Wendibles, Wendibles, did you give the money back?

Remember the small one returned a donation made by a fellow by the name of Paul Green because he lives outwith the UK and it was an illegal donation?

Well, we all know about the section 56 breach, about how it is a strict liability offence (mens rea not required - ignore Sweet v Parsley it's not applicable in this case, but there is a line in decision of the Privy Council in Gammon (HK) Ltd. v. AG of HK that presumption of mens rea stands

"unless it can be shown that the creation of strict liability will be effective to promote the objects of the statute by encouraging greater vigilance to prevent the commission of the prohibited act."

and section 56 does not have a defence attached to it- thanking m'learned friend) and how the offence is failure to return an impermissible donation.

So anyway, I don't want to talk about that, what I want to talk about is the returned donation. Her Imperial Wendyness assures us all that she has returned the donation (well, actually, and very bizarrely, she sent it to the Electoral Commission instead of back to Paul Green, but I'm assuming that no-one at the Commission hipped it).

The donation was sent back but where's the record? The Commission is obliged to enter such things in the register as soon as is practicable and, indeed, they do. In the register is a drop-down menu for "type of donation" under which you can find "impermissible donor" and you'll see the donations which have been returned. The latest to a regulated donee was in November when Andrew Mitchell MP returned £4,000. Where the money can't be returned it's forfeited to the Electoral Commission - the latest one of those was a party one where the Lib Dems gave up £40k on the 21st of December.

Jackie Baillie claims that Paul Green's £950 was returned the day the breach was realised - that was in November at the latest.

Wee problem - that returned donation isn't listed on the register.

So, here's the question - does Wendy still have that £950 and therefore still in breach of the law or is she telling us that the Electoral Commission has failed to observe the law of which it is guardian?

Have you given the money back Wendy?

Register of donations
69.—(1) The Commission shall maintain a register of all donations reported to them under this Chapter.
(2) The register shall be maintained by the Commission in such form as they may determine and shall contain the following details in the case of each such donation—
(a) the amount or value of the donation;
(b) (subject to subsection (4)) such other details as have been given in relation to the donation in pursuance of paragraph 2, 3, 6 or 7(a) or (c) of Schedule 6; and
(c) the relevant date for the donation within the meaning of paragraph 5 of that Schedule, and (in the case of a donation falling within sub-paragraph (2) of that paragraph) the details given in pursuance of that sub-paragraph.
(3) In the case of any donations reported to them under section 68, the register shall (subject to subsection (4)) contain the details given in pursuance of subsection (2) of that section.
(4) The details required by virtue of subsection (2) or (3) do not include, in the case of any donation by an individual, the donor’s address.
(5) Where any donation or donations is or are reported to the Commission under this Chapter, they shall cause the details mentioned in subsection (2) or (3) to be entered in the register in respect of the donation or donations as soon as is reasonably practicable.

Schedule 7
Part V
Register of donations
Register of recordable donations
15.—(1) Section 69 shall apply in relation to donations reported to the Commission under this Schedule (“relevant donations”) as it applies to donations reported to them under Chapter III of Part IV of this Act.
(2) But in its application in accordance with sub-paragraph (1), section 69 shall have effect with the modifications set out in sub-paragraph (3).
(3) Those modifications are as follows—
(a) subsection (2) shall have effect in relation to a relevant donation as if (instead of requiring the register to contain the details mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (c) of that subsection) it required the register to contain such details as have been given in relation to the donation in pursuance of paragraph 10(3), 10(4), 11(2), 11(3) or 11(4); and
(b) subsection (3) shall be read as referring to paragraph 14 and subparagraph (2) of that paragraph instead of to section 68 and subsection (2) of that section.

Relaunch a burning ship

I see they're relaunching Wendy Alexander - that champagne has got to hurt. Four months into her leadership (which was a new dawn) she needs a wee rebranding.

My advice to her would be "Give it up for your own sake and the sake of your party. You're doing no-one any good."

On the brighter side, I was reminded today that Helen Eadie is a conviction politician - Labour and conviction go so well together - and that she shares a bit of constituency with Gordie le Broon. She must have leadership qualities.

It's interesting that the Social Attitudes Survey shows that Scots have more confidence in their Parliament and Government since the SNP took power - an indication that they were wanting a Government who spoke for Scotland perhaps?

SNP leading again ...

I am delighted to be able to report that the SNP in Edinburgh North & Leith has more members than the Labour Party has in Gordon Brown's constituency of Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath. Given that the SNP organises on Scottish Parliament boundaries and Labour organises on Westminster constituencies (which are larger), it's obvious that the SNP is far better looking than the Labour Party.

So, have you heard of the Scottish Industry Forum? Hmmm?

What a delightful, proactive and excellent Government

I've been looking at how well our Government has been doing. You can read all about it on the Government website. How marvellous is your SNP Government these days?

Well, today it announced:

A crack-down on organised crime - why did Labour never do this in all the time they were in power?

£10 million immediate investment and a look at changing their funding - ending ring-fencing, freeing up universities to get on with their core tasks of teaching and research and freeing them up from form-filling, box-ticking and reporting to politicians.

An end to driving civil servants out of the capital - in future there will only be relocations where there are wider benefits for the taxpayer and no compulsory redundancies - that should end the waste we saw with things like moving Scottish Natural Heritage.

The interim report of the Broadcasting Commission - the first ever look at the state of broadcasting in Scotland and how it can be improved.

Promoting Scottish culture in Europe - supporting our artists and writers, selling Scotland to a European audience.

Engaging producers in the debate on food - making sure that our producers are taking part in the discussion so they'll be part of the way forward.

Something on community right to buy - I don't know much about CRTB, but I can tell you that it seems to be working fine and diddly on Gigha - a wonderful place you should try to visit.

Plans to save £2million a year (plus the planet) on Government publications - too many glossy and over-produced documents came out of government in Scotland in the last decade, it's time for some sense to prevail.

A clampdown on fraud in the NHS - stop the fraud and the theft and be able to treat more people while making sure that honest members of staff get the benefit too.

Not a bad day's work, I think.

And they're off ...

Andy Kerr made his bid for Labour leader this weekend (bit hamfisted, but what else did you expect?) - he came haring out of the traps waving Duncan McNeil as a battle pennant. "Hah!" said Sir Andy (for it was he), "I've caught that dastardly Salmond in a trap of his own making and my honour shall be redoubled as I take the Holy Grail into my mailed fist - it's mine I tell you, mine!"

Unfortunately for Andy, he turned out to be more Quixote than Lancelot and was beating a heavy retreat by lunchtime Sunday. Was Tom McCabe sitting chuckling in his cupboard as rumoured? A dastardly and most scurrilous rumour has it that the famous Hamilton South bruiser with his own video on Youtube has what amounts to an array of envisioned voodoo dolls and takes great pleasure in realigning their expectations. I can't bring myself to believe it though.

The Gray Man, though, must have been getting nodding back and forward in his rocking chair, cigarette in one hand and a glass of Himalayan Goji Juice in the other, his favourite Val Doonican LP spinning on the gramophone as he says "Too impatient, grasshopper, one must learn to play a longer game" before adding more inscrutability cream.

The happy whistling you hear from down by the burn is the escaping Jack McConnell - he's off playing Jim, he just needs to find Huck Finn (oh, read the book and stop jumping to conclusions - they'll finish you). Bet Labour members never thought a mere six months ago they'd be missing Jack come January (except those who can never aim well), eh? They all thought they were off on a six-week refresher course and they'd pop back into government.

Except one auld fella I met while out canvassing. He's not voting for me (not yet), and he'll probably 'give Labour one last chance, son'. He was a member of the Labour party until he let his membership lapse and no-one came round to ask why - in last year's election he voted Labour in the constituency vote, voted to get rid of the sitting Labour councillor in the council vote (good understanding of STV - we didn't get his first vote, but neither did Labour), and he voted for the SNP in the regional vote "In spite of Alex Salmond" because he thought Labour couldn't get anyone on the Lothian list (neither did Foulkes, right enough), and we were closest to what he actually believes in. Anyway, the point of this rambling is that he was pointing out that the Labour party just does not know what it's about in Scotland.

His reasoning was that those who are forming a coalition of the convenient to support more powers for the Scottish Parliament really wouldn't be any more successful at doing that than they were at holding off change altogether because "they still don't understand, son, that you lot actually believe in Independence". He reckoned that the fact they had given up all belief in anything other than themselves and only wanted power for the sake of being in power meant that they had no chance of delivering anything - they didn't know what they wanted to deliver. He used a tortured metaphor which seemed to suggest that they were at a tea-dance while we were committed warriors for a cause dear to our hearts.

Not exactly how I would describe it, but I know what he means.

So what Labour needs isn't a refresher course or a while on the sidelines licking the wounds of defeat, what's needed is a rediscovery of a cause. It might be a half-forgotten cause buried under the detritus of the glory years of Blair or a cause that some thought buried with Keir Hardie. It might be a cause born from the need to renew or a cause brought in by an outsider, but it must be a cause that Labour members believe in - imposing one would make the death throes of a once proud party all the more painful.

So, bearing in mind that it's more than a change of leadership, tactics and direction Labour needs, where can Labour members turn? They're a bit knackered, but I would suggest that they have either to look way back in their past or into their future for the answer - well, for the answer to the immediate question of where their next leader is coming from.

They have to stop looking to recent failures - no David Whitton, no Cathy Jamieson, no Andy Kerr, no Iain Gray. I know that there's a desire in some of the female Labour MSPs to ensure that the next leader is a woman to prove that Wendy's failure had nothing to do with her sex. Fair enough, but in the position Labour is in it must find the best leader possible no matter what genitalia they have. Fortunately for Labour women, their female MSPs are far better than their male MSPs as soon as you exclude Margaret Curran, Jackie Baillie, Rhona Brankin, Pat Ferguson and Johan Lamont.

Labour can look to the future with, for example, Claire Baker - she's young and can learn. On the other hand, she's not very good, she's a Fifer, she's never had a proper job - and she's married to Richard Baker (Labour MSP, not the broadcaster, not the composer and not the author), so her judgement is suspect.

With Labour's future looking pretty shaky, it's got to be a swing back in time, bring on the experience and let's sort the whole thing out. Altogether now:

She's Helen, Helen, Helen Eadie

Without her Labour's far too needy...

Alternatively (and this is a cracking wheeze if they can pull it off), the Co-op splits off and follows its own path, leaving Labour free to put the right-wing, free-market version of socialism it has dreamt up while the Co-op can act as its conscience, then there would be two Labour leaders in Parliament and not so much pressure on the one.

I should charge consultancy fees

Jumping the shark

In The Herald today, Labour is insisting that Wendy Alexander should stay on as leader even after she goes down:

Ms Baillie said Ms Alexander would "stay on and fight for her reputation" even if the Electoral Commission decides she has broken the law.

if the Electoral Commission judge that there has been intentional wrongdoing, by either Wendy or one of her campaign team, I would have thought she had even more reason to stay on and fight for her reputation.

Labour just jumped the shark.

Ooops

Yes, yes, yes, as has been pointed out, I made a complete mess of posting the link to Alyn Smith's blog - after hearing wee Geordie Foulkes on Newsnight last night complaining about the world conspiracy against Labour, I blame Wendy Alexander.

The link should have been http://alynsmith.blogspot.com/

I notice he has a wee photie of the Manneken-Pis dressed in a kilt - I'll leave it to Alyn to explain that particular sartorial composition.