David Maddox: The Numbers Game (27) - Marginal results

Two sets of polling figures have been produced this week which illustrate why general national polls are not altogether reliable sources electoral success.
The TNS-BMRB poll this week was not good news for the Conservatives in Scotland this week ahead of their annual Scottish conference in Perth and visit by David Cameron.
It had them stuck on 18 per cent for Westminster, a mere 13 per cent for Holyrood constituencies and and even lowlier 12 per cent for Holyrood party list votes.
None of these figures had budged a dot from the year before and suggested that the Cameron effect is negligible north of the Border.
The one crumb of comfort was that it left them above the Lib Dems in support, but it would still leave them with less seats.
According Scotland Votes the latest split on the poll Labour 42%, SNP 26%, Tories 18% and Lib Dems 12% leaves the following Scottish Westminster seat allocations (change from 2005 in brackets):

Lab: 42 (+2) SNP 7 (+1) Con: 3 (+2) Lib Dems 7 (-4)

The Lib Dems would lose Argyll and Bure, and Berwickshire Roxburgh and Selkirk to the Tories, and East Dunbartonshire, and Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey to Labour. Meanwhile the SNP would gain Ochil and South Perthshire from Labour.

This is not exactly a massive breakthrough for the Conservatives, however, what they claim is that the real key to whether they are succeeding or not is in the polling for target seats and key marginals.
As most people know there are 11 target seats in Scotland for the Conservatives and yesterday they passed on figures of polling they had commissioned in one of those constituencies - Edinburgh South.
This is a threeway marginal which is made even more open by the announcement by its Labour MP Nigel Griffiths that he will not contest it again.
The Tories got an independent poller to ask a series of questions which came up with the following results:

This Labour Government at Westminster looks weak and divided.
Agree: 75% Disagree 19%

The SNP will never have the power or influence to represent your views in Westminster.
Agree 71% Disagree 24%

Do you think it is important to have a strong and stable government at Westminster to help Britain out of recession?
Agree 95% Disagree 3%

It is important to have Conservative MPs from Scotland in the heart of a Westminster government to defend and represent Scottish interests.
Agree 71% Disagree 24%

My local MP would have more influence if he or she was from the Party of government.
Agree 60% Disagree 27%

It is an interesting use of questions designed to eliminate opponents one by one, which will not doubt appear now in leaflets.
The answers say that people think Labour is weak, Nationalism is irrelevant in Westminster and it would be better to have an MP from the party of government which rules out the Lib Dems also have a chance of winning the seat. Logically, that just leaves the Tories as the only option.
Of course, had they simply asked people which party they will support then the result would probably not be so clear cut for the Conservatives.

Eddie Barnes: McCabe's the man for Swinney

We're informed that the SNP Government will unveil the names if the Three Wise Men who will examine their books next week, as part of the Independent Review into the Scottish Government's finances. As I've written in the Scotsman this morning, I suspect there is a lot of behind-the-scenes arm-twisting going on about who they might be, as the make-up of this review will be crucial in deciding what it eventually comes up with.

If the SNP is smart they'll come up with at least one name who has some association with Labour, in order to deflect the attacks from Andy Kerr et al about how they plan to hack back against the poor defenceless people of Glasgow and surrounding villages. How hilarious would it be if Swinney unveiled his precedessor Tom McCabe as one of his recruits? Mr McCabe has not been backwards in coming forwards so far about the scale of problems to come. And he has been extremely candid about the cheque-book politics which distinguished the previous Labour-Liberal administration, of which he was a part. Clearly Mr McCabe would make himself extremely unpopular among his Labour colleagues if he chose to sit on Mr Swinney's panel. But Lanarkshire's grizzliest politician has never quite given the impression he minds having a few enemies.

I doubt it'll happen but there are other options available for Mr Swinney. This could be fun.

Eddie Barnes - Iraq: yet another question that needs answering

Clare Short gives more tantalising evidence today on one of the most fascinating issues raised by the Iraq inquiry - the process by which the Attorney General ended up changing his mind on the legality of the war. Lord Goldsmith revealed last week that what persuaded him to say the war was legal was his visit to the US, where he met Condaleeza Rice, her legal advisers and Britain's Ambassador to the UN, Sir Jeremy Greenstock.

The former International Development Secretary claimed today that Blair "leaned" on Goldsmith to change his mind. Later, she added: "It was suggested to him that he go to the US to get advice about the legal position......I think all that was leaning on – sending him to America....."

We're getting close to something here, but the inquiry has so far failed to nail this down. Who organised Goldsmith's visit? Who "suggested" it? Did Downing Street and the White House discuss the AG's opposition and decide that a trip across the pond would be just the thing to make him agree? Answers to these questions are vital if the Inquiry is going to reveal the full story of what happened.

This isn't just process: just to recap, Blair said last week that had Goldsmith stuck to his guns that the war was illegal, then British troops wouldn't have gone in.

David Maddox: Banking on Sean and Andy

Just a final thought on the events of the weekend and Andy Murray's defeat to Federer.

Some people may have noticed that there was an attack on one Scottish icon - Sir Sean Connery - for fronting an advert for a French bank on green banking.
Labour put out a quite contorted press release on it having a go at Sir Sean's alleged blunder.

Which got me thinking as I looked up at the TV screen to watch the tennis - "Famous people... advertising banks... making money... what's the big deal?"

And then I took a closer look at Mr Murray again and remembered his sponsorship. Strangely enough nobody seems to be concerned about the Dunblane lad's sponsorship by RBS, the bank whose dodgy practices almost sunk the British economy.

Could one of the differences be that Murray now refers to himself as British (courtesy, reportedly, of his marketing team's advice) while Sir Sean is a well known SNP supporter?

*As an addition the prize for the most pointless Murray political press release - keenly contested over the last week or two - has to go to the Scottish Government's one on Saturday evening telling us that the First Minister Alex Salmond would be sat on his sofa watching the Scottish hero do his stuff against Federer.

Eddie Barnes - Mundell for the Scotland Office

The McLetchie-for-Scottish Secretary line is running again this morning in the blogosphere. I first heard this story knocking about at the Conservative conference in Manchester when drink may have been taken. The idea played into Cameron's "respect agenda". With McLetchie in post, the Tories could turn round to Alex Salmond and say that a member of the Scottish Parliament was sitting Cameron's cabinet. How Scot-friendly is that? However, I suspect that this excellent yarn is going to remain just that: a good bit of political gossip.

Here is a genuine fact: David Mundell, the shadow Scottish Secretary, has already started having informal private meetings with the main players in Scotland's public sector, to inform them that they may soon have to work with one another and that he is open for business. He may be freelancing, perhaps, but more likely he has been told - along with other shadow secretaries of state - to get out there and start meeting the people he needs to deal with in a few months time. In other words, he is preparing for the job.

The only way Mundell won't get the job is if he is offered a post elsewhere which he prefers (International Development?). Surely it would be a humiliation too far for him to be a shadow for the last few years, and only then to be knocked back. Sorry to prick the gossip, but I reckon it's Mundell for the Scotland Office.

David Maddox: For Foulkes Sake (16) - The late late show episode 2

I know how much cybernats like pieces about written questions from Lord George Foulkes, Baron of Cumnock, MSP to the Lothians and First Lord of the Twittery.
It always surprises me why people who supposedly support democracy object to democracy in action because of cost or perhaps more likely because it embarrasses the party they support, although, it's fair to say, that it is not only Nationalists who are prone to this sort of self delusion.
But anyway here's another couple of the noble one's questions which finance secretary John Swinney has finally deigned to answer quite a few days late.
Readers of the Steamie may remember the questions from Lord George asking about the First Minister's tardiness.
He asked how many times Alex Salmond had been more than 30 minutes late to official events and why he was allegedly more than two hours late to the opening of the latest stage of the Burns Cottage development.
The two answers appeared to be a little contradictory. Here they are:


George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive on how many occasions since May 2007 the First Minister has arrived more than half an hour late for a public engagement.
Mr John Swinney: Under successive administrations it has not been customary to keep a record of arrival times at events by the First Minister.

George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive for what reason the First Minister was over two hours late for the opening of the latest stage of developments at Burns Cottage.
Mr John Swinney: The First Minister was not late to this event. He arrived at 13:15, the arrival time agreed in advance with the organisers.

So basically what Mr Swinney is saying is that no record is kept of the First Minister's arrival time unless he is on time. This probably requires less effort.

Eddie Barnes: Murray's my mate

In the Scotsman office this morning we were laying bets....which party would win the "I-Want-To-Be-Andy-Murray's-Best-Friend" award?

Labour. Literally less than a minute after he won this morning, this press release landed in the e-mail box.

"Scottish Labour's congratulated Scots tennis ace Andy Murray for his magnificant victory today which secures his place in the final of Australian Open (Murray 3-6 6-4 6-4 6-2 Cilic)

Sports spokesman Frank McAveety is getting behind Murray's bid for his first Grand Slam title.

Mr McAveety said: "This is an outstanding win for Andy Murray against a great opponent Marin Cilic and we hope that he can keep the momentum going in the final. It would be a tremendous and well-deserved achievement for Andy to win his first Grand Slam title. He is a world-class athlete and a great Scottish ambassador for sport and I am sure the whole of Scotland will be cheering him on to victory in the final." "

For the record, Alex Salmond came in with his praise a few minutes later. However, neither the Tories nor the LibDems have yet declared whether they too think Andy Murray winning a tennis match was a good thing.

Meanwhile, in his post-match press conference on the Rod Laver court in Melbourne, Murray reflected: "It couldn't have been better that this. I played really well and to finish Cilic off quickly like that in the fourth set meant I was able to get back into the Locker room in time to watch First Minister's Questions at the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh. Tennis might be entertaining but it just pales in comparison to Holyrood's cut and thrust."

UPDATE: I am now informed that LibDem MSP Iain Smith may have beaten MacAveety to it. He raised Murray's victory in the chamber, having been following the score on his BlackBerry.