David Maddox: No place on the Tory front bench for Scotland

David Cameron and the Conservatives have been painfully aware of their lack of support north of the Border. In a radio interview recently Mr Cameron admitted his party would not win many seats, even though they are targeting 11.

For this reason Mr Cameron and his party (at least in Scotland) have been keen to promote the so-called "respect agenda" should they win power in the UK without much of a Scottish mandate.

The details of this are well known and often repeated - ministers regularly visiting, an annual PMQs with MSPs, post Pre-Budget and Budget briefings, the Scottish Secretary giving a verbal report to MSPs on the implications of the Queen's Speech etc.

But respect needs to be symbolic as well, which brings us on to the last Scottish questions in the Commons before the election. This was my second since transferring from Holyrood to Westminster and today, like the last time, it was noticeable that shadow Scottish Secretary David Mundell (pictured) was shunted off the front bench to make way for other (more senior) colleagues for PMQs which followed immediately afterwards. today he was shifted before Scottish questions had even finished.

On both occasions poor Mr Mundell was forced to sit awkwardly on the steps between the back benches.

In comparison Jim Murphy remained on the Labour front bench throughout PMQs.

The sight of the frontbencher responsible for Scottish affairs being pushed aside so unceremoniously is not exactly the sort of respectful image for Scotland that the Tories have been so keen to claim is their own.

David Maddox: Lessons in how to avoid answering questions

If there is one person in the government or British politics as a whole who has a reputation for being able to deal with the press it is Lord Mandelson.
I went to a press conference today which underlined his reputation for having ruthless streak.
The press conference was on a tedious but important announcement on a massive gas pipeline deal from Shetland along with Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy and some representatives of the companies involved.
The two ministers arrived 15 minutes late, allowed for a contract sign photoshoot and then read out the statements provided on the press releases.
At this point Lord Mandelson asked if there were any questions. He took one question on the technicalities which was answered by one of the industry men.
Then Lord Mandelson picked up his papers and along with Mr Murphy literally ran for the door without allowing another question to be asked.
Just to make sure none of the pesky journalists could intercept his lordship on the way out two flunkies were positions to block the media and allow the ministers a free run to the door.
Below may be a picture of Lord Mandelson departing:

Now it may be because only the Scottish press representatives and a few specialist energy industry journalists were there, that he felt he could get away with it, but it was clear that both his Lordship and the normally chatty Scottish Secretary were interested in allowing the press conference to feature any awkward questions and, bizarrely, had planned hasty their getaway prior to the event.

Needless to say the hacks who had given up their lunchtime to wait for the two ministers were less than impressed.

It left you wondering what questions they didn't want to answer.

Feel free to leave suggestions in the comments section, although please note that obscene and defamatory suggestions will be deleted.

David Maddox: Party fundraising

Well if you haven't got Lords Ashcroft or Paul, a friendly union or, in the Lib Dems case, a criminal to fund your election campaign then you have to get down to some good old fashioned fundraising events.
Take for example this invitation circulated around Westminster by two Labour candidates Kerry McCarthy (MP for Bristol East and Labour's Twitter tsar) and Lucy Powell (candidate for Manchester Withington and apparently pal of Eddie Izzard).
The e-mail managed to get sent to all and sundry, including a few political opponents which is why it ended up with me.
The guest of honour and main speaker at this event in a posh London restaurant is no less than International Secretary come Paisley and Renfrewshire South MP Douglas Alexander.

Here's the e-mail (or part of it):
This is your last chance to purchase tickets for tomorrow night’s fundraiser with guest of honour the Rt Hon Douglas Alexander and other special guests!

We have some exciting raffle prizes that are included below! We do hope you are able to make it and forward on to other friends and colleagues that might be interested and encouraged to attend as well.

Many thanks,
Kerry & Lucy

Raffle Prizes:
Bottles of Newcastle Brown Ale signed by Nick Brown and Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown books signed by the Prime Minister
Framed copy of Gordon Brown’s “I will do my utmost” speech with photo of him and Sarah Brown, to be personalised by both.
Auction Prizes:
Bottle of House of Commons whisky signed by Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and Michael Foot
Minimum Wage Bill signed by Gordon Brown, Neil Kinnock, Michael Foot, Jack Jones and Bill Morris
Historic Labour postcards framed and signed by Andy Burnham, Ed Balls, Hilary Benn, Ed Miliband, Alan Johnson, Frank Dobson, David Miliband
Set of five historic Labour postcards framed and signed by Cabinet Ministers Ed Milliband, Jim M, Nick Brown, Tessa Jowell and Jack Straw

Now the sharp eyed among you, including my source, will note that of all the ministers who have helped with the raffle prizes for this event (£40 a ticket by the way, discounted to £380 for a table for 10), the one whose name is not in fully is Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy.
Here are possible reasons why he is simply Jim M:

1. They are English and don't know or care who he is.
2. Jim M is such a laid back character that he doesn't feel the need to be dignified with a full name.
3. He is providing the post match entertainment with a take-off of his near namesakes Boney M. Anybody for Ra Ra Gordsputin...?

David Maddox: Hell of a week

In a week where one leading Scottish politician was complaining about the forces of hell being unleashed on him, while another was apparently trying to suggest that he was next to God (or was that God next to him?) it turns out that a third is actually going try to take on the fiery inferno herself.

But whilst Chancellor Alistair Darling's motive may have been revenge on the Prime Minister and Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy was seemingly hoping to gain some electoral advantage, SNP MSP Christina McKelvie's (pictured top right) stunt is for charity.

Whilst many politicians would walk on hot coals to get elected later this year, Ms McKelvie is to literally do that on 12 March to raise money for motor neurone disease, a condition her father suffered from.

Anybody wishing to sponsor her should go to this link.

*I have just been reminded that this is not Ms McKelvie's first experience of playing with fire. She once admitted to having an interesting tattoo of a dragon.

Eddie Barnes - Lucky Jim

Scotland on Sunday is running an interview with Jim Murphy tomorrow and while he has some harsh words for people in his party who have conceded defeat, the Scottish Secretary was pretty upbeat.

Not surprising when you come to think about it. Murphy, who is running the Scottish Labour campaign, has the best job in the Labour cabinet. The main reason is that he won't be involved in the campaign in London. That will be hell. Defeat is in the air, nobody and everybody will be in charge, and they're going to have to watch as the Conservatives out-spend them by miles. You can just imagine the whole thing collapsing as thoughts turn to casting blame on one another, and the succession to follow.

Murphy on the other hand has it relatively easy. In Scotland, Labour can play at being in opposition, attacking the SNP government for everything (including, as we have seen this week, the weather). Meanwhile the spectre of an Conservative government being elected at Westminster may well spook their substantial core vote back into the polling booths. Labour chiefs are now claiming that this core vote is more motivated than it has been for at least the last five years (there's no way of checking this, I hasten to add).

On top of this, I've picked up distinctly worried tones from senior Scottish Tories in the last few days who fear that the Hoon-Hewitt coup might actually hand Gordon Brown the 'sympathy vote' in Scotland. This seemed to me initially to be the natural paranoia of the front runner, but I wonder. Meanwhile, one thing we don't know yet is whether the SNP is really going to plough that much cash and effort into the coming campaign, particularly when it's got Holyrood to win back next year. Holyrood has to be their priority, if priorities have to be made.

Lucky Jim indeed.

PS: However, are we forgetting the LibDems in all of this? Iain Dale has some drawn some interesting conclusions today on how the Libs could end up with 16 seats in Scotland, with four gains from Labour. His basic point is that we ignore local trends at our peril. Quite. Dale also thinks the SNP won't get anywhere near Alex Salmond's hoped-for 20 seats.

David Maddox: Currying favour at Christmas

The idea that Christmas parties reflect the fortunes of their hosts seems to be confirmed with a comparison between this year and last year of the bashes arranged by Scotland's leading political rivals - SNP First Minister Alex Salmond and Labour's Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy.
Last year, despite the SNP losing heavily to Labour in the Glenrothes by-election, Mr Salmond still gave the impression he could turn water into wine or at least walk on water, while Labour appeared to be stuck in the doldrums.
So the 2008 Christmas party arranged by Mr Salmond for Scottish political hacks involved top notch award winning curry, lots of drinks and a long reception at Bute House, the First Minister's official residence.
Meanwhile Mr Murphy's staff forgot to send invitations to the media for an event which involved a few drinks and crisps and was lumped together with inviting various parts of Scotland's great and good.
How different it is this year. Last Thursday Mr Murphy entertained the political hacks with curry and drinks, including Scotland's strongest beer (since Brewdog's Tokyo was banned), at 7.8 per cent, perhaps symbolic of Labour's decision to torpedo the SNP's minimum pricing for booze policy. Overall the event, as did the host's demeanour, reflected a far more confident relaxed attitude encouraged by rising political fortunes.
Labour of course have just thumped the SNP in Glasgow North East while Mr Salmond appears to be struggling with the SNP behind in the polls and having no chance of getting its referendum. There is also the small matter of the education crisis which led to the sacking of Fiona Hyslop from the cabinet.
Which brings us on to Mr Salmond's hastily arranged Christmas do for the media this year. This afternoon we learnt that it has now been diaried at the Scottish Government offices in St Andrew's House for a few drinks for Thursday, the busiest day in parliament, for an hour and 15 minutes at 5.45pm, a time when most journalists are stuck on deadlines and unable to attend.
Mr Salmond's office said this was because the original date clashed with the Tartan Bollocks (The Scottish Parliament Journalist Association's annual dinner named after the award for the worst story of the year -NB this is not the story which cybernats most disapprove of).
But, many have seen this last minute arrangement as a reflection of the First Minister's waning fortunes. It certainly suggests he may be less happy than he was spending his time with journalists and that he is not exactly pleased with the coverage he is getting currently.
Of course the irony, if this is true, is that a party on the down would have more cause to try to get in the press's good books to get back into favour, but it seems that's not how politics, at least in Scotland, works.

David Maddox: The growing influence of George Lyon

In these days when black apparently is the new white and vice versa, little should surprise. After all this day that is now drawing to an end was the day that the Tories called for bankers to lose their bonuses and the once upon a time socialist Labour party defended the bonuses.

Then we were also asked to believe that the avid Celtic fan and Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy had had a word with the bank to keep his team's bitter rivals Rangers in business and players.

But it is the story of a Rangers fan that is even more interesting - former Liberal Democrat Scottish Minister George Lyon (pictured right).

When he was turfed out as an MSP in 2007 many (including some in his own party) hoped they were bidding a not so fond farewell to the controversial politician. However, in June this year he returned to frontline politics as his party's one and only Scottish MEP. Since then there have been growing signs of his influence within the party at a time when the Scottish leader Tavish Scott appears to be losing his grip slightly.

Even the unfortunate affair of Rangers was taken jokingly by some as a sign of Lyon's power. Mr Scott issued a press release earlier today demanding that Mr Murphy intervened. was this because the Rangers loving George Lyon asked him to it was queried in the corridors of Holyrood?

But joking apart, there is one serious issue with which the two men appear to be having a power struggle - an independence referendum. Mr Lyon made it clear ahead of the party's conference in Bournemouth that he thought there should be one, breaking the party line set by Mr Scott to oppose a plebiscite. odd considering that Mr Lyon clearly enjoys singing Rule Britannia. Since then there has been a groundswell of support among members, candidates and some of the grandees in favour of Mr Lyon's position, despite Mr Scott's protestations.

The two shall have their day at the behind closed doors Lib Dem special conference which will discuss the matter. The way things are going you would not bet against Mr Lyon coming out on top.

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.

David Maddox: Is the SNP trying to suppress democracy?

Interesting developments today over the great TV debate debate, if you get my drift.
Gordon Brown finally accepts, if somewhat reluctantly, to have one in principle. To be fair on him this is further than any of his predecessors have gone, even if he did have to be harried into accepting the idea.
Then, rather sinisterly, the SNP announce they will go to court to block any Scottish viewing of such a debate if they are not allowed to participate.
The Nationalists' argument is obviously that as arguably the best supported party north of the Border they would be unfairly disadvantaged if Alex Salmond or Westminster leader Angus Robertson were not part of it.
No doubt they still believe in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the 1930s that separation from the UK is the most important issue to discuss - most people in Britain might disagree.
If this were a Scottish election then they would have a point, but it is not. It is a UK election and this is the opportunity for people to see who they would rather want as Prime Minister - Gordon Brown or David Cameron.
There is just about enough moral justification to include Nick Clegg as leader of the Lib Dems, even though nobody but himself actually seriously believes he will be resident in Number 10 any time next year.
It would be a nonsense for tens of millions of non-Scottish voters to have to listen to a party they cannot vote for and a subject (Scottish independence) for which they care little and have no real say.
And where do we draw the line? Should we have the Greens, UKIP and the BNP who have more supporters across the UK than the SNP? Should we have all the leaders of Plaid Cymru and the various Northern Irish parties?
No we should not. The whole thing would become a joke.
So what the SNP want, essentially, is to make sure that Scots are the only voters who cannot watch these debates and take a view on who would be the best PM for Britain. It would be Scots, thanks to the SNP, who would have their democratic rights undermined.
The one compromise that seems reasonable here is the suggestion that there should be debates involving other cabinet ministers and their shadows.
If this were to happen Messrs Salmond or Roberston could take on Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy, David Mundell of the Tories and Alistair Carmichael for the Lib Dems in a specific Scottish edition on STV or/ and BBC Scotland.
However, we know from previous occasions that Mr Salmond's ego is too big to debate with mere Scottish secretaries or ministers. He refused an offer to take on Mr Murphy at a conference about 10 days ago and famously was mocked by Jeremy Paxman when he refused to engage with David Cairns.
It will be interesting to see how this all resolves itself. But my guess is that it may not be Gordon Brown's reluctance that stops these debates but the SNP's hubris.

scotsman.com to host live debate with Secretary of State for Scotland Jim Murphy

DO you have a question you would like to ask the Secretary of State for Scotland?

Readers of scotsman.com will be able to put their questions to Jim Murphy in a one-hour question-and-answer debate next month.

The live text debate is the first in a series on scotsman.com that will see Scotland's top politicians put on the spot by the country's electorate.

Jim Murphy will be answering questions live on scotsman.com on October 6 from 4pm alongside responding to those submitted before the event.

scotsman.com editor Alan Greenwood said:

"We are delighted to begin what we hope will be a series of lively discussions with Scotland's key decision-makers.

"Scotland is at the forefront of debate in the UK and on the international stage so this live debate couldn't be more timely.

"The site has long been a forum for political debate however this is the first that a leading politician will come face-to-face with our audience."

To log on to the debate visit scotsman.com/jimmurphywebchat where you can also set an email reminder.

You can submit a question before the event by emailing enquiries@scotsman.com

Questions will be selected on merit by scotsman.com.

David Maddox: Revising the political lexicon

I've just returned from yet another conference on 10 years of devolution although, as The Scotsman is the official media partner, I should say that Scottish Parliament and Government: 1999 to 2009: Scotland after the first decade, the possible future, organised by the consultancy Mackay Hannah is one of the best ones I've attended yet.

It's two keynote speakers were inevitably First Minister Alex Salmond and his Labour rival Secretary of State for Scotland Jim Murhpy (no not Holyrood Labour leader Iain Gray).

There had been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing over when they should speak. One was supposed to open and the close, in the end they were both placed at the beginning. Then Mr Murphy tried to turn it into a debate, an idea quickly dodged by the FM.

It was noticeable that the conference was chaired by a professional mediator, John Sturrock QC of Core Solutions.

The end result was two speeches and Q&A sessions where the two outlined ideas and thoughts familiar to many of us who have heard them regularly before. However, if ideas were not a new currency the two at least tried to invent some new words and phrases for their ongoing conflict.

Firs up, Mr Salmond, managed to invent a new word - "bandiage" - as in the general political bandiage, otherwise known to the rest of us as "debate."

Not to be outdone, Mr Murphy decided to go digital on the First Minister, so to speak. A referendum, he said, is "a black and white solution to an HD conundrum." I should explain to the less technically minded that HD refers to high definition the latest ultra visual technology used for televisions.
He went on: "Nationalism is the pathway to the past, we are in the fast lane to the interconnected super highway."
One suspects it was all getting a little geeky for the audience and there was some bafflement at his phrase TGI Britain, which after a moment's thought turned out to be "thank God it's Britain."

But both seemed quite pleased with their innovation in political lexicography, so I would guess we will hear these and further additions more in the coming months.

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).

David Maddox: Murphy's law

You know when the silly season has begun because political parties start sending pictures of their opponents committing parking violations.
But this one is wholly deserved. Labour yesterday released a picture of SNP Transport Minister Stewart Stevenson using disabled parking spots for his electric car test (scroll down to the post two below this one) accompanied by the usual expressions of shock and outrage. So today the SNP have responded.
They found me this picture of Labour Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy with his car parked on double yellow lines near the Palace of Westminster. To make matters worse it actually appears on the Scotland Office website.

I seem to remember that there are some security risk issues about parking in that area too.
But the real lesson here is political parties in glass houses should not throw stones.
I guess we won't be having any games like this off the Lib Dems because we all remember the time when former Scottish leader Nicol Stephen parked his campaign bus on double yellow lines too.

Gerri Peev: Murphy tunes in to fantasy panel

Back in December, Jim Murphy, the Scottish Secretary, announced he would convene a panel of economic and academic experts to come up with solutions for the recession in Scotland. This would be a group of people in tune with the problems on the ground, rather than the types to write letters to newspapers, he said.

He promised to come up with a cast list by January. It is now March 18, the official jobless figure for the UK is 2 million and the IMF has warned Britain will weather the recession worse than any other industrialised nation

David Mundell, the Shadow Scottish Secretary, grilled Murphy over this at Scottish Questions today, asking for the reason the delay on naming the experts.

"I am sure that the 1,000 additional people in the dole queues of Scotland this month, and their families, will very be interested to hear the Secretary of State’s solutions. In December, he announced that he was putting together a council of economic advisers, who would be named in January. Since then, we have heard nothing. What is the reason for that delay? Is he trying to avoid the mistakes of his predecessor, who used to vaunt the fact that Sir Fred Goodwin represented Scotland in the Chancellor’s high-level group on financial services? Does the Secretary of State think that his Government no longer need economic advice, or is it perhaps that nobody wants to be associated with his group?"

Murphy hit back: "I made no such announcement, then or since. The announcement that I made was about how to get those involved in academia and campaigning together with experts in poverty to ensure that the poorest could see a way through this recession, so that there would not be a generational legacy as a consequence of that, as there was after previous Tory recessions."

According to Mr Murphy's own speech given at the time, however, (a summary of which was in The Scotsman), he said: "I am announcing this morning that I will establish a new Scottish panel to advise and inform my work in the Government. I will invite experts, advice and voluntary organisations to join this important group. The expertise and local knowledge it will draw on will help our understanding of the specific nature of the impact of the situation facing individuals and families, and how the Government can continue to do what we can to help and support people through the tough times ahead."

So what was wrong with Mundell's questioning? According to sources (or should that be pedants) close to the Scottish Secretary, it was the use of the word "council".

OK, panel it is then. So how many times has this panel met? Er, none, according to the Scotland Office. The first meeting is on March 30 in Glasgow, when an unnamed group of "four or five" academics will meet. I was told that the Secretary does in fact meet individual experts frequently "rather than convening in a formal panel".

Perhaps it would have been better not to publicise something which does not exist and was probably never going to happen then?

Gerri Peev: Wishart off the guest list?

As a former Runrig keyboardist, the SNP's Pete Wishart is used to being catapulted to the front of the queue at private parties.]

Since politics is meant to be showbiz for ugly people [no offence intended here] it is not surprising he is shocked at being left out of many events at the Scotland Office.

Ever since his nemesis Jim Murphy took over at the helm at the Scotland Office, Wishart is convinced that he is being left off the guest list. So much so that he has written to the Scotland Office demanding the official guest list.

Ann McKechin, the minister, has been forced to reply that "The Scotland Office does not hold full invitation lists for the events it hosts". This was because there are "invariably alterations" including late invitations that were not always recorded. She goes on to say that "where third parties host functions at the Scotland Office, they are responsible for their own guest lists and these are not submitted to the Scotland Office for approval".

Wishart has seized on this admission saying, writing back to the minister that "for obvious reasons, that is not a sensible [or] secure arrangement for events hosted in a government building".

He said that the initial claim that the Scotland Office did not hold invitation lists was "not so much unbelievable as it is bizarre".

He reiterated his call for the guest list. The Steamie will keep you updated.

It seems that unlike other SNP MPs who also spend a lot of time questioning the purpose of the Scotland Office, Wishart is unique in being "snubbed". Could it be anything to do with the fact that he and Murphy do not speak to each other?

This correspondent remembers once replying to a Scotland Office invitation correcting her title from "Mr" to "Ms". The response was surprising but hilarious: "Our press officer assured us you were a man". Note to self: need more flattering byline picture.

Ross Lydall: the SNP response to Jim Murphy

Further to my Jim Murphy interview, the SNP Westminster group leader Angus Robertson issued the following statement in response to the Scottish Secretary's claims about the First Minister:

“For Jim Murphy, politics seems to be about personal attacks and he needs to raise the level of his contribution. The Scottish Government is delivering an effective economic recovery programme, and it is vitally important that it is not undermined by Westminster-imposed cuts to public spending in Scotland.
“If Mr Murphy wanted to make a constructive contribution then he should dissuade Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling from slashing Scotland's budget by 500m a year from 2010/11.
“The reality is that relationships between the Scottish and UK governments are generally good, and would be a good deal better without the Scotland Office, which is basically an irritant in the body politic. A much better system would be for the devolved administrations to deal with Downing Street directly via the Cabinet Office.
"Jim Murphy’s typically unctuous attack on the SNP government underlines precisely why the Scotland Office is such an irrelevance.”

Ross Lydall: That Jim Murphy interview uncut

Due to constraints on space, my interview with Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy appeared in an abridged form in today's Scotsman. For the sake of completeness, I attach pretty much the full transcript. The interview was carried out at Dover House, London, on Wednesday 25 February, immediately before Mr Murphy and the Prime Minister met First Minister Alex Salmond, and other leaders of the devolved governments, to discuss the economy etc.

Question: Will the job of Scottish Secretary disappear? "Not any time soon," he said.... "If, at some point in the distant future, when the devolution settlement has settled down in Northern Ireland, at some point in the future you may have a Secretary of State for the Nations." But such matters had been entirely knocked off the political agenda by the economic crisis.

He said it was "wrong" to combine the jobs of Defence Secretary and Scottish Secretary. "It was a mistake to combine the two jobs. Des [Browne] had an impossible job. I thought he did the impossible really well. But it was imbalanced, particularly when Northern Ireland and Wales had a full-time Secretary of State. It reduced Scotland in the hierarchy of the Cabinet. I think we're back to where it should be."

Is the Scottish Secretary or the First Minister the most important politician in Scotland? "For me it's not a competition about who is the main politician in Scotland. Gordon Brown is the main politician in Scotland, not Alex Salmond or Jim Murphy. Alistair Darling is probably the second most [important] politician in Scotland.
"In terms of public perception, Scottish Secretary - it's not the best job title in the first place anyway, is it? I'm relaxed about it. Secretary of State for Scotland is a bit more understood. Des was spending so much time on defence that you can understood why people would say: What is the publicly understood function of that job?"

Asked about the Labour submission to the Calman Commission and reports that there was opposition among some Scots Labour MPs to borrowing powers for the Scottish Government: "I think there were a couple [of Scots Labour MPs] who were critical but it's the Labour party policy. We went through a process. This is what we settled on. We are a party of thousands of members. There will be people who don't agree. That is fine."

Who drew up the submission? "Iain [Gray] did the vast majority of it, I played a supporting role." He added: "I'm very happy with every word in the document. Iain has crafted it really sensibly and it's the right thing to do."

What is his personal view about borrowing powers, and what the Calman Commission should propose? "Wait and see what the report says, the recommendations say... We set up this Calman process and it has to be independent, I'm not going to seek to influence it. By me telling you a view, I would be misconstrued as trying to influence it. I think Ken Calman has gone about it in an really methodical, extraodrinarily professional way, and I'm not going to second guess his work."

Does the Labour submission mean that Westminster is no longer, by itself, able to fulful all the needs of the Scottish people? "No, that argument was had 12, 14 years ago about can Westminster fulful the needs. That is why we had devolution in the first place. The Labour party has argued since its inception that a Westminster parliament couldn't fulfil its needs. Kier Hardie argued that Westminster couldn't fulfil Scotland's needs. Since the day the Labour party was formed, our view was that a UK parliament by and of itself had to be complemented by a Scottish parliament. It's been the heartbeat of the Labour party since we were formed, this idea that Scotland should have two parliaments."

How has Holyrood performed in its first decade? "Great, genuinely. We are coming up to the 10th anniversary of the first elections and the commencement of the parliament. In the first 10 years, did the House of Commons make mistakes? I suspect it probably made one every day that it sat. I think it's been really refreshing for Scotland. I think it's led the way in some important ways. It has been a real success, and needs to continue to be."

Has Holyrood replaced the Commons as the real forum for political debate? "It fluctuates day to day. I don't see it as a competition between the two."

Is the status quo an option on the constitution/for Calman? "I think there is a general problem, which is that they're {the Scottish Government] not financially accountable for the decisions, the spending decisions that are taken. That is the main point that has got to be addressed. There are other points that have got to be addressed, like the working relationships between the two parliaments and the two governments, which are nowhere near good enough. Calman is looking at this, but the idea that there is not enough of sharing of ideas, sharing of experiences among select committees, for example. The intergovernmental, sub-committees don't cotribute enough to cross-border thinking. There is grandstanding, unnecessary grandstanding. The one that has really annoyed me is this thing about drugs. The welfare reform bill that has come before [the UK] parliament. In future, it will be a condition of people on incapacity benefits, because they are drug addicts, will have their benefit stopped unless they take up treatment. But the Scottish Government are refusing to play ball on that, entirely. I think it's unncessary grandstanding. I'm perplexed as to why.
"More generally, in the economic circumstances, the big story of the year, the only story of the year, in the economy is that I just think too often the Scottish Government in general, and the First Minister in particular, is putting party before country. He is arguing the SNP's agenda rather than Scotland's agenda, and Scotland's priorities... For them, it's a chance to reflate old grievances, I don't know whether in light of their economic model being exposed by the reality that we are going to have to accept this as part the vocabulary of Scottish politics, whereby it's 'blame London' in preparation for their referendum in November 2010."

How does he regard cross-border working? "It works both ways. The Scottish government doesn't come here [Westminster] to give evidence. What I'm saying is that I think we can improve the current system. Again I don't have a prescription for improvement, I just know it can be improved."

Would he be prepared to give evidence to a Holyrood select committee? "I think as part of a wider deal in the future, as part of a new arrangements in the future, not in a haphazard one-off way. There are issues about accountability, but as part of a wider process."
Who would come the other way and give evidence to Westminster? "Having identifed the problem, I don't have a pre-cooked solution. But I think it is the type of thing we could look at. Certainly at least for the time of the economic crisis, it's something we should be doing. I think the working relationship between central government, the UK government, and the three devolved administrations - the Welsh Assembly Government, the Northern Ireland executive and the Scottish Government could be improved. It's not a London-Edinburgh thing, it's a general devolution thing."

Has he any desire to become MSP/Scottish Government minister? "I have got a fantastic job here. I think it's arrogance for me to announce [that I would be going to Scotland]. Iain Gray is doing a great job. I'm confident he will be the next First minister. I got elected against my expectations in 1997, as you know. It was the most Conservative seat in Scotland. It's a fantastic job. I don't want to take people for granted by switching."

But would he not be attracted to a Scottish Parliament with greater powers? "I'm happy where I am. It's also a challenge to stay where I am, with the voters of East Renfrewshire."

What does he think of the standards of debate at Holyrood? "I have seen clips on the news and they seem to shout a lot. But that is up to them. You wouldn't get away with that in the Commons. I don't watch it very often, but occasionally I will see it and they will do a lot of shouting."

What are his expectations of the general election? "We have got a fight on our hands but I'm confident we can win. We have got a real fight on our hands. How did I get elected in 1997? I got elected as a 29-year-old in a constituency where the Labour party hadn't won for 70 years. Why? Because the Conservatives had run out of energy and ideas. There was no purpose in voting for John Major. The contrast between the agenda we had, and the one that John Major had run out of, was pretty stark. That was in retrospect probably the easiest election in history for the Labour party to win.
"The next one is the most difficult, and it's rightly the most difficult. We are trying to double what no Labour government has ever done before. No Labour government has ever served two full terms in its history. Now we're trying to get a crack at a fourth full term. Therefore its rightly going to be more difficult. It should be more difficult. Because you have got to continually prove yourself. You can get frustrated about this, but I don't get frustrated. There is never going to be a belated sense of gratitude for what you have done, there just isn't. In normal times - we will see what happens in the economic crisis - there has never been a belated sense of gratitude to fuel contemporary content for what you do next. Even that 1945 government didn't gete two full terms. It was back out of office a few months after its second victory, after doing all the remarkable reforms. The Labour party doesn't get elected off the back of what it has done. It gets re-elected on the basis of what it's going to do. This will be the toughest. But I am certain we can win this election, certain we can win it."

Will voters not believe it is time for a change? "In politics, nothing is inevitable. You create your own energy."

Would Labour's chances increase if Gordon Brown waits until the last possible minute? "It's not going to be easy regardless of when it is. People will rightly be feeling anxious, worried and hurt because of what the economy is going through. No amount of political argument or speeches or clever documents by any of the parties will be able to ignore that fact, that there will be a real sense of anxiety and hurt among the public. It was really about which party is able to say this is the best plan to get the country [back on its feet].
"We did all the easy terms in the first term in government. You introduce the national minimum wage. It's a legislative command - you pass a law and it has to happen. The harder thing is about trying to drive value for money in public service improvements. You can't pass a law - it's cultural change and it's delivery. All of these things are more difficult."

How will Scotland vote? Will there be the same willingness to vote Labour or a rise in the SNP vote? "We have always got to re-earn people's affections. There is a trend about people being more retail and less tribal about their politics. That is a good thing. It's a reflection of modern society that people be more retail and less tribal. But what does that mean? You have got to be better. You have got to be better than all of the others and not rely on what their father did or what their grandmother did in terms of voting intentions."

Are there lessons to be learned from the Glasgow East and Glenrothes by-elections? "Glenrothes showed that politics is local. The global and national thing sets the scene, but people are increasingly local in how they make their decisions. That I think was the lesson in both Glasgow East and Glenrothes. I think there's lessons for party organisation, but that's for the Labour party to work out, not me.
"I think the next election will be about local responses, community responses and families' feelings about their communities in the context of the global recession. The backdrop is going to be the global recession. I think that, when it comes, this will be the most personalised general election campaign in history."

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown: "I have not hidden the fact that I have friendship and affection for Tony Blair. That would be silly. But I speak more to Gordon Brown than I ever did to Tony Blair. Gordon has been remarkably open and really engaged and engaging. All of that stuff is in the past, that Blairite-Brownite stuff. I'm just New Labour. I'm comfortable with that."

Life in Cabinet: "Every meeting is open. I would describe it as open, pretty refreshing atmosphere where you can contribute to your own policy area or anyone else's policy area, and the conversation kind of runs and rolls.... Banks, Royal Bank, HBOS, Calman, these things come up pretty regularly. It's a phenomenal experience. It's all these things you would expect me to say, but I have to say them because they're true. You think yourself, how much would you like to do it? You sit round that table where so many of the big decisions in history were made. And this isn't a kind of mock Glasgwegian working class chip on my shoulder kind of thing, but you sometimes pinch yourself just how fortunate I am. I consider myself to be the luckiest man in Scotland, the most fortunate man in Scotland to have the position I have and the honour that I have. I know that sounds kind of schmaltzy... There is no sense that there are only three people allowed to speak. Everyone has their say when they want to have their say. It's a remarkably open meeting. He runs a very, very good cabinet, he runs it in a very open way."

Ross Lydall: Murphy's blog is first with his news

It attracted a few snide comments at its launch in October, but Jim Murphy's blog has built a regular following, it seems.

According to figures supplied in a Parliamentary written answer to the SNP's arch inqusitor Angus MacNeil, the Scottish Secretary's blog attracted 5,077 hits in its first month, 4,910 in its second, 4,450 in its third and experienced a New Year revival with 5,142 hits in January.

Recent entries range from Mr Murphy being delayed in Scotland as a result of snow at Heathrow - and then going sledging with his family - to his visit to the Gorbals with Gordon Brown, during which time the Prime Minister received his long-awaited first call from President Obama.

He has also used it to break news about initiatives to develop a cross-border approach to tackling football hooliganism and to give his thoughts on the "British jobs for British workers" row that saw wildcat strikes across Scotland. Well done, Jim - if only your press office were as keen to publicise your activities, you'd be securing double the press coverage. The blog can be found at: www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk

David Maddox: Award winning curry versus recycled beer

Jim Murphy, Labour's new Secretary of State for Scotland, has made quite an impression in the last nine weeks since he was elevated to the cabinet. At last there seems to be somebody from the UK government willing and able to take on Alex Salmond.
So it was that the two Christmas gatherings by Scotland's high hegions this week seemed to almost represented two rival courts in a medieval city.
But the Christmas party bragging honours probably went to Mr Salmond this year. At his do in Bute House (the First Minister's official residence) on Tuesday for journalists he managed to pull out the curry chef of the year to provide the night's cuisine.
Meanwhile on Thursday in Melville Crescent Mr Murphy had a star studded cast of civic Scotland, including the Cardinal Keith O'Brien, but the fair on offer was less impressive, perhaps reflecting these more frugal times of the credit crunch.
Guests had a choice between wine and beer to go with their crisps. And the beer, it turned out, was left over bottles from a job lot bought for a Polish National Day reception last year.
"We don't like anything to go to waste," one of Mr Murphy's officials noted.