主播大秀

Whatever the outcome of this Scottish Election and the subsequent General Election a strong SNP representation has taught us what would not have happened during our recent history had support for the SNP not dipped in the eighties; the shame of trading Rosyth jobs for votes in the South West, a plan which backfired doubly on the main conspirators, Malcolm Judas Rifkind and Margaret Thatcher.

Since the birth of the party in 1935, where for a few years they achieved similar successes to Norway in the Eurovision contest, through to 1974 with 11 MPs and onto today with currently 6 MPs (2005) Westminster Parliaments irrespective of colour have always responded 鈥榝avourably鈥� to Scotland when the Nationalist vote was threatening towards the 鈥榯wo party鈥� status Quo.

So what has changed? 1) Alex Salmond 2) Jack McConnell 3) the Scottish People.

1) Alex Salmond is no longer seen by swing voters as a threat; voting in the SNP to Govern Scotland is not a vote for independence that would be a separate referendum.
2) Jack McConnell has operated with his deaf ear turned to Scottish voters complacency being his watch word; now he promises to listen to all Scotland not just Strathclyde.
3) The Scottish people who clearly feel they are dissatisfied with the current governance of Scotland

We continually hear claims and counter claims of the financial proposals for each party what we fail to be provided are the 鈥榳orkings鈥� of these outcomes, remember those workings so important to our High School maths teachers; headline figures may be sufficient for politicians but not for all we voters or our High School maths teachers.

Selling that tablecloth on ebay, surely not the act of an individual with a G61 postcode.

Yes Brian you may get a few bob if you'd kept your tablecloth - after all Wendy will probably become Leader of the Opposition after the election - so you may be on to a good thing!

Personally I would rather trust the financial acumen of Sir George Mathieson than Wendy Alexander whose sole claim to fame was being Saint Donald's protege.

I urge everbody to notice the GLEE with which the Labour Party tells us Scotland is allegedly in deficit. This is after them having a majority in Scotland since the 1950s I believe and after 10 years in Government under Bliar (sic). What an achievment for them! What a ringing endorsement of the Union! After presiding over this pathetic performance, are we really supposed to believe a word they say?

Notice also that we are back to that hoary old chestnut "the Oil will soon run out". They've been peddling that one since the Oil was discovered more than 30 years ago.

Again we see the Labour "campaign" - scaremongering, putting Scotland down, misinformation and downright lies - nothing positive to say for or about Scotland at all.

If Scotland keeps its nerve then it's not the oil that's about to run out - it's their luck!

Good grief!

Anyone would think we were becomng independent tomorrow, listening to these Laboour scaremongers!

The fact is that the Labour Government in the '70s deliberately lied to the Scottish electorate, according to information released under FOI legislation. They made sure that by constantly talking down the strength of Scottish finances, people were too scared to vote SNP. I know which party I trust more now, and it's not Labour.

In any event, we can argue about figures all day. For me a question like, "How come Denmark, Ireland, Finland and other small nations with less resources than Scotland are neither bankrupt nor eager to subsume themselves into larger neighbours?", is far more helpful!

Not only that, but Alex Salmond is banking on oil being a solid $70 a barrel. If not, the Scottish budget under the SNP is in deep trouble.

Thankfully the SNP have a plan B if they agitate successfully for independence and oil doesn't magically rocket to $70.

Don't they...?

Oh.

They don't.

That's, um... bad?

Dear Mr Taylor.

Why should we believe anything the politicians say, when they talk about the economy?. Are they not the same people who somehow manage to ensure the healthy status of their own private financial situations, yet are also the same people responsible for the increasing divide between rich and poor?.
Are they not the same people who are quick to award themselves pay increases and guaranteed pension rights (inflation proofed of course) while denying the same for the public?. Why should we trust these people, some of whom, if they were not politicians, would not survive in any other occupation. I personally would not wish to be in the same room with many of them. The calibre of our Scottish politicians has become an embarrassment in the minds of many, and until this is recognised our devolved government will continue to be viewed as nothing but a `jobs for the boys` club.

Of course Labour are upset.. The SNP are proposing plans for economic growth well above anything ever achieved despite supposedly putting the economy at the top of their agenda.

Alexander and her sibling Alexander can protest as much as they like but the simple fact is that the Labour/LibDem coalition failed to achieve even the UK average in economic growth and that in itself is nothing to shout about.

I assume a point by point deconstruction job will be done on Labour next - with inappropriately placed quotes from leading SNP figures throughout? The arguments put forward by Labour are nonsense - will they really punish the Scottish people to the tune of $400 million if they dare to vote against them!? Unbelievable.

Oh dear Brian, was the New Labour lunch more convivial than the SNP's breakfast then? (difficult to imagine with the Alexander sister involved). You neglected to mention that the SNP's percentage target for efficiency savings from the Scottish Executive is only half that proposed by our pension raiding Chancellor for the UK Government as a whole, which perhaps makes it a little more difficult to rubbish the SNP's proposals. And, taking that thought along with the proposals for Local Income Tax, anyone who doesn't believe efficiency savings are there to be made across the board, just try applying for Council Tax benefit (at least in Glasgow); a 14 page form, four subsequent letters (all asking for information already provided) and four months..... Kafkaesque doesn't even get close.

And you know what, no party can provide absolutely cast-iron guarantees on future finances (or keep everyone happy with taxation for that matter). The big difference here is that the SNP are talking about what we can and what we could positively achieve as a nation, with entirely reasonable changes to the way things are done, in line with our neighbours such as Ireland & Norway. The rest are all busy telling us how poor, incapable and hopeless we are. As an impending father and struggling small business owner, I know which outlook I would rather have for my family & business.

If Wendy, or some other New Labour / Tory apologist can tell me exactly why after years of British Labour & Tory Government and the 'benefits of Union' we have some of the highest levels of poverty, deprivation, crime, homelessness, drug abuse etc. and the some of the lowest levels of growth, poorest health (I could go on.....) in Western Europe, then I would be most interested to hear. In fact, why don't you or some other members of the press corps ask that question, or would that mean no more lunches with Wendy..........

P.S. Can Wendy also enlighten us as to the ongoing cost to each Scottish family of Tony's / Gordon's war in Iraq, and Labour's strange need to possess WMD's, as I don't seem to remember seeing any of those figures in New Labour's election leaflets....

How can Labour say that Scotland is in deficit without damaging their own campaign? If Scotland hasn't grown enough economically to balance its own budget, then whos fault is that? Could it be the government over the last eight years at Holyrood?

When Labour tell us the "cold facts" about independence, it just shows how poor a First Minister Jack has been, and how he has failed to create success in Scotland.

I refer to your comments on the Band F council tax couple who earn 拢66000 between them- shame that they may have to contribute a bit more!!!!
This is still preferable to seeing almost 20% of pension disappearing in Council Tax,
Dont forget they can look forward to retirement, as teir dual income at such levels will not last forever!!
Dont forget that the much maligned Poll tax only failed because the lazy, indolent Scots aided and abetted by agitators made it difficult to collect- a poor reflection on the Brits!!!
Perhaps the pensioners should take to the streets to perpetrate a similar reverse in policy.

I am finding all this anti-SNP campaigning a big of a bore. Now newspapers have started the anti-Alex Salmond campaign. Labour have a cheek to put up posters that say say 'Broke'. They are running on deficits so why lecture others on All these black holes when they have been having black holes for years. Their party is in debt.It would be nice to know they they are actually campaigning on from time to time. Most people I speak too are now wanting a change. Hopefully it will happen next month.

Hmmm ... wonder how Wendy can explain to me how then under the Broon chancellorship - which is supposed to have been the best since ... well has there been better ? - that my mortgage - after next months expected rise - will have risen by more than a third in the last year.

Inflation to blame - well a fair whack of that is down to petrol prices - which the government account for around 60-70% of.

And then there are wage increases to factor in ... up by around 4% ? - but wait - that is apparently almost entirely down to city bonuses ... as other wage inflation is reasonably neutral.

So ... inflation down to the government and wages down to the City ... interest rates go up and who benefits most - those City fellers who have pots of money in high-rate bonds n'things. No doubt a few of these free market-heroes will be able to help the People's Party out with a loan ... well peerages don't come cheap ...

Come on Brian, how about some commentary on Labour and Lib Dem economic policy. How can an Executive which has apparently run up a deficit of 拢11 billion per year be allowed to escape analysis and have the cheek to use this debt as grounds for re-election.

Did you really have to meet the Medusa in person! If you were not a career media hack I would have felt sorry for you!
Like a certain Greek hero - I hope you polished your shield before meeting with her!

Claims and counter-claims about the economic case for independence have been going on for some time. Even in terms of this election campaign the current debate is an intensification of an existing arguement rather than anything new. Both Labour and the SNP can wheel out economists to support their case and give legitimacy to their calculations. What surprises me is that Labour think the state of Scotland's economy is a vote winner for Jack McConnell. Scotland lags behind the rest of the UK in terms of growth, business start-up rates are poor and too many talented Scots have to head elsewhere to fulfill their ambitions. Professor Andrew Hughes Hallett, consultant to the IMF, World Bank, UN, European Central Bank etc. is of the opinion that the Lib/Lab Executive lacks any coherent economic vision or strategy for taking the Scottish economy forward. I think the experience of the last eight years supports this view.

The issue of public finance is very complicated, the figures used by New labour inevitably undestate the yield from tax take in Scotland, and indeed it is very difficult to disaggregate tax yield accross the UK i.e. what share of UK CT arises on the operations of HBOS or RBS and how would this be taxed in an independent Scotland? However the fundamental point remains that New Labour's argument states that after 300 years of Union, Scotland is economically diadvantaged vis a vis England. This hardly seems an argument in favour of the "benefits" of union. On a final note New Labour makes a great deal of a ptential fiscal gap in an Independent Scotland, but ignores the very real and growing BOP gap in the UK accounts (something which no economist has eve argued an independent Scotland would have) did Wendy's tablecloth cover this salient point. Or perhaps this deep seated stuctural weakness of the English economy has escaped the attention of the Iron Chancellor and his acolytes(the relative figures relate to the elasticity of imports and exports at certin rates of ec onomic growth) in this century the figures have been such that the UK economy has been unable to match the growth rates in the world econmy without icurring BOP problems. Over the last 10 years this trend has repeated itself but the Media and New labour pretend the problem doesn't exit.

How can anyone believe anything Wendy Alexander or her brother say? Yes they are clever, no they don't tell the truth. They spin just like their mentor Gordon Brown. Oil revenues go up as well as down but in the world of New Labour when things go up instead of down they tell us we don't understand the statistics. What we do understand is that when John Major was PM, pension funds across the Uk were in huge surplus and now they are in severe deficit. Gordon boasts about the longest period of sustained growth but omits to explain that the first 16 quarters were under John Major's stewardship. British interest rates were at 15% but EU rates were also high as were US ones. Now rates are on the rise but this time, New Labour has nearly bankrupted most households by encouraging them to borrow beyond their means. When New Labour admits its own mistakes, it will be in a position to criticise what might be under the SNP.

Did you not ask Wendy about Nu Labours mantra! Education education education! Its seems they are still chanting it!
How mant more years do they need to get to deliver on it!

Arm yourself with lots of questions for Wendy - then she can write about how she got Taylored!

Strange to begin a piece on the SNP by talking about the views of Labour politicians until we're all too bored to continue reading further....

The last time Scotland had Alexander siblings in the news they were most famous for their song Nobodies Child, how appropriate it would be should today's younger Alexander siblings sing this song to the Labour Party leaders at Westminster and Holyrood.

The sums that have added up in the past.

Since the birth of the Scottish National Party in 1935, where for a few years they achieved similar successes as Norway did in the Eurovision Song Contest, through to 1974 with 11 MPs and to today with currently 6 MPs (2005) Westminster Parliaments irrespective of colour have always responded 鈥榝avourably鈥� to Scotland when the Nationalist vote was threatening towards the 鈥榯wo party鈥� status Quo.

So what has changed today?

1) Alex Salmond is no longer seen by swing voters as a threat; voting Alex Salmond for First Minister and the SNP to Govern Scotland is not a vote for independence that would be a separate referendum.
2) Jack McConnell has operated with his deaf ear turned to Scottish voters complacency being his watch word; now he promises to listen to all Scotland not just the west coast.
3) The Scottish people who clearly feel they are dissatisfied with the current governance of Scotland

We continually hear claims and counter claims of the financial proposals for each party what we fail to be provided are the 鈥榳orkings鈥� of these outcomes, remember those workings so important to our High School maths teachers, FEC and University lecturers; headline figures may be sufficient for politicians but not for all we voters. Pity you didn鈥檛 hang onto that tablecloth at least we could have examined Wendy鈥檚 calculations.

Thank you Peter for making me laugh and for reminding about the song - one of my mithers favourites!
It was as song we sang about John Greig when he was manager of a certain Glasgow football team1 I note that he is now supporting the Union! A guess another reditionof the song is called for!

Brian

Why not repeat verbatim in your blog what Wendy Alexander says? I mean every claim she makes.

Oh, I see you have.