Opening gambits

The New Year diet has barely started but Jeff is already getting stuck into the Scottish budget stuff. Which is probably still more than some at the Scottish Government are doing.

Remember last year? The Scottish Government thinking the thing was locked down, the late negotiations with the Greens - and the resultant collapse of the process on the deciding vote of the Presiding Officer.

So, in the midst of a continuing economic recession and with a General Election anything from 3 to 6 months away, what price the same happening again? Opposition parties in Scotland bringing down the Scottish Government over their budget. Likely? Not in my book.

Jeff has already done the number crunching - and estimates that the Tories and the Greens will provide enough support for the SNP to get their budget through. I suspect he may be right. But maybe it isn't the final result that is interesting this time - its how we might get there.

I can't see Labour lending their support - not with their position on GARL. But they may enter into negotiations, which is more than they have in the past. The Tories, on the other hand, may play a slightly bolder hand than they have in the past - try to get more value for their vote on the basis that their position is likely to be strengthened in negotiations next year by being the UK Government. I'm with Jeff on the Lib Dems - ask Mystic Meg what she thinks they'll do, because there's really no predicting it (but I'll come back to that). Which leaves the Greens.

Now, I have some sympathy for the way they were shafted in last year's negotiations (not that I showed it at the time - a year is a long time in politics after all) but I reckon they will have learned much from it. They are, if nothing else, a year older and a year smarter. Which means 2 things: 1) if they don't get what they want, they don't vote for it (take note Mr Swinney) and 2) it is important not to bank on their vote without first offering something they want. However, with their sister party in England and Wales primed to win their first (ever) Westminster seat at the next election, any perception that Green parliamentarians are immature or reckless may harm those chances. This may play a part in how they approach negotiations.

The Green position, curious though it is, leaves the door open for the Lib Dems. If the Swinney/ Salmond combo can get the Greens on board, then they can ignore Tavish Scott (which is what they thought they'd done last year). If they can't, they'll have to persuade someone who really doesn't like them (and that, I think, is an understatement) that they can do something for them.

Ah, partisan politics. Let the games begin.

Read more...

Budget: Quick analysis

I haven't had a real chance to digest the Budget yet... but this picture seems fitting.


A top rate tax of not 45% but 50% on those earning over £150,000. Hardly encouraging career advancement is it? And surely something which will only stimulate the economy of other states where entrepeneurs will be investing their cash instead of here.

And all because the Chancellor got his sums wrong and has had to borrow more to pay for his massive spending.

Switzerland? Monaco? The Cayman Islands anyone?

Oh yeah, and what was that about broken promises?

Read more...

Second time round, the budget passes

And so, with much less fanfare than its defeat last week heralded, the Scottish budget has finally passed the hurdle that the Scottish Parliament debating chamber. And by a wide margin - though not the unanimity that Jeff expected.

The vote passed by 123-2, with everyone bar the Greens on board. And each of those who played along with the Government's new budget got a little of what they wanted in it.

The Lib Dems got a "strategy to boost the economy" and a submission to the Calman Commission, HUGE concessions on John Swinney's part. I jest, of course. It was probably all he could do not to bite Tavish's arm off when he offered that.

Labour got 8,000 new apprenticeships (half of what they had wanted) while Margo (who voted with it last week as well) retained the money she had demanded for Edinburgh.

The Tories got all that they'd agreed before last week's failure to pass it. They also look like a fairly responsible opposition - offering to make agreements before the thing falls apart. When the next election comes to pass (which will now be 2011) I suspect voters might remember this - and the reluctance of both Labour and the Lib Dems to offer support until they deemed it necessary (or prudent?) to do so.

Which leaves Patrick Harvie and his fellow Green, Robin Harper. The voted against the budget again, though this time their vote against it didn't bring the thing down. Ultimately though, despite only being 5 foot 5, Harvie appears to be the biggest loser of this whole episode. Instead of negotiating further when things didn't go their way last week (granted, in the first instance, I think the SNP could have opened the door to Harvie MUCH earlier) they dug their heels in and told the Government where to go.

On some levels, their stance is laudable. The budget is not to their taste, the Government gave them nothing that they wanted, why vote for it? And its a fair point. But I guess the thing is this: they could have had so much out of it. Despite there being only two, the parliamentary arithmatic means that those Green votes can mean the difference between sucess and failure (as we saw last week). To the SNP, they can mean the difference between giving away a little on law and order and business (to the Tories), on capital city funding (to Margo) and on environmental issues (to the Greens) and having to negotiate with Labour and the Lib Dems. And in this instance, I think the Greens may have overplayed their hand slightly... and they've gotten nothing from it.

Don't get me wrong. I think the whole process has ended up as a plague on all the parties' houses (with the exception perhaps of the Tories). I just wonder who will pay for it at the next election. And on that level - and despite this recent poll - I fear for the Greens.

Read more...

Budget: Analysis of the parties

Having taken time to sleep on the budget outcome - and not instantly chuck accusations of skullduggery around - I've come to the following conclusions about what happened and how it looks from the outside (at least to those that are watching closely).

So, in order of how they voted, how do the parties look this morning?

The SNP Government will survive this setback. Depending how this is portrayed in the media, they will be made to look like victims of the big, bad opposition parties (their line) or hapless, unprepared and, well, bungling (everyone else's line). The truth, I think, lies somewhere in between. Yes, the SNP have been kicked in the teeth by the failure of their budget bill to pass. But it was oh so avoidable... and I think in their heart of hearts they know that.

The spectre of an election in the middle of a recession looms large over the upcoming negotiations, and though Salmond knows he cannot call one, he also knows that if he resigns, they may be able to kill enough time before the deadline for a new FM passes. So, though it is being portrayed by some (mostly Lib Dems) as throwing the toys out the pram, an election - were the government to resign - seems the most logical outcome.

The Tories got from the budget they came for, and are now seen as a constructive opposition party - and not, as so many thought on the creation of a Scottish Parliament, a roadblock to progress. Derek Brownlee has worked sensibly with the Finance Secretary and extracted the concessions the party wanted so they could vote for the budget. If none of that changes - and I don't suspect it will - they will vote for a revised budget.

And then there's Margo. Well, she bled the Finance Secretary dry of money for Edinburgh (and still, truth be told, wanted more) for her solitary vote in support, which, ultimately, proved fruitless. She comes across as a shrewd, hard-nosed operator but - as I heard David Whitton complaining about on Radio Scotland last night - she only represents one city. The parliamentary arithmatic makes her vote relevant - but only if Labour maintain opposition to the bill. She should remember that (and so should the SNP).

And so, to those in opposition to the bill. The Greens have been lambasted left, right and centre for their role in this but, like the SNP, their press could still go either way. They could be portrayed as budget-wreckers, making unreasonable demands and hijacking the budget for their own ends (as has in fact been the case in serveral quarters) or they could be viewed as principled, standing by the fact that they didn't get what they wanted out of it and voting it down. I think there's a bit of both there. They know their position as potential kingmakers here and tried to get something into the budget that they wanted - partly because there was so much in it that they didn't like. But I think this shows the new direction the Green Party will take under new co-leader Patrick Harvie. I think previously, under Robin Harper, they would have swallowed it and abstained, allowing it to pass... now, Harvie's Greens must be taken at their word.

Labour in opposition too, but more passive opposition than I think they could have been... this leaves open an opportunity for Swinney to circumvent the Greens and Margo. I reckon some kind of deal on skills training might be enough to see them vote for it (I don't think we'll see them abstaining again in a hurry). Labour bloggers have been somewhat restrained in their analysis, with Ewan Aitken, like me, holding out for the day consensus politics takes hold at Holyrood. I fear that day might never come!

Which brings me nicely to everyone's favourite consensus politicians - the Lib Dems. Will's analysis of their position is probably about right. I don't see how any party who demands massive budget cuts then walks out when they are told to stop being daft can now turn round and say they are "open to negotiations" over the revised budget. I'd suggest that Mr Purvis doesn't wait by his phone.

With that in mind, it is a bit surprising that I agree with Stephen Glenn (but only a wee bit) when he says minority government is about consensus, about listening to others. That's what the SNP Government have to do now, to pass this revised budget. Otherwise... well, interesting times ahead.

Read more...

It falls...

So, the budget bill, with a tied 64-64 vote, has fallen.

I've spent the day at the hospital in Stirling (just visiting, thanks for asking) away from media sources, relying on text messages from sources at Holyrood passing on information regarding the vote.

Much has been written about the implications for the process, and indeed, for each of the parties involved. I'll add my own analysis tomorrow, when I've had a chance to look more closely at the day's business.

Interesting times...

Read more...

Tense times at Holyrood

Will the Scottish Government survive the budget vote today?

There's only one game in Edinburgh town today, and that's the Scottish budget. Appears to be on a bit of a knife-edge... just like last year.

Here's my take on it.

Obviously (barring any slips of fingers) the SNP MSPs will vote for the budget. That's 47 votes in the bank. And I think that the Tories, despite playing coy with it, have probably secured enough in the way of concessions (and probably much more than they would have done had the negotiations been with a Labour Finance Secretary - which they will no doubt realise). Their 16 votes will also probably go with the budget. That makes... 63.

Here's the problem. The Lib Dems are... probably certain to vote against it. Which makes it 63-16. And with the mess that Labour made for themselves by abstaining last year, they will probably end up voting against the proposals. Which makes it an ever so tight 63-62 with three votes (Greens and Margo) to go.

I'd suggest, despite not being an easy woman to please, John Swinney has sweetened the deal somewhat for Margo MacDonald, giving her all the money she wants for Edinburgh (and some for Glasgow too!). Her vote would make it 64-62 in favour.

And then there are the two Green votes. According to James, their votes are in no way locked down. And I don't think they will be. Partick Harvie has made it quite clear that there are a lot of things in the budget that the Greens don't like - certainly enough to vote against it.

And indeed, were they to vote against (making it a 64-64 tie) the Presiding Officer should vote with the status quo - that is against the budget (as Stephen notes).

But I remember the stage one process this time last year. The vote at that time was 64-62, with the Greens getting enough from the Government and abstaining.

What money the same vote again? I wouldn't be surprised if, with all the through-the-night negotiations going on, the Greens have been given something - not the £100m per year scheme that they wanted, but something - to let them abstain from voting.

I guess we're about to see how well (or otherwise) John Swinney and others have played their hand...

Read more...