Chris Mackie: Won't get fooled again!

Hands up who fell for an April Fool gag this morning.

Aside from the humourous efforts in our national newspapers this morning (including The Scotsman - see if you can spot it, hoax fans) only one political party has come out to play on this, the day of japery and laughter.

The Tories put out an April Fool press release, backed by a rather impressive looking spoof website (http://www.dogw.co.uk/) advertising the entirely fictional Whitehall office - the Department of Government Waste.

Headed by the enigmatic minister Robin Ewe (geddit?), the DoGW was apparently set up in 1997 and has the mission statement:

“At the Department of Government Waste, spending your money is not just a privilege; it’s a duty. Our track record over the last 13 years is one of goal-realisation, spending-prioritisation, and waste-maximisation. And we will go on developing further waste streams if Labour win the next election. So if you want 5 more years of government waste, make sure you vote Labour on Polling Day.”

Today's press release purported to highlight a new report from the DoGW that, unlike many ministerial departments in the UK at present, its civil servants had hit all of their targets contained within their "challenging delivery agenda".
The department's achievements include - wait for it - "a systematic lack of competence"; "diseconomies stemming from over-reaching Government"; "challenging the belief that taxpayers’ money should be respected" and "pushing the boundaries of wasteful spending".

While the website and release do eventually help any sleepy hacks by revealing the entirely fictional nature of the department, the Tories do make the point that all of the examples of wasteful spending included within, are drawn from the last 13 years of government.

It's easy to groan about such lame gags as Robin Ewe, but as a way of pushing a political message its playful nature is certainly more engaging than some of the petty tribalism and points-scoring-at-all-costs we occasionally receive in our in-boxes.

Chris Mackie: Burning a disc

From time to time, protesters gather outside the Parliament here in an (often vain) attempt to directly influence the policy makers as they enter or leave the building.


A couple of weeks back it was the doughty Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers crew, armed with placards, posters and an in-depth leaflet detailing the supposed injustices of Scottish Law. I happened to pass the group as former lawyer David McLetchie made his way through the crowd and into his waiting taxi, with a look of bemusement mixed with sheer terror on his face.


Today as I entered the building, a single rain-soaked chap huddling under an umbrella thrust a sodden flyer into my hand. He was, the leaflet informs me, from a group called Green Alternatives to Incineration in Scotland who are opposed to the burning of waste. They have now released a song on itunes to publicise their fight by a mysterious looking chap by the name of Ro J. I don't know if that is pronounced "Rawj" or "Row - Jay", but he has kindly allowed a section of the lyrics to the track - "It was Madness to Burn Our Waste" - to appear on this publication.


You have to admire the leafleteer's dedication to the cause, but I stop at admiring the lyrical skills of "Ro J", which frankly leave a lot to be desired.



You be the judge:



Verse 1

In this world of insanity,

We just need a little purity,

We are sick with pollution,

And we don't want their solution,

We're not asking for charity,

All we want is some clarity,

Burning waste for the sake of wealth,

Makes no sense if you lose your health.

Chris Mackie: Pwoud of the Wabour Party

So, Sir Alex Ferguson has lent his support to Labour candidate Willie Bain's campaign for the now imminent Glasgow North East by-election (see entry by Willie below).
Playing up his former role as a shop steward Sir Alex urged local voters to turn out for the Labour candidate, saying: "I always tell young players that being a footballer is the best job in the world. Yes, it’s hard work to reach the top but nothing to bringing up a family or running a household on a tight budget. As the only genuinely local candidate in this election, Willie understands what needs to be done."

Quite how significant the endorsement of a former Rangers player, born in Govan will prove in the Celtic steeped neighbourhoods of Springburn, only time will tell.

Sir Alex is by no means the first football figure to become involved in politics - Bill Shankly was a declared socialist - but his views are significantly more moderate than some others connected to the beautiful game...

Despite turning out for Celtic - a traditionally left-leaning club - former Italy striker Paolo Di Canio is a self-proclaimed fascist, who stoked controversy in Italy in the aftermath of a Rome derby in 2005, when he offered the Lazio "ultras" a straight arm salute. It was the third time he had made the gesture during that season, and earned him a £7,000 fine and a one game ban. In the wake of the salute Di Canio told an Italian news agency: "I am a fascist, not a racist."

At the other end of the spectrum, Oleguer Presas i Renom, the former Barcelona midfielder and avowed Catalan nationalist refuses to play for Spain or speak Spanish in public and was regularly booed in away grounds in La Liga because of his outspoken anti-Spanish government views. In 2007, he lost a boot sponsorship deal after writing an opinion piece in a Basque newspaper questioning the validity of the Spanish judicial system in dealing with a member of the terrorist group ETA.

As for Scotland, a trawl through the Scotsman archives throws up the following incendiary insight from Pat Nevin, the ex-Chelsea, Everton, Kilmarnock and Motherwell winger. When asked if he supported independence, he said:

"I am not a huge fanatic either way, though I am leaning towards independence - but it's not a fanatical 'let's do it tomorrow' and kick down the doors of parliament."

Chris Mackie: LibDems 1 Labour 1 in Rangers roundup

Proof, if proof were needed, that the pervasive influence of the Old Firm extends into every nook and cranny of Scottish life reached us this morning as politicians began to wade into the ongoing travails of Glasgow Rangers FC.

The LibDems were first, calling on Scottish Secretary (and Celtic fan) Jim Murphy to intervene in the situation that has seen a representative of HBoS placed on the board of the Ibrox club to monitor spending.

Tavish Scott (bizarrely, a Liverpool supporter) said all football fans - even those of a green and white hooped hue - would be concerned by reports that the club had been threatened with administration by a bank substantially helped by the use of taxpayers' money.

“If the Lloyds group can take down Rangers, there won’t be many professional clubs left in Scotland," exclaimed Tavish excitedly.

Improbably, he was joined by Labour's Frank McAveety, who crossed the Glasgow divide to offer his support to the Teddy Bears, noting gravely: "Anyone who cares about Scottish football should be concerned about the financial difficulties experienced by one of our biggest clubs."

Despite The Steamie's enquiries, the Scottish Conservative and Unionist party have, perhaps surprisingly, declined to become embroiled in the row. And we didn't even phone the Greens.

Chris Mackie: 10 years of laughter and fun in the Kenny and Jack Show

Sporting some carefully nurtured stubble, more at home on the chin of serial automotive snoozer George Michael, Jack McConnell kicked off a lively day of debate at the Law Society of Scotland's devolution debate on Friday.

Tieless, full of jokes and looking relieved that the Lockerbie decision hadn't fallen to his administration, Jack (famously pictured right as First Minister in Tartan week in America) regaled delegates on the successes (and failures) of devolution as he saw them. Among the clear positives, he contended, was the introduction of the smoking ban, something he revealed had caused him a degree of nervousness before it was enacted. Chided by a frosty reception at a licensing industry jolly weeks before the Bill was passed and fearful of widespread civil disobedience of the new measures, Jack had, he reported, barely slept during the night before its introduction.

Later, he outlined some areas for improvement of the arrangements. Among those was the need for a more mature dialogue between Holyrood and Westminster, and he expressed incredulity that the Megrahi decision hadn't been discussed at a high level between governments before deploying the old "if an alien had landed from the planet Zog, what would he have thought?" rhetoric to make his point.

Another contention was that the current system of 32 local authorities was unsustainable and should be scrutinised by an all party review body. Maddeningly, however, he failed to tell the audience a) precisely what he thought was wrong with the system, and b) how he believed it could be improved.

He also called for a radical change to the taxation powers of the Parliament, suggesting that responsibility for income tax gathering could be split between both Governments. And he lamented the lack of a serious policy shaping community in Scotland, revealing that, during his tenure as First Minister, only a handful of times had a policy report crossed his desk that sparked serious debate in the Government.

Later in the day, Sir Kenneth Calman (pictured left) cut a wry figure as he took to the lectern to offer a review of his Commission before taking questions from the floor. He insisted that the process of gathering evidence for his report had been "great fun" with the hard work punctuated by members of the commission circulating e-mail jokes around the group. If any curious reader wants a record of those gags, they may well be available via the submission of a creatively worded FOI request.

Speaking to The Scotsman after his appearance, Sir Kenneth revealed that he had managed to see his daughter's (http://www.susancalman.com/) recent stand up appearance at the Festival Fringe, and claimed to have helped her write some material. As for the remainder of her show, he was less enthusiastic: "She sometimes uses language," he said, "that is not for my ears."

Chris Mackie: Tories and Nationalists get cosy

There is some thoughtful stuff from former Scotsman hack Fraser Nelson over at the Spectator website. As well as some barbs directed at the SNP for its handling of the Lockerbie Bomber release and a fascinating snippet about Alex Salmond meeting Gideon, er sorry, George Osborne on an flight between London and Edinburgh, he throws up some interesting politics surrounding the relationship between the UK Conservatives and the SNP.

His contention is the likely Conservative general election victory could offer the Nationalists a route to financial independence by playing on English Tory Party unease about the level of public subsidy offered to Scotland. www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/the-week/5275838/part_4/politics.thtml

Here is the key section: "For some time, nationalists in Westminster have been quietly cultivating Tories who are known to resent the level of subsidy sent to Scotland (public spending per head is still 24 per cent higher than south of the border). They propose a new settlement. Why not set Scotland’s budget at whatever Scotland raises in tax? This is, after all, how the Basque country deals with Spain. Several Tories, including many on the front bench, are interested."

The move would certainly be popular among the core Conservative support in England, but does Cameron really have the stomach to abandon the strictly unionist line he has been careful to maintain during his leadership? Unionist Tories in Scotland may well begin to think that they have been sold out by their leadership, although the move might well play well to some of the small "c" conservative sections of the SNP support, so it could be a case of electoral swings and roundabouts.

Whatever happens, it will be fascinating to see the relationship between Eck and Dave emerge in the event of a Conservative victory next year.

Chris Mackie: Down wiff da kidz

Just in case you weren't aware, the Scottish Secretary sure is down wiff da kidz. In the tale of his day out at T in The Park over his blog "Jumpin'" Jim Murphy is careful to namecheck as many current musical artistes as he can - even if he didn't actually see them at the festival.
Because, yeah, I'm actually really into We Were Promised Jetpacks, yeah? You wouldn't have heard of them, because they are well new and that, innit?!
But aside from establishing his cutting edge credentials, this is my favourite section: "then off to Slam Tent, which was very dark and absolutely packed. How do they get so many people into the one (albeit enormous) tent? The Streets were pretty entertaining."
The thought of someone as establishment as the current Scottish Secretary hanging out with some of the revellers who can be found in the dark recesses of the Slam Tent is enough to bring a smile to anybody's lips. Consider the fact that there are some festival-goers who, whatever the weather, fail to leave that particular arena for the entire weekend, despite what is on offer elsewhere at Balado.
Perhaps his visit was educational - an attempt to really judge the scale of Scotland's drug problem. Or perhaps he was campaigning - trying to get Labour's message out while potential voters were in particularly high spirits.
Either way the image of Mr Murphy, a member of Her Majesty's Cabinet, grooving along to The Streets (sample lyric "Big beefy bouncers out to reveal us, geezers on Es and first timers, kids on whizz, darlin's on charlie, all come together for this party") is one to cherish.
He might well have needed to collapse in a chair afterwards (pictured right).

Chris Mackie: By-election speculation

There is an interesting piece of counter-intuitive thinking in this blog post by Evening Standard lobby hack Paul Waugh on the difference between the Norwich North and Glasgow North East by-elections.

His contention is that the delay in scheduling the Glasgow by-election is less to do with the Labour Party running scared of a Nationalist defeat and more to do with the thought that they might actually win the vote.

Here is the key section: "Why the difference between the two? Well, there's the obvious reason that Labour thinks it will actually win Glasgow whereas it seems to have given up hope in Norwich.
"But more relevant must be Labour's last by-election victory. Unlike Glasgow East, where the SNP gave Labour a kicking, Glenrothes saw Lindsay Roy sweep home relatively easily because lots of work had been put into finding the right candidate and doing the hard work on the ground."

There is undoubtedly some truth to this, but the delay in the Glenrothes campaign was not just about doing the hard work on the ground - it was also about mobilising a Labour machine in a constituency in which it had not faced credible competition for many years. Despite losing a seat they were confident of taking, the very fact Labour had to work so hard to win in Glenrothes was a triumph of sorts for the SNP. It points very clearly to a general election campaign to be fought in battlegrounds in which Labour activists are unused to fighting genuine contenders.

That must be a particular headache for local parties used to routinely returning incumbent Labour MPs, especially in the case of Glasgow North East, where, by virtue of Parliamentary convention, Labour has faced no notable opposition apart from the SNP in each of the elections since 1997. The headache might well become a migraine when the party studies its - already parlous - finances and finds that funds earmarked to fight nationally important marginals, have to be diverted to shore up its core vote in previously safe seats.

So yes, Labour may be confident of winning in Glasgow North East, but the apparent need to give its local activists as much time as it possibly can to run an effective campaign shows how fragile that confidence is.

Chris Mackie: Bring it on (or maybe not)

If this interesting snippet from James McIntyre of the New Statesman (http://www.newstatesman.com/2009/06/brown-labour-minister) is to be believed, it would certainly put the Labour cat amidst the SNP pigeons:

"Meanwhile, a separate idea, bold if controversial, is quietly being considered for the same election day: a referendum in Scotland on independence. This reflects a rueful and secretly held sense among some in New Labour that devolution was a mistake which emboldened nationalists and strengthened the hand of Alex Salmond, the Scottish National Party’s leader and Scotland’s First Minister. Brown has long fretted about British identity and about how people increasingly define themselves as English, Welsh and Scottish, rather than as British.
A referendum would call the Nationalists’ bluff. It would be a high-risk strategy. But Brown would be gambling on the majority of Scots who continue to recognise that the social, economic and political union remains much more than the sum of its parts."

While no doubt being supported by Wendy Alexander ("bring it on" etc), I agree that the move would carry extreme risk for a Prime Minister not known for his bold decisions. On the plus side for Brown, taking control of the referendum would allow him to dictate its terms and could embolden the "no" campaign before the SNP has a chance to make inroads at the Westminster elections. The likely upsurge in the turnout would also help to get the Labour vote out - something it manifestly had problems with in the Euro elections.

Looking at it with a more Machiavellian eye, if we assume the Labour party expects to lose the next election, a referendum on election day could give an incoming Team Cameron the mother of all constitutional headaches to deal with should the Scottish people vote "yes".

But is he really brave enough to take the Nationalists on in this way? I suspect he has neither the gumption nor the resources to fight two battles simultaneously, especially with the stakes so high. After all, even if he won the referendum, it is unlikely he would be in office to enjoy the political benefits it would bring - those, you suspect would be David Cameron's to savour.

Chris Mackie: 30 years on again (2)

There was a fair smattering of blue rinses and pinstripe suits in evidence at the Signet Library last night as a packed house settled to watch some political pugilism over Margaret Thatcher's legacy on the 30th anniversary of her election victory. Debating the motion "Margaret Thatcher did more good than harm for Scotland" were some political heavyweights marshalled by the affable presence of referee/chairman, Bernard Ponsonby.

In the blue corner sat Malcolm Rifkind - holder of ministerial office for the entire span of the last Tory government, - and David McLetchie - a self confessed Conservative foot soldier in 1979 - lined up to defend Maggie's legacy, looking every inch the Conservative politicians they are.

In the red and yellow corner were "Wee" Brian Wilson - a former Labour MP and secretary of state for energy - and Jim Sillars - the former deputy leader of the SNP, who ribbed Malcolm Rifkind about being the "former Governor General of Scotland". Sillars was cheered on by wife Margo MacDonald, sat, disconcertingly for the Tories on the panel, directly in front of the lectern in an unmissable floral blouse, ready to offer them withering looks when required. There was even an icy Margo stare and sharp retort directed at her husband when he declared that he was, along with Brian Wilson, one of the only two socialists in Edinburgh.

Before each speaker got into the meat of his argument, however, they took the opportunity to warm up the crowd with some humorous banter - each of them pretty successfully it has to be said. But whose humorous banter landed the knockout blow? You be the judge:

Malcolm Rifkind:

"Brian Wilson and I are both former ministers and when you retire as a minister it's quite traumatic. The best definition I heard of what retirement means for a minister is 'when you climb into the back of your car and it doesn't go anywhere'."

Brian Wilson:

"It is a great pleasure to line up against Malcolm Riflkind and welcome him back from Thatcherite exile in Kensington and Chelsea - one of the few recorded successes of the Year of Homecoming."


David McLetchie:

"Last year I spoke at a conference in St Andrews on Saint Andrews' day and I told the audience that Saint Andrew had never set foot in Scotland; had never heard of Scotland; that Scotland, as Scotland did not exist when he was alive and that his connection with Scotland was tenuous to say the least, being based on a small bag of some of his bones being brought to Scotland by a Monk now known as Saint Rule. Nevertheless, he became Scotland's patron saint, which just goes to show that the less you do for this country of ours, the more you are appreciated. That is, of course, because nobody kent his faither."

Jim Sillars:

"When I won the Govan by-election, the poll tax was a very important and pertinent matter and I was always very grateful there wasn't a camera present at Govan Cross one day because I had just finished shouting, about 60 times, 'Ah'm no going tae pay Thatcher's poll tax".
"And a man came up to me and said 'Ah don't know what the hell you're talkin' aboot - she disnae stay here'."

And, as a bonus gag:

"Alistair Darling is the first Trotskyist who ever nationalised a bank and was unhappy about it."

For my money, Jim Sillars just about shaded the comedy, but his side was defeated in the debate, with a close win for the Blues confirmed only after a second show of hands.

You can read full coverage of the discussions in the Government and Public Affairs section of tomorrow's Scotsman.

Chris Mackie, edits the Scotsman's Government and Public Affairs pages where he will be providing a fuller write-up on Thursday.