David Maddox: Nick Clegg offers to hold your nose for you

The speech by Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg will be covered in tomorrow's Scotsman, but its message was pretty blunt and not exactly expected.

He wants to have the chance to hold the balance of power so his pitch has got to be that only a hung parliament can deliver change if he does.

But these lines are of particular interest:

"I want to warn you about something that is coming in the next few weeks.
"We are going to hear a nonsensical claim from the two old parties designed to scare people into voting against their best interests.
"The Conservatives will say: vote Lib Dem… get Brown.
"Labour will say: vote Lib Dem… get Cameron.
"Don’t believe it for a second. They are wrong."

He added later:

"Some people are thinking of holding their noses and voting for Brown just to keep out the Conservatives. I say to you: don’t do it.
"Some people are thinking of holding their noses and voting for Cameron just to get rid of Labour. Don’t do it.
"You have a once in a generation opportunity for real change."

The problem with this message is that if he holds the balance of power we will still get either Gordon Brown or David Cameron as Prime Minister, we will not get Nick Clegg bar an extraordinary shift in political opinion in the UK.

So in reality what he is saying is let me make the choice for you. In his words he is offering to be the one who holds the nose.

Monty: Will a real Liberal ever stand up?

Since I resigned from the Conservative Party in 2005 I have found the liberation from feeling compelled to support most, if not all, of what its leaders might espouse intellectually invigorating and good for the soul.

In 2007 I gave only my regional vote to the Conservatives and in 2010 I continue to have an open mind – open, that is, to who best might remove Gordon Brown from office and consequently begin to reduce the involvement of the state in our daily lives.

My mother's family was of Scottish Borders Liberal stock. My father's family was from Leith with Labour in their blood. I don't have a Tory gene in my make-up - it was because the Conservatives under Thatcher offered the closest thing to free trade classical Liberals that I fell under her spell.

I have sometimes found the policies of the Liberal Democrats on public finances (scaling back debt) or taxation (using tax cuts to stimulate growth) to be attractive and I have always admired the abilities of Tavish Scott. A likeable politician whom I have played golf and football with, he has that most desirous of things that too few politicians possess – a hinterland.

I could easily consider supporting the Liberal Democrats were they not such slavish followers of the European Union or have a tendency to ban everything that is meant to be bad for us or society (or was that just Donald Gorrie speaking?) Still, at this coming election I might be persuaded to give them my vote, thanks probably to some, if not all, of the utterances of Vince Cable – in particular his willingness to speak out against the unsustainable public spending programme of Brown's government before the lily-livered duet of Cameron and Osborne found the location of their spleens (revealed to them by a focus group, no doubt).

Sadly, I now think I am going to strike the Liberal Democrats off my list of possibilities. Tavish Scott has just announced that if the Liberal Democrats have anything to do with it they will see to it that Holyrood will receive £300 million that it would otherwise not get so that it can spend it on... well it doesn't matter what.

The point is that even in this worst British recession of living memory for which the spend, spend, spend attitude of collectivist politicians of all colours has a lot to answer for Tavish still wants to spend rather than cut.

What a shame. What a wrong turning. What a turn-off.

Will no one at Holyrood tell it as it is, that the spending in the fabricated debt-financed "good years" was too high then and it is certainly too high now? Will no one in Scotland stand up for the virtues of true Liberalism - that the road to prosperity is a more modest state doing less better and costing less?

Will a real Liberal ever stand up?

David Maddox: Change of Lib Dem strategy?

Those of you who take an interest in party election leaflets - and I guess if you can be bothered to read this blog it will probably include you - then the utterances of Alistair Carmichael, the Liberal Democrat's Shadow Scottish Secretary, on Newsnight Scotland last night may have come as a surprise.
To put this in context I would ask you to remember the classic line used by all parties now, but developed by the Lib Dems, of only "only we can beat.... here." Usually it is accompanied by a spurious bar chart showing neck and neck support between their candidate and the sitting MP.
Often the claim bore little resemblance to reality. I remember as a 13-year-old in 1987 helping my mother deliver such leaflets for the then Lib/ SDP Alliance candidate in Norwich North only for the chap to come a very poor third.
Perhaps more famously Linda Gorn, the Lib Dem candidate in the Holyrood by-election for Moray in 2006 made a complete fool of herself by basing the campaign on that message. She disappeared shortly after coming third.
but last night Mr Carmichael said the idea of "binary political choices" was "condescending and arrogant".
He added: "The politicians have got to get real here, they've got to recognise that there's a major problem of political disengagement and instead of telling people what choice they have got why don't you just try and listen to them for a while and engage in proper, serious political debate about political issues, about the state of our economy about the state of our democracy and about the fact that most people don't see any solutions coming from a broken political system at all."
He meant this in a context of the election being one between Labour and the Tories or Labour and the SNP, but it certainly makes that old Lib Dem leaflet slogan look odd too.

Chris Mackie: A bluffer's guide

As the SNP education brief begins life in a post Fiona Hyslop world, the clear line coming from the opposition parties is that her demotion (ok, sacking) was an example of Alex Salmond blinking first in the latest stage of his Call-My-Bluff style of minority government.

That the opposition felt emboldened enough to stare him down in his latest threat to walk out was emblematic of the torrid seven days his government has experienced. A simmering dispute with local councils, a lukewarm response to the referendum plans and ongoing education travails all added up to make it a week to forget for Salmond and co.

It is certainly true that the reshuffle (alright, sacking) has emboldened the opposition benches - the number of gleeful Tories, LibDems and Labourites eating lunch in the Parliament's canteen yesterday was significantly higher than it usually is.

But Alex Salmond is nothing if not a canny operator and he may well have felt that his powder would be better left dry to help him through the forthcoming budget negotiations, especially as the political tide is flowing against him in the run up to Christmas.

Much more is at stake for the SNP in those deliberations, and to take his government to the brink for the sake of loyalty to a colleague would have left him with much less political capital to play with in the new session. Yes, his position is lessened by this climbdown, but to stake his government on an education secretary that was the very definition of "embattled" would have been denser than the 198 brochure used to herald the referendum Bill.

Expect to see more of this in the New Year, with or without the chairmanship or Robert Robinson.

David Maddox: Breaking news - first cabinet casualty

Fiona Hyslop (pictured) has just been removed as education secretary by Alex Salmond after a string of failures.

She is replaced by Mike Russell. In turn Ms Hyslop takes over Mr Russell's old external affairs and culture portfolio in a non-cabinet role. However, Mr Salmond does not feel he can trust her with the referendum bill and has taken control of that personally.

It seems the final blow was a threat by the Lib Dems to hold a vote of no confidence on Thursday in Ms Hyslop. Interestingly, previous threats like this have been met with a threat by Mr Salmond to get the government to resign. But he clearly was not willing to stake the keys of Bute House on Ms Hyslop's woeful record.

Read more about it in tomorrow's Scotsman.

David Maddox: Political betting

I received a slightly cocky e-mail this morning from a Labour spindoctor concerning his prospects of winning a bet the two of us have on the next general election.
At the start of the by-election he bet me £10 that the SNP will have less than 10 seats after the next general election.
And, according to his e-mail, after Labour's crushing defeat in Glasgow last night he is confident that I will be handing over a state sponsored RBS note some point next year.
I took the bet because I'm always happy to receive free money and my opinion has not changed from last night.
True, the SNP juggernaut came to a halt in Glenrothes and last night only confirmed that the breakthrough needed is still a long way off. The SNP will struggle to get Alex Salmond's target of 20 seats. It seems a long time ago now since the SNP were passing around a list showing that all Labour's seats bar one would fall to them on the basis of the Glasgow East swing.
However, they will gain seats. They managed to win six in 2005 with a mere 17.6% of the vote, they are now regularly polling above 30% in Westminster voting intentions and haven't dropped below 25%.
The other factor is that the Lib Dem vote appears to be disintegrating before our eyes. The party is running at around 12/13% in the polls (half what it was in 2005) and last night came a dismal sixth with just a handful of votes. Most of the disaffected Lib Dems appear to be going to the Nationalists and, to a lesser extent, the Tories.
As things stand my prediction for the SNP at the moment is 14 seats, four for the Tories, nine for the Lib Dems and 32 for Labour. Obviously, though, the chances are I will be very wrong.

Glasgow North East: Eileen Baxendale, Liberal Democrats; Campaigning for Change

I think this is a great idea from the Steamie. I would love to see more newspapers and media outlets adopt innovative approaches to help get more people engaged in politics.

I want to say right from the start that I think it was simply outrageous that the Labour party have allowed the people in Glasgow North East to go without an MP for so long, well over 125 days now. This just shows that the Labour Government has lost touch with the people it serves.

Since this campaign kicked off all those weeks ago, I have been working hard, knocking on doors and listening to people right across the constituency.

The message that I am getting again and again is that people are fed up being overlooked and ignored and that they want change. They want their politician’s focus to be on sorting the economy, creating more local jobs and tackling local crime.

I believe that it is Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats that have the policies and ideas to make a real difference on these issues.

To really tackle these problems we need more than just sensationalist, headline grabbing soundbites. We need a new approach.

On the economy and banking, it is Vince Cable that has been the voice of reasoned authority over recent months. It was he who first warned about the impending economic collapse. Labour were too slow to act and the Tories were simply nowhere on sorting out the economy.

On tackling crime and creating jobs, Liberal Democrats believe that this is best done at a local level. We are committed to putting the heart back into our communities and giving local people a greater say over their own affairs.

Locking everyone up and sending our young people to prison is not the best way to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour. We need more community based initiatives that tackle the root causes of why young people in our society get involved in crime in the fist place.

Labour’s recession has led to tough times for all of us. The Liberal Democrats want to sort out the tax system to give a boost to those on low and middle incomes. We want to raise the income tax threshold so those on less than £10,000 a year don’t pay tax. This would put around £700 a year back into the pockets of those on low and middle incomes.

It is the Liberal Democrats who are the only party offering real progressive change to our society. Unlike the SNP it is the Liberal Democrats who can make a real difference at Westminster and stand up for the people of Glasgow North East.

David Maddox: Preparing for the end of the world in 2012

So it looks like a referendum on independence is now most likely to happen in 2012 if at all, as predicted in The Scotsman on Saturday by a senior SNP source and Professor John Curtice.
After the Lib Dems decided not to support the referendum bill next year at their conference on Saturday, but have clearly left the option open for the future we can fairly predict it will be a negotiating tool after the 2011 election.
However, today's Yougov poll on Holyrood voting intentions suggesting Labour would be the biggest party with 45 seats compared to the SNP's 41 seats in a George W. Bush style victory where they win less votes, means that it is not totally certain the Lib Dems would jump into bed with the Nationalists.
But, assuming for a moment that they do and the price of a ministerial Mondeo for Tavish Scott is a referendum and this happens in 2012 then it seem that even a vote for independence may be a hollow victory.
The end of the world may be a reflection of how ardent unionists would feel about separation, but according to a cult using the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar - from the Mayan culture - the world will literally end anyway on 21 December 2012.
The popular myth has been taken up by New Age types around the world and is now the subject of a new movie - simply entitled 2012 - so Scotland may get its "freedom" in May of that year but only have seven months to enjoy it.
By a strange coincidence, Labour's Holyrood campaign in 2007 was largely based on the four horsemen of the Apocalypse (pictured above) visiting Scotland should the SNP win power. Looks like they just got their timing wrong.
The good thing is that at least we will be able to squeeze in the London Olympics before Messrs Death, Famine, War and Pestilence arrive.

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.

David Maddox: The Numbers Game (23) - polls apart continued

Always glad to see that the political parties are taking the Steamie serioulsy.
Following my blog below within minutes I received an e-mail from a Lib Dem spin doctor responding to some of the points I made. It read:

"I take issue with the "Lib Dems are in trouble in Scotland" point - what about the ComRes poll published in October showing LDs on 25%?! Or the YouGov poll showing us on 25%, also published this month.
Also, given that "others" are counted in SNP figures - surely this skews the results for seats.
Also - how are you getting a total of 12% for us?
Looking at the YouGov sky tracker poll - our figures are 9, 17, 24, 16, 18, 9, 10, 13, 25, 12, 12, 13, 15, 10, 15 - by our reckoning, we should be on at least 15%..."

This is not altogether unfair as the averaging of the Yougov poll depends on your starting point. It is also true that the SNP cannot be separated from other others in the Sky Yougov tracker. I think though it is fair to say the majority of that "other" vote in Scotland is for the SNP, while polling of 25% in Scotland for the Lib Dems appears to be the exception rather than the rule.

In addition, even if the Lib Dems are at 15% in Scotland, I would contest that that means they are still in trouble, especially considering their 26% in Scotland in the last Wesminster general election. It leaves them firmly in fourth place.

David Maddox: Do the Lib Dems have anything to say?

Apparently not. It seems they turned down their chance to have a subject debate on Thursday, allegedly because they had nothing to table.

Labour have stepped into the breach with another planned stooshie on building schools and the Scottish Futures Trust. It will be interesting if education secretary Fiona Hyslop turns up to defend her record this time having ducked the last education debate. Needless to say Labour are already challenging her to come out of hiding.

But perhaps, she will take the line of the Lib Dems and decide again that the least said the better.

In fairness to the Lib Dems, I have at least received an explanation from them for their reticence.

The party's ever cheery spindoctor in parliament Jenny Stanning told me: "I've also checked about the party business debates - we only get four a year, not as many as Labour - so it's not really a case of taking turns. The Government offers slots to parties as part of the business programme and we decided that we'd prefer one of our four debate mornings to be later on in the session. Hope this clears up any mystery!"

Eddie Barnes: Love-bombing the LibDems - Scottish version

The LibDems can hardly move at present without some supposed political opponents attempting to hug them close. With David Cameron trying down south to become Nick Clegg's new best friend, now it is Alex Salmond's turn this morning to suck up close to the men in yellow.

At a conference on devolution this morning, the First Minister has declared that he is "minded" to propose putting a so-called 'multi-option' question to voters in his proposed referendum so that, along with the status quo and independence, voters would be asked whether they would like the Scottish parliament to have more powers. "That seems to me to be an entirely reasonable, consensual and democratic way forward," he declares. The development this morning appears to be that the multi-option referendum is now the SNP's preferred choice of question.

Labour and the Tories won't buy it, but - as we have been reporting over the last two days - the Liberals are swithering all over the place about whether to back the referendum or not. On the one hand, they don't want to help out the SNP by handing them their referendum. On the other, they are not happy at all about being cast by the SNP as part of an arrogant Unionist alliance, denying the people a say. Now Salmond is effectively offering to meet them half-way - if you won't go for dinner, at least let me buy you a drink, he suggests.

Canny politics.....now let's see if Scottish LibDem leader Tavish Scott pukkers up. The lean Shetlander is insistent that he will not back the bill under any circumstances, but the pressure is mounting from within his party. Interesting times.

Gerri Peev: Cable tangled

The storm clouds have gathered over Bournemouth. Overnight, a whale stranded itself on the beach. Perhaps it was an omen of the disastrous day that lay ahead. First up, Vince Cable was ambushed in a "shadow cabinet" meeting of the Lib Dems over his mansion tax policy. Cable is a clever man who has a good run in the press and with the wider public. There are even some predictions that his mansion tax will go down well with voters. It could even be pitched to those on the right as being preferable to taxing income, which is the product of hard work. But the normally careful Cable was left tangled by not sorting the detail of the policy. He seems too affable a man to have let the stardust go to his head, but colleagues were left raging that he had not consulted them over such a fundamental policy change.

Next up, was the press briefing with Clegg's chief of staff, Danny Alexander, who provided the press with a third statement on what the Lib Dems thought should happen to the Attorney General Baroness Scotland, who has been fined for hiring an illegal immigrant as her cleaner. While Chris Huhne took to the airwaves to say she should be sacked, Clegg said she should stay. Meanwhile Alexander suggested she consider her position. During the briefing, a Blackberry alert came through with the message that Clegg had said she should perhaps consider her position. By the end of the day a statement came through saying that her position "looked untenable".

Then came the onstage swipes at Clegg's leadership from his own frontbenchers: pensions spokesman Steve Webb said the party had had enough despair for a week, while Dr Evan Harris, the spokesman on science, suggested that Clegg had some way to go before becoming a great leader.

And then Clegg was bounced into firming up his opposition to a referendum in a BBC Scotland interview, after The Scotsman's story this morning. Tavish Scott had claimed that perhaps colleagues who suggested the policy would be reversed had ingested too many pina coladas. For the record, this correspondent was not sharing cocktails with her sources at the time of acquiring the story. Perhaps Scott was just worried he was on the rocks?

To cap the day off, journos were given a few extracts from Clegg's speech...There is a killer line in it which voters must listen out for tomorrow. The old addage that any publicity is good publicity is truly being stretched for the Lib Dems this week. It almost stirs sympathy for them.

David Maddox: Troubled times for Tavish

The Scotsman front page today by my colleague Gerri Peev has certainly caused a stir in the otherwise quiet corridors of Holyrood.
The idea that the Lib Dems are considering backing a referendum has come as a surprise, although the party's vacillating record of changing its mind on various issues means that we should have half expected it.
The interesting aspect here is that Tavish Scott, the Scottish leader, has been adamantly against a referendum in the current economic circumstances. Most people believe that privately he is against one in almost all circumstances bar an outright SNP majority when his party's opposition would make no difference anyway.
What seems to be happening here is that Mr Scott and the Scottish party are being bounced into supporting the referendum by the UK party leadership, in one stroke undermining the supposed autonomy of the Scottish party in the Lib Dems' federal set-up.
Apparently pressure is coming from Vince Cable, the man most people want to be chancellor, who is now the Twickenham MP but was a Glasgow councillor.
What seems to be driving this is that the Lib Dems think a Tory victory will undermine support for the Union in Scotland and they believe that with Labour rapidly disintegrating they are the only party capable of saving the UK. They believe that the SNP can win an outright majority in 2011, which in my view at least, shows a surprising lack of understanding of the consequences of the Holyrood electoral system which mitigates against any majority.
Call a referendum now and you don't have to fight one at a time more convenient for the Nats.
It all echoes former Labour leader Wendy Alexander's ill-judged: "Bring it on!"
But this is bad for Mr Scott. During the late summer he lost the confidence of his Scottish party over his views on keeping Megrahi locked up in Scotland, now the UK leadership seems to question his judgement on a referendum.

David Maddox: And the important news is.... baa

As Labour goes into meltdown and the UK Government appears to be on the verge of collapse you can always rely on the Lib Dems to come up with the top news story of the day.

Their press release's headline screamed out:

SCOTLAND’S SHEEP FARMERS NEED MINISTER TO ACT OVER EID

EID is apparently electronic identity tagging. The trouble is that most of the sheep people are thinking about today are the panicking Labour MPs in Westminster and the only EID in play will be the one the despairing PM (pictured right) is no doubt trying to put on his last remaining ministers to make sure he can keep track of them before they too decide to resign.

David Maddox: Time for the banks to show all

Tavish Scott, the Scottish Liberal Democrat leader known for once marauding with fellow Vikings through Holyrood (as pictured right), has now turned his axe on another well barred door.

He has an interesting motion down in parliament calling on banks, which are nationalised in all but name, to come under the auspices of the Freedom of Information Act.

His point being that a lack of accountability and transparency is one of the reasons that an industry that has been a source of pride for Scots for more than 300 years was laid low. Bank of Scotland is no more and furious Royal Bank shareholders who at times looked more like a linch mob declared their bank dead in all but name too at their annual general meeting today.

The FOI for banks idea is one that has already been pushed by the Lib Dems down south in Westminster, however, there is an interesting element to Mr Scott's motion. FOI is a devolved matter and the Scottish Government is currently consulting on extending it.

Therefore it is possible that nationalised or largely state owned backs based in Scotland could become subject to FOI if the Scottish Government are inclined to agree with Mr Scott.

Here is the motion:

*S3M-3827 Tavish Scott: Freedom of Information and the Banking Sector—That the Parliament reaffirms its commitment to the principles of openness and transparency that underpin freedom of information legislation; believes that the public has a right to expect transparency from public organisations and from private organisations that perform public functions; regrets that, with the taxpayer holding a majority stake in two major Scottish banks, the UK Government does not allow freedom of information legislation to cover banks that have been bailed out with public funds, and therefore calls on the UK Government to amend freedom of information legislation to include nationalised banks and banks where the taxpayer holds a majority stake.

David Maddox: Are the Lib Dems ready for the fight?

Times are tough, not least it seems for Scotland's political parties.

The Liberal Democrats, who even in their leanest Liberal years could rely on a fair level of support in Scotland, are, according to their website, ill-prepared for the next election, which in theory could happen as early as June.

There are just five candidates listed in the People Section of scotlibdems.org.uk. Even if you add their 12 MPs, this leaves them prepared to fight a mere 17 of the 59 Scottish Westminster constituencies.

The question is whether the financial problems alluded to in recent reports and the low membership base of 5,000 are endangering the Lib Dems of becoming fixed as the fourth party of Scotland. Even the Greens believe they can have a go at overtaking them.

Opponents suggest that 2005's haul of a dozen seats was a high water mark and 2009 or 2010 will merely be a matter of how many they can hold on to.

So is it possible that the limited number of candidates merely reflects a new focused cost effective strategy?

David Maddox: SAS candidate takes on Ming the Merciless (aka Patsy versus Pompous Ass)

Sir Menzies Campbell (top left), the former UK Liberal Democrat leader, has had a tough time this week after being described as a "pompous ass" and "Ming the Meaningless" by his old opponent, Alex Salmond, the First Minister. But, while he laughed off Mr Salmond's outburst, it seems that the former Olympic athlete may be having to look over his shoulder at a threat from some energetic youth.

The "energetic youth" in question is the Tory North East Fife candidate Mile Briggs (pictured right with Scottish Conservative leader Annabel Goldie), a party researcher in Holyrood, who today self-styled himself as being an SAS candidate. This might be necessary considering that his opponent's nickname is Ming the Merciless.

The SAS allusion came with his proposed charity abseil off the Forth Rail Bridge (pictured left in Colin Ruffell's famous painting) to raise money for the RNLI.

However, when I bumped in to him earlier this morning buying a coffee it was his relative popularity to the veteran Lib Dem that he was boasting about.

When on Friday Sir Menzies gave his address to the Lib Dem conference on international affairs - the one where he criticised Mr Salmond's international grandstanding - he attracted about 72 delegates.

On Saturday, Mr Briggs tells me, that over 300 people turned up to one of his fundraising constituency coffee mornings in Newburgh, more than four times Sir Menzie's audience.

However, that said, Mr Briggs needs to overturn a majority of 12,571.

And the obvious put down for the young Tory - one of a legion of Patsies (politically ambitious 20 somethings) employed by political parties in Holyrood - might be Sir Menzie's current favourite Gordon Brown quote, the one he used about Mr Salmond and foreign affairs - "It's no time for a novice."

David Maddox: Is good breeding the secret to political success?

I often think it's comical!

How Nature always does contrive!

That every boy and every gal

That’s born into the world alive

Is either a little Liberal

Or else a little Conservative!

Times have changed since November 25 1882 when these famous words of Private Willis from Gilbert and Sullivan's Sentry Song (in their operetta Iolanthe) were first sung in the Savoy Theatre in London. And circumstances are even more different in Scotland than they are south of the border with the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats now only occupying third and fourth place in people's affections respectively.
On a good day the Tories and Lib Dems may get a third of the political support between them in Scottish polls and, at least in the Lib Dems case, that share seems to be shrinking rapidly.
So as the Lib Dems are failing to persuade people to support their cause, they seem to have hit on a new strategy - put virile youngish men in positions of leadership and get them to produce supporters for the future. The tactic seems to be working.
UK leader Nick Clegg, 42, and his wife Miriam (both pictured left) have just had their third child - a son named Miguel born on February 22. Mr Clegg pointedly avoided last weekend's Scottish party conference, no doubt to spend some quality canvassing time with the youngster.
Scottish leader Tavish "Viking" Scott, 42, and his new wife, BBC journalist Kirsten Campbell, are due to have their first child in July. It will be Mr Scott's fourth.
Scottish deputy leader Michael Moore, 43, and his wife Alison (both pictured left) are due to have a child in June.

No wonder poor Alistair Carmichael, 43, the party's spokesman for Scotland in Westminster, was gently chided by Mr Scott in his conference speech yesterday for not doing his bit for party membership.

David Maddox: Liberal Democrat conference - the history men

An interesting fringe meeting took place on Friday evening hosted by the Liberal Democrat History Group. Its topic of discussion was: "Fighting Labour: the struggle for radical supremacy in Scotland 1885 - 1929."
It was a discussion in which the Lib Dems could look at their forebears with a great deal of pride and regret.
This was arguably the period when the old Liberals were at their height and the very zenith of their powers, following on from the legacy of Midlothian's most famous MP - William Ewart Gladstone.
It was Kelvinside boy, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman (pictured left), who led them to power in 1905 and although he had to retire due to ill-health in 1908, he started the historic government which would lay the foundations for the welfare state. Its greatest achievement was the creation of the old age pension by David Lloyd-George, whose good work as we all know was partly destroyed for the private sector by Gordon Brown as chancellor.
Lloyd-George's great friend and cabinet ally was a Dundee MP, who would later as a Conservative become known as the greatest Prime Minister of them all, Winston Churchill (pictured right as Dundee MP in 1909).
But, anybody who has read George Dangerfield's The Strange Death of Liberal England will see that in their height of success also were the seeds of the Liberals' fall.
Dangerfield's thesis was that a popular Liberal government found itself overwhelmed by three genuinely radical forces - mass trade unionism and general strikes, militant feminism led by the Pankhursts, and the struggle for Irish independence. He argued that the drive to the First World War was a deliberate move by the Liberals to channel their anger and energy in a different direction for a national cause.
Emerging from the war the Liberals were split between former Prime Minister's Herbert Asquith's supporters and Lloyd-George's, including Churchill, who had ended up allied with the Tories.
By 1929, even though the party was reunited, Liberalism was all but dead in England and just holding on in the so-called "celtic fringes" including parts of Scotland. It had largely replaced by Labour on the left and the Tories on the right. By then Churchill had been ousted as Dundee's MP by the only ever successful temperance MP in British history and returned to the Tories.
As Tavish Scott's speech at conference today eluded to, the defeat came despite a promise that the Liberals could end unemployment.
They have never recovered and their only brush with government was as Labour's junior partner in the first eight years of Scottish devolution.
And it is perhaps this ghost that was also lying behind the discussion. Because through the Scottish Executive partnership between 1999 and 2007, the Lib Dems became intertwined in the popular mind, particularly in Scotland, as being Labour-lite.
In his pre-election 2007 conference SNP leader Alex Salmond made a jibe about how they needed to become more than a means of propping up Labour.
What this fringe meeting was maybe trying to remind people was that the Lib Dems need to put a distance between themselves and their old enemy Labour, particularly as that party is on its way down, and remember that the two were in a life and death struggle of ideas when nationalism in Scotland was still just a lunatic fringe.
That is perhaps why leading Lib Dems have been hinting at alliances with the SNP for the last few weeks. But even this is an acknowledgement of history's cruel judgement, that as a force now they can only aspire to be a junior partner.

David Maddox: Lib Dem conference - finding a speaker

This Scottish Liberal Democrat conference was billed in the run-up by spin doctors and party leaders as the great thinktank on how to get Scotland and the UK out of the recession.
I've just been sitting in their most high profile debate on the issue - An Economic Recovery Package for Scotland.
You might think that given the billing it would have been difficult to get on the stage to speak. But no. It seems though from the introductions of two speakers - election candidate Fred Macintosh, who ticked the wrong box and and ended up having to oppose an amendment he supports, and Edinburgh City Council leader Jenny Dawe - that the chairwoman of the debate Siobhan Mathers was standing at the door trying to persuade delegates to speak.
Sensitive to this Ms Mathers told delegates: "Don't think that I've been standing at the door trying to find speakers" in a classic case of shutting the door after the horse has bolted.

David Maddox: John Farquhar Munro found (2)

Had yet another update from the Lib Dems on their missing pro-referendum on independence MSP John Farquhar Munro (pictured)- Holyrood's international man of mystery.
As you will have seen from the earlier blogs he is missing today's vote on the principle of a referendum, where he would have probably gone against the party anti-referendum line, because he has important business in Germany.
The original suggestion from the Lib Dem press office was that he was there for health reasons, which made chief whip Mike Rumbles rejection of his original request a look a little hard hearted.
But, the latest update is that he is in Germany to be a special guest speaker at the MDS foundation's European patient and family forum in Germany - it was arranged around Christmas time apparently.
According to its website the foundation is "a multi disciplinary, international organization devoted to the prevention, treatment, and study of the myelodysplastic syndromes."
For the non-medically qualified among you, myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a group of diseases in which the production of blood cells by the bone marrow is disrupted.
So he was there "for health reasons," but not his own health, which, although it is nice to know he is not seriously ill, makes it all the more surprising that he was given such an important parliamentary day off to go there.

David Maddox: John Farquhar Munro found

Well the mystery has been solved. One SNP spin doctor suggested to me that there may be a Nationalist search party looking for John Farquhar Munro (pictured) combing his Ross, Skye and Inverness West constituency to try to get him to Holyrood to support them in the referendum vote.
But, it seems they may be looking in the wrong place.
A Lib Dem spin doctor has just e-mailed to say that JFM is in Germany for health reasons, which is a fair excuse to be away and certainly different to the last occasion when he was given leave to bury a cow.
However, they are a hard bunch in the Lib Dems. According to the Lib Dem press office, chief whip Mike Rumbles actually turned down the original request to be away, even though it was health related. In the end it was party leader Tavish Scott who gave permission for his absense.
But the official line from the Lib Dems, given the nature of today's vote and JFM's support for a referendum against party policy, is that his absense is "a happy coincidence."

David Maddox: Where is John Farquhar Munro?

John Farquhar Munro (pictured) is a quiet man and not one who is often looked for these days.
But his absence is causing great excitement in the chamber at the moment where the SNP's alleged failed record in government is being debated.
Mr Farquhar Munro is a mentor for former UK Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy and the only MSP for whom Gaelic is a first language, but neither of these things are the cause of the agitation.
According to the Liberal Democrats he asked to be excused on Friday for an "unavoidable" constituency matter, they cannot say what it was.
But hold on a minute, say the Nationalists, is it a coincidence that Friday was the day JFM embarrassed the party when he announced that he would support holding a referendum, just days after Scottish Lib Dem leader Tavish Scott said his party would vote against one?
And today the Lib Dems have put down a clever amendment to the SNP failures debate (sponsored by Labour) which would allow MSPs a chance to have a vote on whether a referendum should go ahead, in the knowledge that the three unionist parties would vote against.
It is after all pretty unusual for an MSP to be allowed to have the day off on a Thursday, the only full day of debate and votes in the week.
Tory MSP Murdo Fraser has suggested that JFM may have been locked in a cupboard by Lib Dem chief whip and former army major Mike Rumbles.
Look out on the Steamie for further updates if we find out where the elusive MSP has got to.

David Maddox: Budget - the end of the affair

Patrick Harvie, the leader of the Greens, is on his feet looking very glum. He has said the SNP "just don't get it" when it comes to carbon emissions.
As mentioned before, poor Mr Harvie is suffering after snubbing the SNP budget last week. Not surprising for a man who has seen his scheme lose £18 million in a week and changed from a free for all to a means tested one, he has said that the budget is "still inadequate."
There was a bitter swipe at the Lib Dems who dropped their £800 million 2p income tax cut for measures worth nothing to back the budget, which in effect ended the Greens chances of getting more for free insulation.
He doesn't care that the two Green votes will be the only ones against the budget today.
"It doesn't matter about numbers," he said defiantly. "There is a wider movement out there" being failed by the middle ground of politics "which the Greens will continue to represent."
According to Mr Harvie President Obama and most European governments are taking not of that movement and bringing in green projects to boost their economies and try to save the planet. Parliament would not even consider his reasoned amendment on the principle of free insulation.
It seems that the close relationship enjoyed by the Greens and SNP for the best part of two years may have come to an end. The only question now is have the Lib Dems supplanted the Greens in the SNP bed?

David Maddox: The numbers game (3)

The Yougov poll mentioned in Saturday's posting had some interesting results, as you may have seen in a Sunday publication.

Despite apparently gaining in popularity from the 2007 election, though, on the basis of this poll in a Holyrood election the SNP would stay on their current 47 seats with Labour (44, -2), Lib Dem (13, -3), and Independent (0, -1) losses being taken up by the Tories (18, +1), Greens (5, +3) and Scottish Socialist Party (2, +2).

But, a briefing I have received from a senior SNP strategist shows that gains in pure numbers does not tell the whole picture. What is more important, as far as he and his colleagues are concerned, for long term success is the significant gain of nine constituency of first past the post (FPTP) seats.

This would see defeats for some big names - Labour's finance spokesman Andy Kerr (pictured left, in a different sort of tough race) in East Kilbride along with former Lib Dem leader Nicol Stephen in Aberdeen South would both go. Even the poor Presiding Officer, Alex Fergusson, would be swept away in Galloway & Upper Nithsdale.

Other SNP gains would be: Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross; Ross, Skye and Inverness West; Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale; Aberdeen Central; Airdrie & Shotts; and Linlithgow.

As the senior SNP strategist explained: "My point would be that it’s better to win FPTP seats than list seats (although obviously good to win both!) – constituency MSPs are better able to dig in, build the base, etc.
"2003 was interesting – we fell back overall but won more FPTP seats than in 1999 – which was a healthy pointer to the future. And of course we won a pile of FPTP seats in 2007.

"Basically, the SNP used to be good at winning votes, and not good at winning seats (eg. the ’92 election). Now we are good at both – which in turn bodes well for the next Westminster election."

David Maddox: Budget - Tomorrow is another day

Well after all the excitement of this truly extraordinary and historic day in Holyrood I'm going to sign off. You can read the in depth analysis and reports in tomorrow's Scotsman.

But needless to say the blame game has already started. Labour have blamed the SNP, the Tories have blamed Labour, the Lib Dems have blamed the SNP, and the SNP have blamed everyone except the Tories and themselves. Funnily enough, anybody who is not in a political party has blamed the Greens.


One interesting point is that somehow, even though their thinking is often different, the Lib Dems have still always voted the same way in Holyrood as Labour on the budget every year since the parliament was reconvened. More and more they look like an extention of Scottish Labour to those not well versed in the machinations of Holyrood, which is reflected in the declining polling ratings north of the border, which in some cases have dipped into single figures.


As one final note, it is clear that the SNP smelt disaster early in the afternoon and were resorting to pretty desperate measures.
This high priority e-mail was sent out by one of their backbenchers Christina McKelvie (pictured) at 2.51pm to her public sector trade union colleagues calling on them to lobby Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray:

I am writing about this afternoon's budget debate in the Scottish Parliament. The implications for Scotland if the Budget Bill is not passed are serious. Section 6 of the 2008 Budget Act would be the legislation which governs such an eventuality. That section can be found here - http://www.oqps.gov.uk/legislation/acts/acts2008/asp_20080002_en_3 In short, it means that the Scottish Government would only be allowed to release, in any calendar month, one twelfth of last year's budget or the amount paid out of the Consolidated Fund for the corresponding month last year. There is no allowance made for inflation. This would leave a shortfall of some £1.8 billion or £150m per month and leave the Scottish Government without the flexibility to spend money to protect jobs and investment.
As you will appreciate, such a situation would jeopardise public sector pay deals; increased funding for the NHS; increases to the local government settlement which would affect the ability of those local authorities to freeze council tax again this year; funding to cut business rates for small businesses; and accelerated capital spending in the region of £230 million. With the economy struggling as it is at the moment, I'm sure you will agree with me that Scotland could ill-afford such a cut in public spending this year. Cuts on that scale would not only affect the pay of public sector workers, they would adversely affect public services and would prevent the Scottish Government the opportunity to ensure that Council Tax stays frozen this year and that prescription charges come down - costs which fall heaviest on poorer members of society.
Can I urge you, therefore, to contact MSPs who you may know and urge them to support the budget this afternoon. In particular I would urge you to contact Labour's Leader in the Scottish Parliament, Iain Gray MSP, and urge him to take his party with him and vote to protect Scotland 's public spending this afternoon.
Yours,
Christina McKelvie MSP

David Maddox: Budget goading

The verb to goad comes from the word for a big stick used to prod cattle in a certain direction and whilst the Tories may not care which direction their Lib Dem opponents go they have certainly decided to bring out a big stick to beat with them with over their position on the budget.
For those of you who need reminding, the Lib Dems have not exactly been negotiating much over the budget because they want a 2p cut in income tax using the Scottish Parliament's tax varying powers. The SNP oppose this because it would take £800 million from the Scottish budget.
Now you might expect a party that wants to reduce public spending by so much to not have a wishlist for extra spending. You would be wrong, claim the Tories. They have published a 91 item wishlist worth £8.3 billion which the Lib Dems have put their names to since Tavish Scott became leader in September. That's tenfold the savings they need for their tax cut.
The Lavish Tavish List includes £1 billion for the income tax cut, £1.8 billion for having a bigger new Forth Bridge, £330 million for extending paternity leave, £300 million on new dentists. The list really goes on and on.
The Lib Dems have of course hit back, calling it the Tories' "dodgy dossier"and say it is riddled with errors. A spokesman also suggested that it was a diversionary tactic away from the fact that the Tories have appeared to be asking for so little for them to support the SNP's budget.
The interesting point to this is that it very much sums up the supporting act in the two bouts that are going on in Holyrood. The headline act is the battle to be number 1 between Labour and the Nats, while the Lib Dems and Tories are locked in the battle to be number 3.
It's all a far cry from when the Tories were the biggest party in Scotland decades ago and the more recent pre-2007 election claim by the Lib Dems that they could be the biggest party in Holyrood.
If last year's by-elections are to be taken as evidence it is a battle the Tories are winning by dint of not being completely squeezed out by the two big parties and also their extra Holyrood seat from the 2007 election.
The two are also positioning themselves as the party of tax cuts for the 2011 Holyrood election. The Lib Dems want this to fall in income tax, the Tories in council tax.
All this matters, of course, because in a parliament of minorities even the Greens two MSPs can hold sway.
The first budget vote is tomorrow (Wednesday), but expect far more fun and games by the time the final vote takes place on January 28.

David Maddox: What's in a name? Well quite a lot actually..

The Lib Dem gaffe referred to by my colleague Hamish below may have actually had a bit of wishful thinking about it.
Lord Primrose - the one Lib Dem health spokesman Ross Finnie wrongly thought had been appointed to chair the Hep C inquiry - is actually the name of the Earl of Rosebery.
The current incumbent is the seventh in the line, but his father, known as Harry, was a Liberal MP and his grandfather was a Liberal prime minister from 1892 to 1894, whose government was shortlived because of unionist opposition to his devolutionary domestic policies.
So as a self proclaimed Liberal in the Lib Dems, one wonders if there was an element of harking back to the (very) old glory days of his party for Mr Finnie.

David Maddox: Lib Dems get ready to Rumbles

There used to be a rule among English cricket selectors that they should always pick bowlers to the suit the conditions for swing, spin or pace. It did not stop them losing with a monotonous regularity but somehow it made sense.
The same could be said of Tavish Scott's apparently strange choice of personel in his budget negotiations with the SNP. Instead of sending in his spinner - finance spokesman Jeremy Purvis - to weedle out a clever agreement he decided to rely on the less subtle tactics of his chief whip Mike Rumbles, who, if he were a bowler, would have a stock delivery of bouncing the ball at pace straight towards his opponent's chin.
Now I understand that Mr Purvis was not best pleased to be sidelined, but it was clear for all that the Lib Dems had no intention of striking an agreement with the Nats, thus the choice of Mr Rumbles.
The issue at stake here is that Mr Scott announced in his first week as Scottish Lib Dem leader that he wanted a 2p cut in income tax using the Scottish variable rate. This would mean a cut of £800 million in the budget which the SNP have made clear they will not countenance. It also means the Lib Dems cannot ask for new money for new projects so there was really little to discuss.
Mr Rumbles has been striding around Holyrood for weeks now berating opponents for not supporting the cut, so will have relished the chance to wag his finger at Finance Secretary John Swinney.
It may be the training he received in the army where he became a major, but his usual style made it difficult for most of us to believe the earnest pleas of the Lib Dem spin doctors that "he went into the meeting willing to be constructive."
I understand the meeting was short and went as planned for the Lib Dems: MR entered. MR demanded that JS accepted a cut in personal tax. JS said no. MR stormed out. Job done.
But even though Mr Scott may have picked the right bowler for this particular wicket, the question is, like the old England cricket team, will they still end up losing?