Are voters viewing independence as the alternative to ConDem cuts?

Only the other day, I was bemoaning the need for ITN news to dust off its unemployment totaliser, and then I go and discover it sort of has.

ITV is commissioning monthly polls from Com Res to create a Cuts Index and October’s makes for fascinating reading.

The sample base for Scotland is small, only 176, so it cannot be read as representative, but as a snapshot of sentiment, it seems to highlight a number of trends.

Firstly, there is a reason leading SNP figures are trotting out this line about Labour’s continuing support for the Union will consign Scotland to a lifetime of Tory governments.  Poll findings suggest it has traction with Scottish voters.

In the October Cuts Index, when asked about the key UK politicians and trusting them to see the country (sic) through the current economic situation, Scots’ opinions varied considerably from those of the UK as a whole.  George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer?  Only 18% of Scottish respondents trust him compared to 27% of all respondents.  For David Cameron, it’s worse – one in five Scots compared to over one-third of total respondents (36%).  Nick Clegg performs slightly better but it’s relative – only 13% of Scots trust him compared to 16% of all respondents:  the issue here is the lack of trust everyone has in his leadership qualities.  Ed Miliband has a similar problem, with only 9% trusting him compared to 16% in total.

Setting aside the bit part players, it is clear that Scottish opinion (albeit a small tranche of it) finds the Conservatives less trustworthy than the UK generally.  Hence, this argument from the SNP but also some hope for Labour – resurrecting the threat of the Tories wasn’t necessarily a poor election ploy per se, it just didn’t play well in the context of a Scottish election.

There is also considerable divergence in feelings of optimism and pessimism about the economy.  The survey posited a number of attitudinal statements:

• the way the government is going about cutting public spending is fair
• the government is cutting public spending too much and too quickly
• things in this country are headed in the right direction
• the UK is on course for another wave of recession
• I know someone who has lost their job since the Credit Crunch in 2008
• I or a member of my family are seriously worried about losing our jobs
• I feel more confident in my personal financial situation than I did six months ago
• I am confident that the company I work for will be more successful financially in the next year, than last year
• I expect that there will be more redundancies made at my workplace in the next year, than last year

On all of these indicators, which make for a great test of the temperature of the nations and regions on the economy, Scotland is either less optimistic or more pessimistic than the UK.  Only on the one on redundancies, do Scots think slightly more positively than the UK (35% to 36%).

And on the ones which include an assessment of the UK Government’s performance, Scotland diverges sharply.  Only one in four Scots think the government is going about cutting public spending fairly, compared to 36% of total respondents;  nearly two-thirds of Scots (65%) disagree with the assertion that the country is headed in the right direction while 55% of total respondents do (hardly a UK wide endorsement of the ConDems incidentally);  and nearly 70% compared to just over 60% think the country ie the UK is headed for another recession.

The sample sizes are tiny so caution must be applied, but this split in opinion is interesting in terms of its relationship with our constitutional future. For the first time in a long time, a narrow majority of Scots support independence – consistently, across a range of polls – with the numbers outright opposed shrinking.  The direction of travel is away from no towards don’t know and yes. Independence appears to be emerging as offering Scotland an alternative economic route to a generation of austerity and ConDem cuts.

This Index does not ask about Alex Salmond’s performance as First Minister nor John Swinney’s as Scotland’s Finance Secretary so we cannot tell if they would emerge with different ratings on their capabilities.  But one finding does suggest that the Scottish Government’s approach to handling the economic situation finds favour with Scots.  When asked if the Government should invest in a series of large-scale infrastructure projects to boost UK employment, 65% of all respondents agreed it should, and 67% of Scottish respondents agreed.  Given that this is a major plank of Plan MacB, it would seem to chime with voters here (and offer a hint to the UK Government that people are looking for a more Keynsian approach).

Of course, what would be nice is a much larger Scottish sample or purely Scottish survey (hints) which explored this kind of territory.  But even this snapshot starts to explain what appeared a puzzling drift of support towards independence so early on in the SNP’s second government term, with the potential to create the perfect storm of opinion in favour of independence I blogged about a wee while back.

It all suggests that the Scottish Government’s tactics are sound: continuing to point up the failings of Westminster to assist the Scottish economy, to emphasise the role of the Conservatives, in particular, in it all, to pick fights with the big bad wolf of UK government on a range of issues while forging its own path with an economic growth plan and programme for government which chimes with Scottish voters.

This presents something of a challenge for Labour, which has switched focus since the election by trying to pin down the SNP Government as being to blame for service cuts and job losses.  They’re not just Tory cuts, the narrative goes, they’re also SNP cuts.  It would appear the Scottish electorate isn’t listening, or at least hearing that message, for now, again indicating just how out of step with Scottish opinion and mood the Labour party is currently.  And how much work it has to do to find its way back.

No wonder the SNP is heading to its annual conference in Inverness in buoyant mood.

How many Labour politicians does it take to land a blow?

If the First Minister ever needed his ego stroked, he could just gaze upon the photo and headline in yesterday’s Herald and purr.  Not just one Labour MP as Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland – Margaret Curran – but two full-time deputies in Willie Bain and Lord Browne and a further nine in double roles.  As if shadowing important stuff like defence, energy, the Treasury and business weren’t big enough jobs on their own, nine Scottish Labour MPs, including new kids on the block like Ian Murray and Gemma Doyle and old hands like Anne McGuire, get to shadow Scotland too.  And of course there are a further two big beasts in Douglas Alexander and Jim Murphy, getting to do big proper roles, all on their own.

What on earth has Scotland done to deserve this?  Apart from vote SNP….

First though, congratulations are in order to Team Scotland, for catching the eye of the leader and securing promotion.  Many of them should do well in their portfolio roles.  They are, by and large, decent, talented politicians who deserve a chance to learn the ropes of policy and ministerialism with one eye on a government prize after 2016.  Good luck to them all – here’s hoping they can help hold their Conservative and Liberal Democrat numbers to account in their portfolio roles.

But I wonder what Ed Miliband hopes to achieve by this cunning, but high risk ruse?

Some of the Scots have been promoted to largely issues that are England only – energy and climate change (Tom Greatrex);  environment, food and rural affairs (Fiona O’Donnell);  business (Ian Murray).  Didn’t Miliband see enough of his predecessor’s travails in this area, of allowing MPs with no constituency or parliamentary locus to annoy the English by lording it over them?  This is such an open goal for the Conservatives and I’m sure they will make the most of pointing out the practical effect of the West Lothian question in action.

And as I blogged on Saturday, MPs shadow each other, not governments or elected members in other places.  Ostensibly.  Either Michael Moore has hidden talents in the scare category that I was hitherto unaware of, or Labour is at it.  If Miliband thinks the English won’t notice, and indeed, the Scots, he is sadly mistaken.

Meanwhile, Alex Salmond can line them all up and taunt them to give it their best shot.  If it only takes eleven (and two of them are law officers) to run a country, how on earth can it take twelve Scottish Labour MPs – plus shadow Holyrood Ministers – to land a blow?  You can tell the SNP spinmeisters are going to have hours of fun with this one.

This may indeed be Labour’s cunning plan to utilise as many Scottish Labour MPs as it can justify to mount a defend the Union campaign, but again I wonder if Miliband has thought this through.  I’m not sure English voters are going to like his party using their money (and ours) to fight a party political campaign from beyond the boundaries of Scotland when actually there is a job for them to do associated with their erstwhile portfolios.  It might all backfire on Labour at the next UK election.  And in the referendum.

But worst of all, it makes a mockery of recent Labour party rule changes to make the Scottish party more autonomous and to make the next leader more than just the Leader of Labour in the Scottish Parliament but laird of all he surveys in Scotland.  If ever he wanted to hamstring the next leader, this move will do it.  Who will actually be in charge?  Which voice should anyone pay attention to?  What if they disagree?  Who has primacy?  Who gets first dibs?  Who gets to lead Labour policy, Labour activity, Labour members, and perhaps, most relevantly Labour’s campaign in the independence referendum?

If I was one of the candidates for the Scottish Labour leadership, I’d be spitting mad at such an unsubtle manoeuvre that boxes him or her in, and which points up quite clearly who is boss.  One of the constant refrains in Labour Hame blog posts about lessons wot we have learned from being gubbed in May, is that Labour in Scotland had lost the ability to tell a narrative that resounded with Scottish voters, to offer them something distinctly Scottish to vote for in Holyrood elections.  We are, of course, a good distance out from the next Scottish election but having four and a bit years of muddle, disarray, disjointed voices, different opinions, too many cooks etc will do nothing for the party’s credibility with the electorate.  Indeed, voters might decide to punish Labour in the 2015 UK election for such a morass.

And if I was a Member of the Scottish Parliament, I’d also be seething.  It might be a much reduced one, but I thought Labour had a Team Scotland.  Or is Miliband’s ruse a tacit acknowledgement that not only does he not know any of their names, he doesn’t care to know them and doesn’t much rate them either?  Who is it will actually get to talk about Scottish matters to the Scottish electorate without confusing, or worse, alienating them further.

If it is to succeed – and it is a big if – such a strategy needs to be carefully planned and supremely executed.  Frankly, I don’t think the party has such sureness of touch in it at the moment.  It might be a cunning plan, but Miliband would do well to recall what happened to all of Baldrick’s.

Vote! Good week, bad week

So, who had a good week in politics and who had a mare?

Well, top trump in the chumps and flumps’ stakes has to be shared by Liam Fox and Chris Huhne.  Huhne for managing to tweet a direct message openly to all and sundry that indicated that he had been briefing off the record.  Tsk, tsk.  And Liam Fox because of a complicated relationship with his best man that has resulted in lots of tittle-tattle on the front pages of the metropolitan press.  Oh, and that he’s had to refer himself to be investigated for his conduct.  If he thought this course of action might damp the whole thing down, he was wrong:  the political press pack now scent blood.

George Osborne had a good week when he probably shouldn’t have – he appears to have taken over from Teflon Tony.  A robust and passionate conference speech against a backdrop of gloomy economic news at home, dire straits in Europe and tailspinning global markets.  Oh and still no plan for growth.  His reaction to credit downgrading for some of the UK’s biggest financial institutions was “good, about time”.  Labour’s reaction to this nonchalance was non-existent.  Where was Balls on this?

David Cameron, meanwhile, was almost conspicuous by his absence from the public and media consciousness in this big week for his party.  How strange.  Yet, perhaps pre-ordained?  The show after all doesn’t always have to be about him.  Steady as she goes, after all, this far out from a UK election.  Though lots of puppy-dog earnestness about paying down our debt and adopting a can-do attitude ain’t exactly newsworthy.

In media terms, the phrase darling was surely coined for the hilarious double-act performed by Messrs Jeremy Paxman and Boris Johnson on Newsnight.  At times, surreal, at others simply bizarre, it was an interview that contained genuinely laugh out loud moments.  There is a vaudeville opening for them on the festival circuit when they both retire.

No real stand out performances at Holyrood this week, though I do think, Holyrood itself and the SNP and Labour collectively can pat themselves on the back for a job well done on the welfare reform debate.  Jackie Baillie skilfully manoeuvred the Scottish Government into a difficult position over her amendment to its resolution on the UK Government’s welfare reform bill.  Anyone who has discounted totally her tipping her hat at the leadership might be a little premature.  And even if she doesn’t run, she laid down a marker this week that she is a parliamentary force to be reckoned with.  Particularly as it is rumoured that the Scottish Government was bounced by its backbenchers at a parliamentary group meeting into supporting her amendment.  The idea that the group of 69 provides little more than lobby fodder might well be unfounded.

Indeed, the Scottish Government was put on the backfoot – again – on its ill-thought out anti-sectarianism bill.  Opponents are circling at an ever more alarming rate and gaining credence and credibility.  The committee’s report was a dog’s breakfast, ably dissected by the estimable Lallands Peat Worrier.  The lesson from this debacle for the First Minister is surely that election commitments made on the hoof result in much repenting at leisure.  What other wee goodies did Salmond bounce his party into during the campaign that will now return to haunt his administration?  (And that’s quite enough clichés for one blog post)

Ed Miliband shuffled his pack (oops, sorry) and Margaret Curran can be viewed as a big winner.  Only an MP since 2010, she is now in the shadow Cabinet, and will bring her knowledge of Scottish politics to bear, as well as her experience as a government minister, albeit in the ither Parliament.  Those CyberNats guffawing at her prospects against the FM are missing the point.  He is not her putative opponent:  Michael Moore, the Liberal Democrat Secretary of State is.  I reckon she will land plenty of blows, as I’m not sure the ponderous and accident-prone Mr Moore will cope with her incessant, terrier-like harrying.

Miliband now has a Cabinet of his own making, though it remains to be seen if he can make anything of his Cabinet.  And his opportunity.  Tom Watson, meanwhile, can be pleased that his championing of the phone hacking scandal, from the start, when no one else was prepared to listen, has resulted in such an omnipotent role behind the scenes.  The new Mandy is a very different beast….

So, time to vote.  And let’s see how the SNP-oriented readers of A Burdz Eye View cope without having one of their ain to vote for.  Go on, engage your brain, you know you want to…. though if you disagree with my choices, suggest alternatives in the comment thread, and I “might” add them.