2010 Predictions

• The election will be held on May 10th 2010. The result will be a small Conservative majority. Shortly afterwards, Gordon Brown will stand down, taking up a teaching position at the University of Edinburgh.

• The next leader of the Labour Party will be David Miliband or Harriet Harman. Either one will fill a similar function to William Hague during the Tory wilderness years, which is largely why neither one of them should be made leader.

• The SNP will take 16 seats in Westminster. This will be at the expense of the Lib Dems, leaving Scotland dominated by Labour and the SNP and paving the way for a two-way battle for the Scottish Parliament in 2011.

• The Conservatives will lose their only current Scottish seat, but gain two other Border seats.

• The economic problems faced by the UK will peak during the summer, with a slow return towards growth in the run up to Christmas 2010. Unemployment will continue to grow, peaking above 3 million. The next big jump in employment figures will be in January and then again in June/July/August as a new batch of students graduate.

• Leadership Changes: Gordon Brown, Iain Grey, Nick Clegg, Tavish Scott and Annabel Goldie will all face challenges to their positions over the next 12 months.

Minimum Unit Pricing Across The Border

Minimum Unit Pricing seems to have already disappeared into the ether that bills in progress through the Scottish Parliament seem drawn towards, despite being hailed by Labour as a sign of an SNP administration in crisis and being as controversial as the 2005 Smoking, Health and Social Care Act.

However, it would also seem to be enjoying some popularity – with MPs in England. According to a report in the Guardian on the 11th of December, the Health Select Committee, a cross-party body, will, with the support of the British Medical Association and  Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer, approach the Government urging them to impose a 50 pence per unit price on all alcoholic drinks.

If adopted, this measure would see a moderate rise in the price of beer, cider, alcopops and cheap spirits when bought from an off-license or supermarket. The 50 pence price point is mid-way between the SNP’s initial proposal of 40 pence per unit and the 60 pence per unit price proposed by Scottish Government advisers.

Sadly, despite the cross-party and expert support, Gordon Brown is opposed to the measure because “it is unfair to the majority of drinkers” (Guardian), while the Tory Party oppose it’s principle. It’s worth noting however, that the key difference between this proposal in Westminster and in Holyrood is that Westminister may apply this as a tax, either fully or partially with companies mandated to make up remainder of the price increase. This coule potentially generate much needed revenue for the Government.

The First Minister’s Question Time following the publication of the Select Committee’s report on the 7th of January may make for interesting viewing, with Alex Salmond being handed an ideal weapon  to use against Scottish Labour’s opposition to the Alcohol Bill. It also raises the possibility of further MPs or MSPs following Malcolm Chrisholm’s lead and breaking the whip over an issue which deeply affects Scotland.

Other measures recommended by the report include increasing education regarding the effects of alcohol, giving local authorities greater powers over licensees, targeting irresponsible promotions and decreasing duty on alcoholic drink with less then 2.8% alcohol by volume. Several of these are already in place in Scotland, enacted by both the Labour-Lib Dem and SNP administrations.

And So It Begins – Election 2010

The dissolution of Parliament remains at least a month and a half away if the March 25th election day predictions are to be believed. Yet today sees the Observer reporting that the Conservative Party are preparing to begin their election campaign on the 4th of Janurary.

I believe this piece is probably correct and sheds light on a few of the goings on in the blogosphere in the last few days. In a possibly linked series of events, this story follows a lunch hosted for Tory bloggers on the 15th which was apparently misreported by the New Statesman, a blog post by publisher and Tory blogger Iain Dale (who was not at said lunch but who’s employee, Shane Greer, was) lauching an opening salvo against Labour MP and digital communications advisor Kerry McCarthy and a sustained twitter campaign led by blogger Tory Bear, including the creation of a “Kerry Out” website due to launch on the 4th.

All of this has a number of implications for the parties.

The biggest potential implication is that this could devastate turnout, in particular if the election is in May rather then March. The British public have reacted unfavourably to negative and extended campaigns in the past, generally by not voting at all. This would affect all of the parties, with fewer swing voters coming out and probably a number of supporters becoming disillusioned by the campaigning.

By launching an early campaign at the cost of half a million quid, the Tory Party is putting it’s money where it’s mouth is as far as the date of the election is concerned. If, as some believe, it does not occur during March, then the Tories will have spent a considerable sum on what may be a temporary poll boost. Alternatively, they face draining the party coffers to maintain a PR blitz, which again has the potential effect of turning off voters. The negative, attack based tactics against Ms McCarthy, if they become more wide-spread, form a risky path.

Despite an early Tory Campaign, Labour still hold the ball. There are three potential paths they can take with it: call a snap election in February, call an election in March/April after getting some of the legislative agenda through or hold off until May, draining Tory resources. However, the Labour Party probably can’t afford to fight an extended election campaign, with their party debt increasing.

For small parties (and possibly the Lib Dems) the effects of an extended campaign could be rather bad. With no-where near the budget of Labour and the Tories, it’s likely that the Greens, BNP, Respect and UKIP would be unable to campaign early on, potentially giving the big three an opportunity to marginalise them further.

For the SNP, I doubt this will have much effect. The Tories are still facing utterly dismal polls in Scotland and a poster campaign is unlikely to make much difference. Given that Alex Salmond is currently on top form politically, managing to beat off all opposition and bad PR news, the party is currently in a comfortable position. The push for a referendum will probably help and harm the SNP equally, but a lot of that depends on Labour’s campaigning and the SNP’s reaction to it.

The first 6 months of 2010 are going to be occupied with one thing: the election. Better get used to it folks, it’s going to be a very long, very nasty year.

Has Environmentalism Become Embedded In British Politics?

This can be illustrated through a number of examples. Chief amongst these are British environmental policy before and after both the ‘Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer’ and the ‘Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change’. Also relevant are the environmental policy decisions surrounding the 2000 fuel tax protests and the reaction to environmental protests by the Thatcher and Major governments. The sources of environmental policy will also be discussed.

It should also be noted that while policy does not seem to be embedded within British government or any of the mainstream parties, it remains a consistent issue with the British population. Thus, it can be said to be embedded as a policy in Britain in general. The persistence of the Green Party – in particular in Scotland post-devolution – is particularly telling.

The origin of contemporary environmental policy can be traced to the London’s smog crisis of 1952, in a pollution-thickened fog descended on the city, lasting nearly a week and resulting in more then 4,000 deaths. Four years later, the Clean Air Act 1956 was passed. This placed restrictions on the amount of smoke emitted by new furnaces and factories, the emission of solid pollutants and types of fuel which could be burnt both in commercial and domestic facilities (United Kingdom 1956, pp3-9). A Clean Air Council was also established to monitor the effectiveness of the this early environmental policy (United Kingdom 1956, pp26).
Read the rest of this entry »

The Attack Blog Storm Fails To Exit It’s Tea-Cup

The bunfight over attack blogs seems to be rolling on thanks to a combination of an extremely angry Mark McLauchlin and a rather inept Iain Gray.

Mr McLauchlin appeared in last week’s Sunday Times, discussing various issues relating to his blog, including his resignation and attack blogs in general. He raises some interesting point – for example, by suing the SNP, he may set a precedent for better employment rights for political employees, one of the few groups remaining society where staff are expected to fall upon their own swords from time to time. I can also understand his position and his demands to the SNP for help finding a new job, something which was revealed in a series of leaked emails, although I find it hard to agree with him.

It will be very interesting to see how Mr McLauchlin gets on with his suit, although until such time as more evidence is presented to prove that Mike Russell actually contributed, consented or otherwise supported McLauchlin’s blog, it remains a bit of a non-issue between the SNP and a former employee. Labour are facing problems persuing the SNP over this issue, as was illustrated by Alex Salmond in yesterday’s First Minister’s Question Time:

Here is the challenge: if we want to talk about conduct in politics, let us condemn attack blogs from whatever source. After Damian McBride and the Leaky Chanter, the Labour Party should not pretend that it has not had serious involvement in such things. As a Parliament, can we not agree to deprecate such conduct?

This was part of an extended question from Iain Gray regarding Mike Russell and Mr McLauchlin. It can only be described as one of Mr Gray’s least considered political decisions – attacking the SNP for sacking McLauchlin, attacking the SNP for not taking action on blogs (an area which is far out with the remit of the Parliament or any Party) and finally rounding on bloggers in general, stating “I wish to see these anonymous blogs rooted out and got rid of”.

The result of this question is a ten minute piece of political theater which allowed Alex Salmond to give a five star performance, leaving Gray looking distinctly chastened. The fact that Salmond was able to turn everything Gray asked about back upon him suggests that this may finally be the issue of attack blogs seeing it’s death in the chamber, but also serves to illustrate the failings of Iain Gray as a leader. He is simply unable to hold the SNP to account or tackle Alex Salmond with any adequacy.

It is unfortunate that Labour also have their English counterparts and tribal voting patterns to rely on during the 2010 election. If the campaign battle for Scotland was simply between Salmond and Gray, I suspect the SNP aim of 20 seats would seem pessimistic.

Update: Jeff at SNP Tactical Voting reports that a second scalp has been claimed in this affair after the SNP council leader in Dumfries & Galloway confirmed that he had written emails to Mr McLauchlin, prompting him to write articles on his blog. I am concerned that this will not be the last scalp claimed…