Elephant polo

Scotland's really good at elephant polo - which you can understand given the remarkable qualities of the native Scottish elephant - but it would appear that a young fellow by the name of Andrew Murray is intent on eclipsing the might of Scotland's elephant polo teams (for we have more than one international class elephant polo team - oh yes).

A quite stunning display by the young Dunblaner last night, reminding me of my own days at the tennis - watching, of course. I hear that someone is looking to challenge him for the crown:

Nae chance, of course, tennis players need fast reactions and very fast decision making skills ...

I hear rumours from my very favourite people in the Labour party that power-broking has become the new sport, arms are being twisted, and inducements are being offered. Brown, the story goes, is determined to make sure that the possible contest for the vacant post as milk monitor to the Labour group in Scotland's Parliament does not become a political melt-down.

It would seem that the Broon would prefer a leader to 'emerge' or for the contest to be disgustingly one-sided, but doesn't yet have a preferred bidder. Charlie Gordon is birling his hat in his hands and threatening to throw it into the ring - which would, of course, reopen the whole dodgy donations saga - and he's looking for a buy-off, but what could he be offered? Surely he's in it for real? And surely the loss of Glasgow East will deal a serious blow to the ambitions of anyone from the west coast?

In spite of all the posturing and coquetry ongoing just now, I'll buy you a coconut if there are two or more serious contenders for the vacant post - Labour is terrified of the damage that leadership campaign could do.

Unless, of course, Helen Eadie stands!

La garde meurt mais ne se rend pas!

Watching the unseemly rush of Labour MSPs seeking elevation to the giddy heights of opposition leader, I can't help reflecting that it is, by and large, a prime example of ambition unfettered by talent.

Cathy Jamieson is the best of the lot, performing far better now than she ever did as a Minister, calm and considered, setting aside the shrill hectoring so beloved of some of her colleagues in favour of making a point. Her performance at FMQs was steady and well-handled, her dignity throughout the Wendy Alexander farce setting her well apart from her less sober fellow travellers.

I may have said this before, but the rest of them should stand back and admire as the one true leader steps forward to fill the void (it's a kind of anti-matter thing). She's been a superhero, holds fast to her principles, she can even bring her own scandal. She's an experienced election planner, she knows her history, she is most definitely one of life's visionaries, she's right up to date with all this modern technology stuff, and she even entertains the opposition.

What more could anyone want? Give us Helen Eadie! Eadie to leadie! Her contributions to debates are legendary and wonderful, her rapier-sharp analysis is at least in a par with anyone else in the Labour group, and people would flock to support her. Her questions to the First Minister would be fantabulous - we'd be able to sell tickets for that - and she can spot nuclear weapons on Google maps.

Go on Labour, have courage, choose a real hero!

Wendy Alexander resignation

Was this chap prescient?

Yes, she's resigned and we can get back to politics instead of her nonsense, but she resigned without any humility and without once apologising for her actions.

Instead of admitting she was wrong and saying sorry, she claimed that she was the victim of a 'partisan' decision and that she had been denied 'natural justice'. This is not true - she was investigated by an independent commissioner, judged by a jury of her peers and her actions were found wanting.

Her lack of good judgement has been her Achilles heel all along and her refusal, even now, to accept responsibility for her actions and their consequences is an indication of just how bad her judgement is.

She said in her statement that "My pursuers have sought the prize of political victory with little thought to the standing of the Parliament." It would be better argued that those who questioned her actions and their admissability did so to protect the standing of Parliament and not allow the reputation of Scottish politics to be further sullied. That determination to champion what is right is to be welcomed, not criticised.

What is clear is that Ms Alexander was under attack from within her own party. It was a series of leaks from within Labour that revealed all the information on her donations - the other parties active in Scotland were surprised, to say the least, to discover that anyone would seek donations to run an internal campaign, never mind donations on the scale revealed, it was a leak from within Labour that revealed the "Wonderful Wendy" cribsheets, and the continual dripping of negative stories from within Labour has been consistently undermining her.

Her policy platform was unstable and incoherent, her analysis of situations was abysmal, she shed staff one after another, she performed incredibly poorly in the chamber and just as badly outside it. She was bad for Labour, bad for Scottish politics and bad for Parliament, it is good that she has resigned, she should add some humility to that resignation.

It's time to get back to politics.

Trams - what are they good for?

Edinburgh trams. The SNP opposed them, the other parties all backed them. The combined votes of the other parties forced the Scottish Government to hand over the money and forced Edinburgh Council to crack on with the project.

In October I pointed out some of the problems with the case that had been made for trams.

In March I indicated some of the problems with construction.

In May I lifted the lid on the project shaving.

Earlier this week I pointed out the lack of anything concrete in the tram presentation.

Having taken a wee while to think about it, I'm absolutely convinced that this unnecessary vanity project is already out of control, that the business case is mince, and that we're going to resent the actions of Labour, the Lib Dems, the Conservatives and the Greens in pushing this madness on us.

In the hope of persuading people to try to salvage something from this, I'm going to do the following:

1. We were told at the briefing that the business case was so shiny that the entire cost could have been raised in the financial markets with one wee trip. I know a retired investment banker who still has excellent contacts in the international money markets so I'll ask him whether he'd fund the tram if he was still making decisions. I'll publish what he says.

and

2. I'm going to use the Freedom of Information legislation to get proper details about the state of the tram project.

Right, then, that's me off to ask.

Another poll

The Telegraph's end-of-month poll by Yougov shows the Conservatives even higher than the Grauniad's ICM poll earlier - by a point, 46% instead of 45%.

Labour's on 28% - which is actually up on last month when they had their lowest-ever poll rating. It appears that they are both taking votes from the Lib Dems - that party is now sitting on 15% - in the shoogly peg zone, Lib Dems took 22% in 2005 and appear to be getting seriously squeezed, they're likely to lose heavily in terms of number of seats taken.

Labour's problems are growing. Whether or not it's true, Brown appears to have taken on a bunker mentality and it's affecting the view people have of his party - 71% think his Government lacks direction and 61% say Brown is a liability. While I take John Major's point that Brown's family will be suffering and much of the criticism is personal rather than political, politics isn't a non-contact sport and Brown was part of the New Labour Project that eschewed proper political debate in favour of personality politics and presentation.

What's missing from the Telegraph story is the score for 'others' which will include the SNP on this UK poll. The figures for the other parties add up to 89% though, indicating that the SNP vote will still be incredibly strong.

Mind how you go!

UPDATE

Disaster for Labour news coming in just now - fifth place in the Henley vote behind the Greens and the BNP. Labour took only 3.1% - a drop of almost 12% and two places and a lost deposit.

The Lib Dems failed to make any impact on the Conservative vote, either, the Con vote actually going up by 3.5% - a swing of .81% from Lib Dem to Conservative, Lib Dem vote increasing by only 1.8%.

Only the Conservatives have anything to celebrate in Henley - a solid and improved result. They hadn't taken a casual vacancy since 1982 now they've taken two in a little over a month and will, of course, take a third victory on July 10th - unless ...

Full result:

John Howell (C) 19,796 (57%, +3.5%)
Stephen Kearney (LD) 9,680 (28%, +1.8%)
Mark Stevenson (Green) 1,321 (3.8%, +0.5%)
Timothy Rait (BNP) 1,243 (3.6%)
Richard McKenzie (Lab) 1,066 (3.1%, -11.7%)
Chris Adams (UKIP) 843 (2.4%, -0.1%)
Bananaman Owen (Loony) 242 (0.70%)
Derek Allpass (Eng Dem) 157 (0.45%)

C maj 10,116 (29.1%)
0.81% swing LD to C

Labour - will its members never learn?

I've been watching the coverage of the Standards Committee decision on Wendy Alexander today, and I must admit to a degree of astonishment at Labour's spin.

Instead of doing the obvious and honest thing - apologise, accept the penalty and move on - Labour appears determined to continue to argue the case that Wendy did nothing wrong. Wendy Alexander kept saying we should draw a line under it and move on but when presented with the chance to do just that Labour passed it up. Instead, Labour members have been claiming that all of Wendy's pain has been caused by the SNP.

For example, I've just seen David Whitton on Newsnight trying to bully his way through the difficulty - exactly the wrong approach. He made claims about what was in the Commissioner's report - I don't know whether he was right about it, but he shouldn't actually know what's in that report - it's not public. He also said that there was another complaint to be considered - he shouldn't know that either. So has David Whitton and an unnnamed co-conspirator broken the rules again to give him sight of documents or was he just making stuff up for effect?

Labour's farce should be over so we can all get back to talking about politics. Apologise, accept your punishment and move on.

Surely it's over now?

Code of Conduct
1.1.2 The schedule to the Act sets out the circumstances in which financial interests must be registered. In this Code and in the Act these interests are referred to as ‘registrable interests’. These registrable interests are described in detail in Section 2 of this Code. Penalties and criminal sanctions apply in the event of non compliance with the requirements for registration. If a Member is uncertain about any aspect of the operation of the Act or the Code, the Standards clerks may be asked for advice. However, each Member must ensure that the provisions of the Act are complied with and may additionally wish to seek independent legal and other professional advice prior to registration.

1.2.11 Where an interest is acquired after the initial registration, the procedure is largely the same as for initial registration. A Member must register an acquired interest by lodging a further written statement within 30 days after the date of acquisition (section 5 of the Act). The form of written statement is again the same as that provided for initial registration but in this case the Member fills in only the information relating to the acquired interest.

2.6: Gifts – schedule, paragraph 6
A member has a registrable interest:
(1) Where a member or a company in which the member has a controlling interest or a partnership of which the member is a partner, receives, or has received, a gift of heritable or moveable property or a gift of a benefit in kind and—
(a) the value the gift, at the date on which it was received exceeds 1 per cent of a member’s salary on that date (rounded down to the nearest £10); and
(b) that gift meets the prejudice test.


Seems perfectly clear to me, simple to understand, easy to follow. Any gift over £520 should be registered - even if it wasn't cash that was received, but just a benefit of some kind.

You've got to believe that someone in the Labour party will now have the decency to tell Wendy Alexander that it's over, or move a vote of no confidence? A wee shove and the pain will be over for her, she can go and do something she's good at instead.