more politely.
Wish I could tell you different but that is the stark reality of the situation at present.
Every now ang again I come across a Conservative in Scotland but those occasions are few and very far between. Sorry to be the bearer of that news but it is the plain unvarnished truth and one has to accept that like it or not.

[ChrisD]

"Sorry my friend there is certainly no change upwards and NO the Scots still find the Conservative as toxic as ever"

Jim, you are wrong on so many levels, not least because you are assuming that the Scots a) don't follow politics both at Holyrood and in Westminster and b) aren't as inclined to come to the same conclusions about the abilities of a leader or a political party as their counterparts in other area's of the UK.
There was a real and noticeable mood change that I picked up and indicated to me the swing to the SNP in the months running up to last years elections. Also, this swing in the polls towards the Conservatives does not surprise me now as much as it would have done even a year ago in the Westminster voting intention, quite simple it fits in with the political narrative.
I am sorry, but for Labour to recover either in Holyrood or Westminster voting intentions in Scotland they need to be effective politically in both places. Wendy Alexander is a laughing stock, and she is most certainly not improving her party's standing. And as for Brown, he is really not impressing anyone I have come across, in fact his lack of ability as a PM is further damaging the Labour party up here.

I can give you two examples of people who I have known for many years do indicate the change happening in Scotland.
One, a life long Conservative voter who proudly boasts that they voted SNP for the first time for no other reason than to kick Labour out of power in Scotland.
Two, a lifelong Labour supporter who has informed me just recently that for the first time ever in their adult life they will vote Conservative as the next GE, why?
Because they think that its time to give Cameron a chance, note that they say Cameron and not the Conservative party, now that made my jaw drop. And that is when I knew that Cameron had really detoxed the party.

[Jim Mcleod]

Well Chris, I bow to your knowledge of Scotland, as I said I am only there only once every fortnight for four days and only meet the people I spoke about plus those I deal with via my business.
After that I do not know any more than I have already stated.

[Scott]

Jim, I appreciate your vox pop of Scotland, but I admit that I have the same opinion with the poster above in that I agree with very little of your analysis. I think in most places in (especially rural) Scotland you can feel support for the SNP building up. I have yet to hear anyone on the street outside of a political party properly ‘have a go’ at the SNP like they used to about us in the early nineties and labour or recent years. Whether we like it or not I think they are genuinely liked. Whether this lasts or not is dependent on so many factors. But I think the main point is that the Cameron effect really isn’t having an impact in Scotland in any major way. A look at all the council by elections (real opinion polls) will show this clearly.

I completely disagree with you that the Labour Party will be back in Scotland at the next Scottish elections. For so many reasons I can’t even be bothered to go into. But I can not think what part of Scotland you are in which might even hint that Labour are on the way back to power.

[Ken Stevens]

Today's 'Scotsman'
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Give-option-to-scrap-parliament.4119091.jp
"SCOTS should be given the option of scrapping the Scottish Parliament if a referendum ...
Tam Dalyell... official submission to the Calman Commission, which is looking into the powers of the Scottish Parliament.

".. not only Scottish Nationalist Party members but MSPs from every other party are clamouring for more powers."
"MSPs will not be satisfied until they reach a position indistinguishable from a separate Scottish state. It might well be that before this point is reached, the patience of people in England will have snapped.

"..the very existence of a Scottish Parliament inevitably, sooner rather than later, leads to the dismantling of the British state."

http://news.scotsman.com/politics/No-guarantee-from-Tories-on.4119067.jp
..speculation that, if he becomes prime minister, David Cameron will review the Barnett Formula
.. new chairman of the Scottish Conservatives said it was impossible to predict what Scotland's funding would be under a Cameron government. Nicola Sturgeon, the deputy First Minister, said this showed the Tories' "damaging intentions" towards Scotland ..

And first reader comment on latter story:

1 An Beal Bacht,
26/05/2008 00:15:39
We know the tories - we've been there before. That's okay though - if the English are happy with them who will we , in an independent Scotland, be to complain?

[ChrisD]

"But I think the main point is that the Cameron effect really isn’t having an impact in Scotland in any major way. A look at all the council by elections (real opinion polls) will show this clearly."

Scott, council by elections are the least reliable guide to voting intentions anywhere in the UK, and neither are they better indicators than real opinion polls which sample a much wider area.
Neither can you use a *local* result from say a year ago, and then assume that it will indicate the public mood two years from now in a national election. If you do that, don't bet money on it!

[Editor]

Just for info, this has just come from the Scottish Tories:

The following table shows the Scottish public’s ratings of various political figures. It has been compiled from the most recent YouGov polls and shows that Annabel Goldie has the highest net approval rating at Holyrood and David Cameron the highest net rating at Westminster.

Approve Disapprove Net approval

Annabel Goldie 41% 20% +21
Alex Salmond 53% 33% +20
David Cameron 55% 36% +19
John Swinney 34% 22% +12
Nicol Stephen 27% 28% -1
Nick Clegg 28% 35% -7
Gordon Brown 28% 69% -21
Wendy Alexander 21% 60% -39

The politician with the top approval figure is David Cameron (55%) and the politician with the lowest disapproval rating is Annabel Goldie (20%): Labour are bottom of all rankings.

Approve

David Cameron 55%
Alex Salmond 53%
Annabel Goldie 41%
John Swinney 34%
Nick Clegg 28%
Gordon Brown 28%
Nicol Stephen 27%
Wendy Alexander 21%

Disapprove

Annabel Goldie 20%
John Swinney 22%
Nicol Stephen 28%
Alex Salmond 33%
Nick Clegg 35%
David Cameron 36%
Wendy Alexander 60%
Gordon Brown 69%

Sources: YouGov 24/28th April 2008 & YouGov 15/16th May 2008

[Bill]

I also don’t go along with Jim’s analysis, but I think the real point is in danger of being overlooked. The question is not so much what people think about us, but what we are doing, or not doing, to craft an approach and message with broad popular appeal.

I haven’t attended a conference in more than a decade, but I was at Ayr racecourse. While the reaction to DC’s speech was certainly, and given the events of the previous night entirely justifiably, warm, what I thought noticeable was that the audience, by and large, reserved their applause almost exclusively for the more ‘core’ messages while what I took to be the central theme of the speech – the achievement of progressive ends by Conservative means – seemed entirely to pass them by.

I think the assessment by Professor James Mitchell, as quoted by Tom Gordon in yesterday’s Sunday Times, was spot on:

“There could be a Cameron effect if the Scottish Tories had a Cameron type leader and could embrace a Cameron style of politics. But the Scottish Tories are quite old-fashioned.”

The problem in Scotland is not any longer that people don’t like us, although there is still undeniably a residual resentment which Jim has clearly encounterted, but that we have failed to make any real attempt to break out of our comfort zone, as the party in England and also Wales has done with such evident success.

I do, as I have stated in previous threads, believe that the way in which our MSP group in the Scottish Parliament have positioned themselves has given us both leverage and a consequent degree of relevance in Scotland that we lacked over the previous decade. This has been a sensible tactical position to take both in terms of our own detoxification north of the border and in terms of achieving a modest range of concessions from the Scottish government that can be held out as evidence of why there is still a point to voting for us.

Fundamentally, however, we need to decide whether or not we are really interested in renewing the Party in Scotland and broadening our electoral appeal by adopting more of the agenda and language that has been the hallmark of our revival across the rest of mainland Britain, or if we are simply content to play to the 16% who currently vote for us. Seems a no-brainer to me, particularly given the fascintaing poll that the Editor has just posted.

[Edward Huxley]

Lots of long winded comments. I`ll keep this short,like my previous one about the control of fishing and maritime matters being with Brussels.
Who is going to be allowed to vote on Scottish Independence, the people of Scotland - those residing there, or the Scottish people, lots of them all over the English-speaking world. Don`t they have a say?

[ChrisD]

"Fundamentally, however, we need to decide whether or not we are really interested in renewing the Party in Scotland and broadening our electoral appeal by adopting more of the agenda and language that has been the hallmark of our revival across the rest of mainland Britain, or if we are simply content to play to the 16% who currently vote for us. Seems a no-brainer to me, particularly given the fascintaing poll that the Editor has just posted."

Great post Bill, and you put your case more eloquently than I ever could. The problem on these threads sometimes, is that we all tend to latch onto one theme, myself included! It then hijacks the thread, and we miss the opportunity to have the kind of debate I would dearly like to see, and which your thoughtful post goes a long way to contributing too!
As to your last paragraph, I agree. By not adopting more of the agenda and language that has been the hallmark of our revival across the rest of mainland Britain, we will not reach out beyond our core vote, simple leaving the Libdems to continue to mop up a sizeable group of non aligned voters who see themselves as residing to the centre rather than the left of politics.
Blair also managed to connect with these voters who were normally not Labour inclined in Scotland.
The irony is that while some regard Scotland as a left leaning bastion of socialism, they miss the fact that Labour, and to a less extent the Libdems also enjoyed further success because the top of the Scottish Conservative party matched the more right wing core vote strategy of its counterpart down South. In fact, if I was being mischievous, I would say that fact was not lost on others who saw there own agenda slipping away under David Cameron and sought to see it continue to flourish North of the Border.
Annabel Goldie has grown in her role as the Scottish leader, she is now in a position to forge the kind of change in agenda and language that we would both like to see.

[Jim Mcleod]

[email protected]
I am not trying to alter anyone's opinion just merely stating as fact, that which I have found out for myself to be so, over a number of years.

[Jim Mcleod]

Bill, are you aware that Malcolm Rifkind who I have the utmost respect for and was former Conservative MP for Edinburgh Pentlands, not far from where the Hotel I stay in is, is now considered one of the most detested men from Scotland along with Lord Forsyth. They are both blamed for selling the jobs of the Scots down the river to the South of England, to help the Conservatives keep votes in the S.West this is how unpopular Conservatives are in those parts.

[Jim Mcleod]

Editor | May 26, 2008 at 11:51

I brought this point up I have heard at first hand about pollsters ringing people up and people telling them exactly what they wished to hear please see my post timed @ May 26, 2008 at 05:59 I covered that point in fine detail as I have repeatedly heard it said.

Quote:Labour will be returned at the next Scottish election make no mistake about that, Salmond is there on trial and please do not pay any attention to opinion polls you see up there as the Scot laughs at those and tells the canvasser or polling organisations what they wish them to hear. Sometimes that is as far removed from reality as one could imagine. They are certainly a canny lot.

[Bill]

Jim

Well, if you say so, but it’s not my experience.

I suppose a lot depends on where you are meeting people.

My family are from towns and villages in former mining communities in the west of Scotland, and you can be sure that hostility towards us remains very pronounced there, but I’m equally certain that a quick tour around parts of south Yorkshire would reveal a comparable level of hostility.

[Iain]

ChrisD, if the Scottish Conservatives alienated their vote in Scotland by reflecting the policies of the Conservative party, aren't you in fact making the case for federating the Conservative party and creating an English Conservative party to deal with English matters, and a British Conservative party to deal with British state matters? Doing this would isolate the policies English people find attractive, but which would horrify the comrades of the Socialist Republic of Scotland, it would also allow English people the opportunity to vote for a party and polices English people find attractive, but which currently have to be compromised lest it scare the sporrans off the Scots!

[J Hutchings]

"aren't you in fact making the case for federating the Conservative party and creating an English Conservative party to deal with English matters, and a British Conservative party to deal with British state matters? "

seems obvious to me. Should have been done decades ago. Why we have to be trammelled with the clearly out of date and innapropriate present organisation of the Conservative party escapes me.

[Jim Mcleod]

Bill | May 26, 2008 at 13:27
Bill coming from the West Coast of Scotland and comparing it to Edinburgh on the Est Coast they are poles apart in my experience my comment earlier on "West Coast Jack"
Jack McConnel was accused of treating the people of the West Coast of Scotland far more favourably than those in the East Coast such as Edinburgh is.
That was why he got a pasting at the Scottish elections.
I have also heard it said that "Wee Ecky needs to get back to his Granny and his Roses" an unfortunate term to use for Salmonds wife she is years older than him and is ridiculed in some parts much to my dismay.

[Bill]

Thank, Jim. An interesting perspective.

[Jim Mcleod]

English people find attractive, but which would horrify the comrades of the Socialist Republic of Scotland,Iain | May 26, 2008 at 13:28

Would it surprise you to know Ian that this sort of talk is picked up in Scotland and helps to alienate the Conservative even further from the people of Scotland regardless of what Tim thinks and opinion polls say?
I would really ask you to temper that sort of talk, these people would never ever call Scotland a Republic and they are fiercely proud of their heritage and so they should be.
And although they have a dry sense of humour the type only a Scot could have, it takes a bit of getting used to. That is the reason they would look at your remarks and find them insulting as they would not see it as humurous.
Face to face with any Scot and I would give nothing for your chances

[Jim Mcleod]

Bill | May 26, 2008 at 13:27
I think the Scots are the salt of the earth as you can read by my posts. I could never think of any nationality I would like shoulder to shoulder with me in a crisis.
I have the utmost admiration for all of them, I like their lifestyle where the elderly are cared for in the community. I enjoy their dry sense of humour and Scots hospitality is second to none, they are generous to a fault contrary to the Husic Hall jokes about them which is a fallacy.
Do you know a Senior Citizen for years have been able to travel on public transport anywhere they liked after 9am free of charge and in Edinburgh, one can buy a ticket which allows use of the public transport which is first class all day long. No need to park in Edinburgh which is hugely expensive, Princess Street is used mainly for taxi's and buses. Buy one ticket for £2.00 and one can travel all day long on and off buses without anymore payment. The bus service is second to none and most frequent, it only costs me £8.00 for four days to travel one length of Edinburgh to the other from the City Centre down to the Western General at one end and from the City Centre out to as far as Dalkeith, Loanhead, Penicuik and Roslin at the other, Roslin is where the Da Vinci code was filmed, the chapel is by far smaller than it appears in the film I was most surprised by it. The Apprentice's pillar is extremely beautiful. Worth going to see with the bargain thrown in of the return fare for such long journey's. It is madness to take a car up there, unfortunately I have to stop off in Newcastle at times or I would always use the train and get around by bus. I do that at every opportunity I get. Now you can see why I like Scotland and the Scots so much.
On top of that Edinburgh has the most wonderful architecture that one could ever imagine and to see it on the bus instead of concentrating on busy roads is a treat.
The City itself is very clean and litterbugs are pounced on swiftly. Yes I like Scotland and the Scots and I would hate this union to be broken especially as I am their No. 1 fan.
I would live there if I could, clean fresh air and decent tasting water what more can one ask for, a few minutes on the Bus from Princess Street the heart of the City centre and we have the Sea. In the other direction we see rolling Country side. So the City-the Coast-the Countryside all within 10 minmutes bus ride for £2,00 return it can't be bad.
Roll on retirement.

[Iain]

"Would it surprise you to know Ian that this sort of talk is picked up in Scotland "

No my name is Iain, spelt the Scottish way, given to me by my parents in memory of the warm welcome given to them by a Scottish community. But from Scottish friends the one thing I have noticed is that being upfront and honest isn't something that endangers a friendship, but being less than straight will, so in suggesting that there is a high level of state dependency north of the border I wasn't being anything other than honest about the situation, in this take a look at the Times article 'Britain's northern 'soviets' swell on Brown handouts'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2200150.html

To quote from the article:

"Gordon Brown, the chancellor, has pushed up national public spending beyond the levels of former communist countries such as Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia."

PS Don’t worry your self about any face to face confrontations I might have for having spent my sporting life playing openside flanker I’m more than capable to taking care of my self.

[Barry]

And with the Tories insane proposals to punish people who are unemployed (when are the Conservatives going to realise that some people need SERIOUS help to find employment and that sometimes it ISN'T a 'choice'?) his usual grin will become even wider. Who would have thought it? I as a staunch Unionist will have to vote Lib Dem in my parliamentary seat to unseat the Tory Party MP in order to protect the Union! Does David Cameron ever think about how his silly proposals play out around the ENTIRE United Kingdom before he says they are party policy? Now, I hope the Tories don't win a majority as if you do and you enact this proposal it is virtually a racing certaintly that Mr Salmond will be able to persuade the people of Scotland to break-up our United Kingdom.

[Terry]

Why is everyone always bending over backwards to please the Scots?

Cameron should give England EXACTLY what Scotland has (Parliament, equal funding, equal representation at Westminster) before we start worrying giving them any more. If the Scots don't like it, we'll have no MPs up there as opposed to the ONE we have now. So what?

[Bill]

For anyone interested in further elaboration on the point I made earlier in this thread the article below from today’s Herald, and in particular the latter half, is a worthwhile and well considered read.

Project Cameron turns up the pressure in the north

DOUGLAS FRASER, Scottish Political Editor

Tory nostrils were twitching at Ayr this weekend, unused to the sweet smell of success. Their annual conference had been perfectly timed - by Labour's Westminster business managers, oddly enough - to celebrate the historic Crewe and Nantwich by-election breakthrough.

This was "historic" because Tories, helped by much of the media, reckon there is an unstoppable force propelling David Cameron into Downing Street within two years. The party leader warns instead against triumphalism and complacency. This peak may have come a bit soon. There is a long way to go.

Front-runner momentum brings more attention. And while the case against Gordon Brown is building, what about the case for David Cameron? His Labour opponents portray him as having nothing to say on the big challenges. Particularly on economic woes, food and fuel inflation and the weak pound, it is hard to see what he would do differently. But then, they are not his problem - yet. On tricky, longer-term questions such as nuclear power, pensions, elderly care and Iraq, there are substantial blanks.

But it is wrong to caricature the Tory leader as vacuous. His speech to the Scottish Tories was noted, above all, for its promise to "respect" the Scottish Government's mandate, somehow contriving to work with Alex Salmond as the means to save the Union.

Labour's wobble and rift over an independence referendum has handed Cameron and Annabel Goldie a golden opportunity to present themselves as The Party of the Union. But could they support a referendum themselves? When Cameron spoke of "acting on the voice of the Scottish people", some saw wriggle room. When asked on a BBC web discussion about an independence referendum, Miss Goldie said not at the moment, then not in principle, and only reached a firm "no" at the fourth time of asking.

But however interesting to Scotland's political village, the Cameron pitch depends on what he says to what marketers call MidBritain. On that, he has been handed a further golden opportunity by the abolition of the 10p tax band.

By making the tax system more regressive, it has allowed David Cameron the space to become champion of progressive values.

Being for progress is easy, but it needs a route map to the future. And less widely reported amid the Scottish constitutional talk at Ayr was Cameron's developing theme of tying Conservatism to progressivism, both for the future and from its past.

Wilberforce abolishing slavery, Peel's free trade, Disraeli clearing slums, Churchill confronting Nazism, Macmillan building homes and Thatcher's economic radicalism: Cameron presents himself in a progressive tradition.

"In this century of opportunity, of the information revolution, where people have and want more power and control over their lives, progressive ends will best be met through conservative means," he told the party faithful.

On poverty, he praises Labour's sincerity, but attacks it for merely wanting to heave people just over the poverty line and then leaving them there. A tax system "that makes Britain the most family-friendly place on Earth" sounds grandly ambitious.

Likewise, the Conservative vision is clearer than Labour's when he talks of equal opportunity and mobility: "The idea that you can go from the very bottom to the very top". And on the environment, described as "an inheritance to future generations", he has dragged his party from seeing green politics as a conspiracy against profit to now viewing it as good for business.

Just as Margaret Thatcher was propelled to office 29 years ago with the help of heavy intellectual lifting, Cameron's team is seeking a coherent platform through winning the battle of ideas. For now, they remain a direction of travel, a narrative plotline on which his programme is yet to be built.

Front-runner status will require answers and more detail, perhaps sooner than Cameron had planned.
And it will put more pressure on Scottish Tories. Annabel Goldie's conference speech staked her claim to a new campaign against poor parenting, linking it to crumbling social order. That is safe territory for a Tory, but she conceded she lacks solutions, and she will be lucky if they avoid the smack of unConservative intrusion into personal freedom.

As with drugs, the issue plays to her lawyerly comfort zone on justice issues, whereas the more challenging Cameronian causes of greenery, liberty and voter engagement at an emotional level are less often heard from Scottish Tories.

If the smell of success doesn't go to their heads, it should spur them to do the necessary work on helping to build the Cameron project north of the border.

[ChrisD]

Bill @ 19:21

Interesting article and yes it touches on your earlier excellent post, but one quibble.

"As with drugs, the issue plays to her lawyerly comfort zone on justice issues, whereas the more challenging Cameronian causes of greenery, liberty and voter engagement at an emotional level are less often heard from Scottish Tories.

If the smell of success doesn't go to their heads, it should spur them to do the necessary work on helping to build the Cameron project north of the border"

Now I agree wholeheartedly with the main point made at the end that we must build on the Cameron project North of the Border. Are you listening Mr Cameron & Co? Come and visit us more often, and bring the shadow cabinet, in particular Liam Fox and Alan Duncan, who despite the prejudice towards the Tories of the QT audience managed to gain a few appreciative laughs. Another welcome visitor would be Iain Duncan Smith who I think would be a great contributor to any debate on our policies of social justice at Holyrood.

Sometimes it frustrates me that after years of trying to build our own identity when the Tory brand was toxic we failed, and now when we are managing to reach out beyond our core vote successfully South of the Border we appear almost hesitant, lacking the confidence to do the same up North.
We need to be a bit bolder, and where I disagree with the article is on the issue of the passionately argued case for increasing funding to enable wider drug rehabilitation.
I thought the combination of increased policing to fight crime coupled with more resources for drug addicts was not lawyerly, but simple socially responsible and did resonate with the agenda of the party led by Cameron down South.