Aitken must go – and so should silent Goldie

The response of Strathclyde police to the latest in a series of shocking rapes and sexual assaults in Glasgow city centre was depressing enough.  “Don’t go off alone” might seem like sound advice but it, as usual, puts the onus on women to keep themselves safe and fails to address the bigger issue, that of men’s continued violence towards them, and the failure of our society to prevent it or to tackle attitudes which permit it.

It negates much of the good work being done by the Violence Reduction Unit (VRU) that is attempting to shift the terms of debate – that violence is preventable, not inevitable – and to encourage a philosophy by which men – all men – take responsibility for the violence that some perpetrate against women and children, but also against each other.  Domestic and sexual violence is not a women’s issue, it is a men’s issue.  The VRU is interested in adopting the bystander approach advocated by “anti-sexist activist and educator” Jackson Katz and Scotland’s first such programme is currently being piloted by Scottish Women’s Aid alongside a host of partners.

But it’s clear we still have a long way to travel, particularly when there are politicians like Bill Aitken MSP around to shock and appal by questioning the morals – and therefore, the impact and seriousness of the crime – of this particular woman and women in general, who by dint of daring to be alone in a city centre are apparently inviting horrific gang rape.  Why this woman was in this part of the city centre, or indeed any part of the city centre, and for what purpose is of no matter.  It does not excuse nor trivialise this atrocity, at least not for most right minded folk.

There is no excuse and no justification for Bill Aitken’s comments, made in a telephone conversation with a Sunday Herald journalist.  They are unacceptable and he must resign from his convenorship of the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee.  By these comments he has proven himself unfit to hold the post.  It does not matter that he is about to retire nor that there are only a few weeks of parliamentary activity left.  If the institution itself is not to be brought into disrepute, he must resign.  If he fails to do so, then other committee members must effect his removal. 

It is not just Aitken’s inappropriate verbosity that is suspect;  Annabel Goldie’s continuing silence on the matter is fast becoming an issue too.  There is nothing on the Scottish Conservatives’ website, neither an apology from Aitken nor an opinion nor condemnation from Goldie.  If he refuses to do the honourable thing and resign his position, then Goldie must act for him.  She must remove him from his portfolio responsibility for justice and insist that he resign the Convenorship.  Then, on behalf of the Scottish Conservative party, she should apologise – to the victim, her family and to women more generally.  If she does not, then her own position becomes untenable.

The First Minister has made plain his disgust, as has Labour’s Depute Leader, Johann Lamont.  Good.  If Aitken has not resigned by the time Holyrood returns from recess next week, the burd hopes that the two main political parties will work together – for once, at last – and take the appropriate action to remove Aitken from his post.

Anything else is a travesty.  And belittles and undermines all attempts to have the crimes of rape and sexual assault treated much more seriously, the impacts of such crimes addressed much more effectively, and the causes of such violence tackled and prevented.

Not ever requires much more than glossy commercials and websites to become a reality.

Labour in poll position…. maybe

It only takes one poll and suddenly the blogosphere is a lather with New Year predictions for the Holyrood elections in May.   The boys at Better Nation got into a bit of a spat over it all.  Jeff applied his shiny new election predictor file to the findings from the TNS-BMRC poll for the Herald while Malc H preferred a less scientifically rigorous application.  James was left to hold the jackets.  Meanwhile, Lallands Peat Worrier presented the gender differential on voting intentions in stark relief and it didn’t make pretty reading for the SNP.

The analysis would of course be incomplete without the burd getting out her divining rods and giving her crystal ball a rub.

The treatment of the findings deserves comment.  There has been a wee bit of jiggery pokery in order to create a phenomenon called the committed voter.  Effectively all those who refused to answer or didn’t know how they intended to vote were removed from the sample and the findings re-calibrated.  This “tweaking” resulted in Labour’s findings on the first constituency vote leaping from 31% to 49%.  But it is unusual to effectively disenfranchise don’t knows from the process at this early stage in the campaign.  A bit naughty really of the Herald to report these findings as the main ones. 

The burd also notes that the committed voter tallies are what Better Nation used to come up with an overall 3 seat majority for Labour.   What would be the result if the whole sample findings were poured into the election predictor?   Something far closer to what the result in May is likely to be, I reckon.

Let’s also consider the methodology.  The Scottish Opinion Survey is one of the few polls to be conducted face to face, in people’s homes;  most others are done by telephone or completed online.  Does this account for the apparent collapse in Conservative and Liberal Democrat voting intentions? 

The burd grew up in Galloway when Ian Lang was laird of all he surveyed.  For 18 years he was the area’s MP, but in all that time, few ever admitted openly to voting Tory.  No one ever boasted of it, the most that could be coaxed was a sheepish sotto voce admission that maybe they had, at one point, voted Conservative.  Could a similar factor be at work to explain the very low polling of both the Tories and the Lib Dems?  I mean, who in the current circumstances, would openly want to admit, face to face, to a stranger no less, that one might be considering voting for the parties preparing to dismantle the welfare state and inflict huge public spending cuts on us all? 

But that does not explain why the predilection of the bashful would appear to be for Labour at the expense of the SNP.   Especially when BBC Scotland’s poll on spending cuts last autumn showed that voters blame the previous UK Labour government for our current economic woes. 

Yet, the SNP is actually at roughly the same level as before the 2007 election.  The gap between them and Labour is not insurmountable, and as is often the case with polls, the don’t knows are sufficiently large in number to make it all to play for.  On the constituency vote, Labour leads by 10% but nearly 1 in 5 of participants are undecided.  On the regional vote question, which was phrased fairly clumsily, Labour’s lead is only 9% with over 20% still to make up their minds. 

Moreover, if you look at the key target voter groups that, in the burdz humble opinion, constitute Scotland’s squeezed middle, namely women, 35 – 54 year olds and C2s, there is also still hope for the incumbent Scottish government.  On the voting intentions of women, the picture does seem pretty bleak for the SNP.  The direction of travel is all wrong with the gap widening.  What is going on here?  Why is the SNP’s problem with wimmin growing?  Not sure.  It needs more cogitation and deliberation before blogging on it but it is clear that the SNP needs to focus some energy onto fixing this before it becomes a chasm that costs them the election.

The future seems less bleak when looking at the other groups.  Of those aged 34 to 54, 34% intend to vote Labour and 19% SNP on the constituency vote, with 32% voting Labour and 19% SNP on the regional vote.   It’s not great but a brighter picture emerges when the intentions of those aged 45 to 54, who are more likely to actually vote, are considered.  Labour’s lead over the SNP narrows significantly. Incidentally, if we look at the age group most likely to vote, the over 55s, the lead is down to 6% and 5% respectively. 

Classic switcher territory also indicates there is still all to play for.  Amongst C2s, Labour polled 29% to the SNP’s 23% on the first vote and 25% to 24% on the second vote.   These poll ratings matter because previous election analysis shows that it is skilled manual labour voters who are most likely to move between parties and in marginal constituencies, their votes could make the difference between crucial losses and gains.

Is Labour in poll position to win the Scottish election in May?  Maybe.  But the fat lady – or rather the wee dumpy wumman in her pinny – hasn’t yet sung for the SNP.  And beware those low ratings for the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.  Early reports of their demise may be grossly exaggerated.