1. Labour 2. Conservatives 3. Plaid Cymru.........................4. Liberal Democrats

It's only an opinion poll, so usual caveats apply:

LABOUR is the only party to have won a referendum bounce in the polls and is now on track to gain a majority in the May Assembly elections, according to figures released last night.

Support for First Minister Carwyn Jones’ party now stands at 48%, up from 45% in January and far above the May 2007 result of 32%.

Conservatives are slightly ahead of Plaid Cymru (20 to 19%), Liberals are bumping along at 7%, the UKIP and Greens may well also grab a seat.

There are several varying seat projections but if trends are reflected at the ballot box, then Labour will be running a majority administration post the May election with, no doubt, Mr Tango-Man (as he does here) claiming the credit!

SNP revival... in the polls

A sensational surge! A storm back! A whisker!
An Ipsos MORI poll:

With the Holyrood election now under three months away, the latest poll from Ipsos MORI reveals a significant reversal in fortunes for the two main parties, with the SNP now holding a slight advantage, having been 10 points behind Labour in November 2010. Among those certain to vote on May 5th, the SNP’s share of the vote now stands at 37%, up by 6 percentage points since November 2010. In the same period, Labour’s share of the vote has fallen by 5 percentage points and is currently at 36%, while the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Liberal Democrats are largely unchanged at 13% and 10% respectively. This is first time since February 2010 that an Ipsos MORI poll has shown a lead for the governing SNP

Most interesting thing for me is that the Scottish Conservatives and Liberal Democrats standing has remained unchanged over quite a rough period- they have collectively hit rock-bottom, only way is up? Secondly, whatever happens and barring a miracle, there is going to be a minority administration or even a coalition needing the support of the UK's governing parties- that's going to make things very interesting...

George VI backs voting reform

Well, that's it sorted then:

The campaign to change the Westminster voting system has received the support of Bafta-winning actor Colin Firth.

Fresh from receiving the award for his portrayal of George VI in The King's Speech, the Oscar-tipped star said May's referendum offers a rare chance for reform.

"The referendum is a once in a generation opportunity to change our clapped out politics for good. I'll be voting yes," he said

Seriously, who cares what he thinks?
Why bother even printing it?

University tuition fees, the clock ticking for the Scottish Lib Dems?

It's a wholly justifiable comment with regards to Ms Swinson:

“A remark was made that Ms Swinson and the LibDems had as many faces as the town hall clock so why was anyone surprised by what they did?"

Ms Swinson being the Scottish Lib Dem MP whose attitude on university tuition fees depended on which audience and country's electorate she was addressing.

However, her local colleagues are at least showing a more consistent approach:

SPLITS have emerged between local LibDems and MP Jo Swinson over the explosive issue of student tuition fees.

However, during the debate, LibDem group leader Ashay Ghai went public with the unease it is believed many local activists feel about the LibDems’ stance nationally, especially after opinion polls showed their support in Scotland crashing ahead of this year’s Scottish Parliament elections.

Councillor Ghai said: “The LibDem members of this council do have personal views of conviction on the matter and in this case our leanings were towards voting against the coalition government.

Personal "views of conviction", now there's an interesting concept.

Not a very liberal reaction....

Last week the SDLP Councillor, John O’Kane broached the possibility of his party forming some kind of informal pact with the UUP and Alliance:

"To be credible with the public we need to have some common platform with the UUP and possibly the Alliance Party as we go into the Assembly elections. Pact is a rather unfortunate word but if the Con-Dems can work in England then there’s no reason why we can’t make that type of model work here with the UUP. The Democrats and Conservatives hate each other quite deeply but in the interests of the country they work together and present a united front. We must do that too.

Anna Lo, on behalf of Alliance delivered what I would classify as the typical party apparatchik response:

These comments are welcome and they are indicative of the shift of other parties and individuals towards the Alliance Party.

I am pleased that others now see that the Alliance vision is the right vision, but for us to make the transformation to a genuinely shared society, people must join the one party that deals with this issue ahead of all others, and that’s the Alliance Party.

She seems to be already in election mode and because of that, ignoring completely the enlightened point O’Kane was making in favour of pushing her party’s brand; a disappointment although not that surprising an attitude to take even for the sanctimonites of Alliance.

Michael Carhrie Campbell of the NI Liberal Democrats, having read the same response decided to jump way, way off the deep end:

Anna Lo appears to want Northern Ireland to be a one party State just like the People's Republic of China.

Huh???!!!
Where on earth does that interpretation and comparison come from? Completely OTT and more disturbingly, there is a distinctly stronger whiff of racial stereotyping there than you should expect from someone describing themselves as a liberal.

Put it another way, how would he feel if people were to misinterpret his own opinion on, eg student tuition fees, by saying something along the lines of :

“Michael appears to share the same vices as those of Gerry Adams, seeking to justify the unjustifiable with their typical Ulster hypocrisy and selective amnesia"?

Putting the party interest before that of the wider country is not something exclusive to Ms Lo and, in my humble opinion, is not something arising because of her racial or ethnic background... if that’s not what Mr Campbell is implying, then he really needs to tighten up on how he expresses himself.

What a splendid idea....

They nearly spoil it by giving this nonsense any kind of credence whatsoever:

What is more significant for Scotland is the timing of the AV vote which has been scheduled for the same day as the important Holyrood elections in 2011.


As the SNP have commented: “It just shows that the Tory-led coalition government with the LibDems is treating the Scottish Parliament and the people of Scotland with contempt.”

It gets worse. The British Royal Family have since announced that the wedding of the heir to the throne will take place on the Friday before the Holyrood election. A national holiday has been announced. The Scottish elections will be further diminished. It is worth noting too that Scotland’s First Minister, Alex Salmond, has stated that this election will be fought primarily on the case for Scottish Independence.

It is hardly surprising that those of a more conspiratorial bent are suggesting that this is a grand pincer movement by the British establishment to diminish the importance of the forthcoming Scottish elections. That may or may not be the case

I think "those of a more conspirational bent" would more realistically read as "wild-eyed, mouth-foaming, tin-foil hat wearing, anti-Brit loons".

Still, this is a good idea:

1.Q. How should Scots respond to this disrespectful imposition of an irrelevant referendum on the same day as the election of our national parliament?

1.A. We hijack it. We use it for our own, much more important, objectives. We turn the AV referendum into a referendum on Scottish Independence.

So with this in mind, we, the undersigned, call for all Scots who support our country’s independence to write the word INDEPENDENCE in bold letters across the AV voting slip on 5th May.

Let’s make sure the piles of “spoilt” ballot papers rejecting the British electoral system – and rule from London – are greater than those voting Yes or No.

This way we can finally have our first national referendum on Scottish Independence. The beauty of this initiative is that the London government will fork up their own cash to print and distribute a voting slip to every person in Scotland. Which is very generous of them. Thank you London!

Spread the word. Use your vote on 5th May. Vote INDEPENDENCE.

Let's hope Mr Salmond and the rest of the SNP pragmatists have the balls to back you up on it....

They've set their target and if achieved, then they've earned their separation referendum- direct democracy in action.

The Old Firm increase their dominance

For the SNP and Scottish Labour, read "Rangers" and "Celtic"; so far ahead of the rest of the pack, the rest might as well pack up their boots and go home:

The SNP has significantly closed the gap on Labour following the launch of the party's 2011 election campaign at its annual conference last weekend.

The poll puts the SNP on 34% in the constituency vote, against 40% for Labour, 14% for the Conservatives and 8% for the Lib Dems. On the regional vote the SNP has increased to 31% against 36% for Labour, 15 for the conservatives and 8 for the Lib Dems.

Which makes the Conservatives, the "Aberdeen" of Scottish politics. Allegedly once, waaay back in the mists of time, a power to be reckoned with north of the border, they even nicked the odd title off Labour and the SNP.
Now would be inordinately pleased next May if they avoided relegation to oblivion (aka the Scottish Division One).

Leaving the Lib Dems. Constantly being patronised and laughed at by fans of the Big Two but essentially harmless and, well, pointless (in both accepted meanings of the word).
Partick Thistle?

And then there were the Lib Dems!

The last of the three UK-wide parties is now up and running in the N.Irish blogosphere; the NI Lib Dems' effort can be read here. It is now also on my running links section, "Other Favourites"

Stephen Glenn (now safely returned to the wet and windy Motherland;))is one of the contributors and anyone who has seen his material when he was embedded in West Lothian will know that he is certainly well worth a read.

Referendum or not to referendum? You could always ask the people...

Further to this post, from Monday morning's Scotsman.

THE Scottish Government has confirmed it is poised to drop its flagship plan for an independence referendum in this parliament, despite spending three and a half years preparing for the vote.

First Minister Alex Salmond is set to abandon plans to put his referendum bill before MSPs and will instead appeal directly to the electorate to back the need for a vote on independence at next year's Holyrood election.

The strategy was unveiled to Nationalist MSPs last week and will be discussed at a Cabinet meeting tomorrow.

The SNP had pledged to hold a referendum before the 2007 election, with a preferred date of St Andrew's Day, on 30 November, this year.

But with any bill expected to be voted down by opposition parties in Holyrood, Mr Salmond is instead planning to "appeal over the heads" of the Labour, Liberal Democrat and Tory parties and try to get the electorate to support a vote on independence

I think the pledge was to hold it before next year's election not 2007 but pedantry aside, the cancellation/postponement is a recognition of political reality. But that reality, in terms of the likely voting breakdown at Holyrood, has been the case since the SNP came to power as a minority government, so what's changed?

Not so much "changed" as "not materialised in the first place". The hoped for increase in momentum pushing for it from the public has, despite projects such as the National Conversation, simply not developed in any meaningful form.

*However* the Conservatives and the Lib Dems want a referendum on an AV voting system, for which there is also no "momentum" from the electorate whatsoever for. The Labour Party, although not 100% united on the issue, want a referendum next spring on more powers for Wales. Guaranteed a "yes" vote on that one? Not at all certain; the "yes"s are hardly riding forward on a wave of overwhelming public support.

So... if the SNP do make the independence referendum in Scotland an election issue (and they would be silly not to), then what coherent arguments in a democracy can the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, in particular, make against its granting?



Thanks to Tony for the handy background on this one;)

PM comes to town. Don't mention the wa...pact?

That's one promise kept:

Prime Minister David Cameron is making his first visit to Northern Ireland since taking office.

Hmmm...let's hope it's not just those two on the schedule.

He will be meeting First Minister Peter Robinson and Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness during his trip.

And just to confirm,the "we" in this case being the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats:

"We will work to bring Northern Ireland back into the mainstream of UK politics, including producing a government paper examining potential mechanisms for changing the corporation tax rate in Northern Ireland."

Birds of a feather all roost together?

The first day and indeed a clear message being sent out:

David Cameron and Nick Clegg sat side by side on the first day of the new Liberal Conservative coalition government, which the Prime Minister hailed as a "new start" for politics.

But Northern Ireland's sitting MPs, including new Alliance East Belfast MP Naomi Long, sent out a clear message to the new government by joining Labour and the Scottish and Welsh nationalists on the opposition benches.

That "NI MPs oppose government" (minus the definite article) headline also rings true.

The price of success- 2%...

....and a geographically-concentrated support?

Under the FPTP electoral system, the margin between what is heralded as success and failure can be very thin.

In Northern Ireland, the Conservatives and Unionists gained 15.2% of the total votes cast, number of seats won – zero. Failure.

In Scotland, the Conservative Party polled 16.7% of the total votes cast and won 1 seat out of the 59 available. Again, failure.

In Scotland, the Liberal Democrats got just a total extra of 2.1% votes than the Conservatives at the ballot box, 11 seats won, just under 20% of the total.

In Northern Ireland, the SDLP polled 16.5% of the total votes cast, just an extra 1.3% compared to the Conservatives and Unionists, yet won 3 seats.

A Scottish Conservative Party winning 11 seats would have been considered a resounding success, ditto the Conservatives and Unionists in Northern Ireland winning the equivalent 3-4 seats.

The point I’m making here is not an argument for changing the electoral system but instead for keeping a bit of perspective. 15.2% and 16.7% of the total votes cast is disappointing, 1 seat won out of a total potential of 77 is more than disappointing.

But can 18.9% and 16.5% of the total votes cast be considered that much more of success? Yes, it can apparently, didn’t it deliver a total of 14 more seats?

Quote of the day

There's a fair part of the article that I'd take issue with, but I think Swapan Dasgupta has got it just about right with these 2 paragraphs:

The Conservative Party has to renew itself, but without discarding its traditional commitment to doing “the right thing”— a Cameronian expression that means so much and so little. It has to connect to a new generation of Britons whose Britishness is a shade too cosmopolitan and who have acquired a sense of entitlement that is dependent on an unaffordable welfare State. Cameron’s concordat with the Liberal Democrats may have struck many die-hard Conservatives as a reckless sell-out. However, it has given the party an invaluable entry point into a Britain that is unmoved by traditional Toryism.

Throughout its history, the Conservative Party has reinvigorated itself by drawing defectors from other political traditions. The grafting of Joseph Chamberlain’s municipal activism to the high Toryism of Lord Salisbury and the accretion of the self-made Essex man to the party vote bank by Thatcher are just two recent examples. The addition of the social compassion of the Liberal Democrats to the Conservative kitty has the potential of undermining the “progressive majority” that the Labour Party believes will secure its recovery. A coalition government is a novelty for Britain, but it offers British Conservatism the best chance for a long innings in government.

The Lib-Dems have both a Liberal and a Labour pedigree. To reinforce the May 6 gains, Cameron has to absorb the Gladstonian inheritance of his coalition partner.

A Coalition of the Losers will damage the Union

As Gordon Brown apparently has now called in the progressives of the DUP for a chat about joining his rainbow coalition, expect a lot more of this over the next few days:

English taxpayers face being held to ransom by Scottish and Welsh nationalists in a 'rainbow' coalition to prop up Labour - despite having voted overwhelmingly for the Conservatives.

Even though Labour and the Liberal Democrats have now entered talks over a possible deal, they will only get a Commons majority if they ally themselves with minority parties from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

But these parties, such as the SNP and Plaid Cymru, have said they will demand their countries be protected from cuts as a price for keeping Labour in No 10.

Although last week's election was inconclusive across the UK, in England the Tories gained a massive majority of 62 - and won nearly three million votes from Labour.

If such a coalition (and let's hope, just for the Dupe's sake, they adopt the rainbow as its symbol)gets off the ground, we are not looking at a stable, long-lasting government; I'm sure Labour and the Lib Dems would find enough common ground to get by but as you all will have been told by now ad infinitum, they need more MPs on board.

The Plaid Cymru and SNP are in a win-win situation in this scenario - they either get their immunity from cuts (and the attendant rise in English resentment) or they get an increasingly unstable UK political (and economic) situation. The reverse is obviously true for both Labour and the Lib-Dems - if the electorate had wanted them to deliver a solution for the mess we're in, then they would have given them the mandate to do so but they quite clearly didn't.

Regionalist bribes to keep the DUP, Plaid Cymru and the SNP on board will not deliver them (Lab and the LDs) more electoral support and that mandate at the next (in all probability, imminent) election.
Regionalist bribes will not deliver the hard economic solutions needed to answer the nation's problems.
Regionalist bribes will, however, damage the Union for the reasons highlighted in the article.

Let's hope that smarter and more principled heads within the Labour Party realise soon the danger they are placing not only their party, but much more importantly, the United Kingdom in; they are attempting to do *deals* with parties and politicians who, at best, have no real concern for the interests of (and at worst, an active hatred for) our shared nation.

Wake me up when Clegg goes

Clegg got off to a flying start, Cameron stood still, Brown performed as you'd have expected to perform (ie as a plank of wood minus the animation).

Predictable complaints about it being an "English" debate; considering how many N.Irish, Scottish and Welsh issues have been taken away from Westminster courtesy of the Devolution Experiment, then obviously it was always going to be the wider national issues which would predominate.

But if I, as a political anorak, found myself nodding off within the first ten minutes, I can only imagine the reaction of the typical viewer to what was a boring piece of television- political theatre it was not. These kind of debates "work" in the US due to the gladiatorial format; two challengers battling to land the killer punch on their opponent. Here three was one too many (particularly when that one has no chance of picking up the ultimate prize) to make the same kind of thrilling, meaningful contest.

So, whilst the pundits and apparatchiks will be poring over and arguing about the intricacies this morning, the rest of the electorate will carry on regardless, making sure that they have their hair to wash or dog to walk at the time of the next debate.

Vote with your heart...

Nick Clegg (rebuffing a plea by Labour peer Andrew Adonis for Lib-Dem supporters to back Labour to stop the Conservatives gaining power:

Vote with your heart. Don’t be told by politicians like Lord Adonis you’re only allowed to have a choice of two.

I think it’s really arrogant for Lord Adonis to sort of declare at a time when we have so much choice in our lives – from the holidays we take, from the mobile phones that we choose, from the food that we choose and so on – [that] uniquely in politics, you are only allowed to choose from the red team or the blue team.

Vote with your heart; vote for the values and the policies you believe.

Amen to that.
Calling Plaid Cymru "two bit" might backfire though...

Far too tight to mention...

I've added an additional feature to the site for all of you who enjoy a political flutter.

Scroll to the bottom of the screen and you'll the latest percentages from Betfair for a Conservative, Labour, Lib Dem majority.

More disturbingly the number of seats to be won are also predicted and David Cameron & Co's are falling almost by the hour. Down now to 337 which would give an overall majority of 15 (20 or so, if you count on the Shinners not turning up); not good, not good at all.

Finally confirmed - Salmond not expected to be UK's next Prime-Minister

Although, to be fair, Clegg can count himself lucky to be included in a Prime-Ministerial debate:

The BBC, ITV and Sky and the three main political parties have agreed on the rules for hosting live leaders' debates in the run-up to the general election.

The three 90-minute sessions will begin by focusing on domestic policies, international affairs and the economy.

The studio audiences will then be able to ask direct questions on any subject, with viewers doing the same via e-mail.

Labour's Gordon Brown, Tory David Cameron and Lib Dem Nick Clegg have welcomed the news.

Complex rules

The first debate, themed on domestic affairs, will be held in the north-west of England, with ITV newsreader Alastair Stewart moderating.

The second, focusing on global issues, will take place in south-west England, with Sky's political editor Adam Boulton in charge.

The third, broadcast by the BBC from the Midlands, will be moderated by Question Time host David Dimbleby and deal with the economy.

Craftily entitled "Prime-Minsterial" rather than "Leaders'" for the obvious (legal) reasons:

The BBC is to hold separate party leader election debates in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and other parties will be able to respond to the debates on the news.

But for the SNP, Angus Robertson said: "London-based parties are going to receive exponentially more exposure and coverage than other political parties, I think licence fee payers and voters in Scotland will be asking themselves why they are being treated as second class citizens."

It's only those "London-based" parties which are standing UK-wide and whose leaders have a chance of becoming the UK's Prime-Minister... based in London. Still, the option is always there of advising your fellow countrymen to boycott the programmes and if that is the case, it will be interesting to see comparative viewing figures in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

Almost the last nail in Barnett's coffin...

The Scotsman has had a glimpse of the Calman Commission's report, which is due to be published on the 15th June. The Commission, set up in 2007 by the three main unionist parties, is recommending that the Barnett Formula be dumped and replaced with what looks very much like an unsecured(!) bank overdraft type system of funding:

HOLYROOD will be allowed to run up debts and the controversial Barnett Formula will be consigned to history in dramatic recommendations by the commission set up to review Home Rule in Scotland, The Scotsman can reveal.

In a long-awaited report, the Calman Commission will call for a new financial set-up which will make MSPs more accountable – but could see Scotland's budget severely reduced. The commission also believes the Scottish Government should be granted limited borrowing powers which would be wide-ranging enough to raise £2 billion for a new Forth Road Bridge.

It is proposing no new tax-raising powers for Holyrood and also argues against "assigning Scotland's share of the oil and gas revenues directly to the Scottish Government".

It's probably better waiting to see the full proposals on the 15th before making a more educated comment, but at very first and superficial glance it looks like a report that's going to make the Scottish Adminstration more accountable, whilst falling a long way short of any kind of "Home Rule" or "Devolution Max"- an outcome which as a Unionist you can only but welcome surely?

And now...the UK Liberal Democrats?

But if the Tories and Labour are both serious about fighting future elections in Northern Ireland is it time for NI Lib Dems and the Alliance Party to formalise our bounds and stop merely living together?

Stephen Glenn, Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate for Linlithgow and Falkirk East in the 2005 General Election and Bangor FC fan argues "yes". I agree with him, although I think he's underestimated the potential of the Conservative/UUP grouping to reach beyond the "traditional" boundaries.

And if it all comes to fruition, how about (as suggested/threatened) Lembit Opik standing in his home constituency of North Down?

(If you wish to comment on this, please do so at Stephen's blog)