Arts & Culture - Politics - Anti-Capitalism - Scotland

2007 - 2021

Korea Suicide

A Letter from Pyongyang

After Ruth Davidson’s rapid follow-up to Johann Lamont’s scene-setting speech this week, we’re now in no doubt that thecampaign against the welfare state is now in full flow in Scotland.

It’s no longer possible to disentangle the fight for self-determination for the fight for social justice. Comparing Scotland with economic basketcases has a long history (Albania’s a favourite) and the litany of abusive terms for our elected FM is commonplace, but Ruth’s taken the Romneyesque choice of insulting virtually a whole nation saying that “North Korea would be a ‘beacon of free enterprise’ in comparison with Scotland unless action is taken to curb the state’s dominance north of the Border”. Before adding “Welcome to Pyongyang” and deriding her critics for challenging her ‘facts based argument’.

This is drivel and it will, ultimately cost her her job. The facts she so cherishes are not on her side. In a swift rebuke that even made the print Guardian Stephen Boyd pointed out, the Scottish leader’s got her sums badly wrong:

“Hilariously, at a time when Davidson’s party is campaigning hard for an end to Scotland’s universal benefits such as free bus travel for OAPs, free prescriptions and free personal care, the calculation assumes that the distribution in Scotland of “household income, benefits and taxes is the same as that of UK households”. It isn’t. In Scotland, those in the upper income brackets are recipients of additional spend that is lost in her analysis.”

To compound the problem it now turns out that the Scottish figures (skewed and disfigured as they are) are better than the UK equivalent. The Centre for Policy Studies, a right-leaning think tank, has unveiled striking new research which suggests that 53.4 per cent of British households take more in benefits and services than they contribute in taxes. (1) Oh. Dear. (Whaur’s yer subsidy junkies now hen? – Ed)

Worse still Bella is put in the invidious position of having to agree with Alex Massie. An egregious position and this for one recuperating after hospital. Mr Massie – after a humorous admission (‘It is staggering and perhaps also frightening if the Tory leader really believes the public can so easily be divided into the Bad (88%) and the Good (12%) in this fashion. If nothing else Davidson – whom I suppose I should disclose is an old friend-cum-acquaintance of mine – might have remembered that her own career has hardly been a model of private-sector entrepreneurial vigour’) – goes on to state the wonderfully bleedin’ obvious that: “It’s not difficult to appreciate that We Hate You, Now Vote for Us is not a winning political message. Moreover, when Michael Forsyth – not always a man in tune with Middle Scotland – suggests you’ve blundered it is reasonable to think you may have made one hell of a mistake.”

Just as I was beginning to think that all was lost, that Davidson’s remarkable onslaught against 88% of Scots would win over floating voters, or that Cameron’s high-praise of Workfare in his party speech today might have rekindled the Party de Panda in Scotland, in flew Old Tom Harris (he of the social media fame). Tom kindly re-tweeted his guest post on his Tory pal Iain Dale’s blog explaining why sixteen and seventeen year-olds shouldn’t be allowed the franchise (Votes at 16). Now you can argue this, and that’s fine, but what is going to be interesting is defending this once – as is now highly likely – under 18s are given the vote: ‘Now we didn’t want you to have the vote but now you have vote for us (to not have more powers)’.

So now we have the full range of the NO alliances political messages in the run up to the referendum, neatly summarised as We Hate You, Now Vote for Us:

  • Bar 12% of you you are all scroungers
  • Young people shouldn’t be allowed to vote on the future of their country
  • You live in a  freebie culture – your ‘something for nothing culture’ must end
  • Vote for us and we’ll take away your free education
  • Vote for us and we’ll make you pay

Davidson talks of a ‘corrosive sense of entitlement’ and a ‘rotten system of patronage’ yet it’s clear that the person who speaks these words has no sense of irony and is semi-detached from reality. Scottish Labour and the Scottish Tories are now led by two remarkable women dancing hand in hand towards the autumn of 2014.

With Murdo Fraser and the aforementioned Tom Harris each party had a chance of rebirth. Now they are caught in a death-spiral. As Richard Seymour wrote recently:

“Scottish Labour is thus caught in a vicious circle. The more it suffers electorally, the more it loses whatever political talent it has accumulated. It moves from disaster to disaster, from Alexander to Gray to Lamont. The more the SNP demolishes it, the more bitterly hostile Scottish Labour becomes, and the less rationally it responds to its crisis.”

So too the Scottish Conservatives recklessly lurching from anonymous oblivion to the harsh glare of ridicule. In her speech at Tory conference Davidson said that Salmond was ‘isolated in the Scottish Parliament’, clearly drawing succour from Lamont’s policy statement, but it’s a thought so bereft, so  detached from reality as to almost evoke sympathy.



Comments (0)

Leave a Reply to Charles Patrick O'Brien Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Sympathy surely that is against Tory principles?
    When I was very young about 10/12 yrs-old.I thought that the Tory principle of being self-sufficient was about all things,like taking charge of your self working for yourself and it would extend to a country looking after itself,but at 14 I learned about independence and that is where I have been ever since,and hope to see us independent and self-reliant very soon.

  2. peter says:

    druth davidson’s path was cleared by johann lamont. hence the the deafening silence from labour hq

  3. James Morton says:

    I suspect when Lamont had her brainfart – Davidson decided to join in and let one off herself – So strong it was that even Michael “Gargamel” Forsyth found his eyes were watering. And when Alan Cochrane looked over the wall to say “phew – that’s a bit strong” that should have been Davidson’s queue to apologise and leave the room.

    I hear that the Scots tories are having another review of their party – wonder if the need for a new leader will come up? But tbh, its doubtful if anyone would want the job as it stands.

  4. “a ‘corrosive sense of entitlement’ and a ‘rotten system of patronage’ ” – sounds like a perfect characterisation of the Westminster government.

  5. Doug Daniel says:

    It’s amusing how often political parties shoot themselves in the foot by electing duds as their leader. Anyone with half a braincell could see that Murdo Fraser was the man to rejuvenate the Tory party, although I suppose it’s difficult to win the votes of conservative people by saying “I’m going to change everything”. I thought Ruth had gotten past the teething problems of her first few months in charge, but clearly not. Even Jackson Carlaw would have been better than Ruth.

    As for Johann Lamont, she was clearly the worst of the three. The same goes for Ed Miliband, who is just never going to win an election, no matter how great the press thought his speech was. Even Ed Balls looks more likely prime ministerial material than Milibean. His brother was clearly the only one who stood a chance of winning the next election for Labour, but obviously they all thought they had to make a break from Blairism. How hilarious that they’ve ended up with all the negatives of David Miliband, but in the shape of a dork who looks like he still gets wedgies every morning.

    And even Iain Gray wasn’t as bad as the new Maggie…

  6. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

    Even Wuillie Rennie appears to be trying to disassociate himself with those two clowns. That says it all.

  7. megabreath2 says:

    ‘corrosive sense of entitlement’ and a ‘rotten system of patronage’ ”
    sounds very much like the environs of Labour local Government that I,ve encountered over the years.
    For all her faults Davidson is at least having a go.Yes,its all a shambles and yes her ideas lack a certain coherence/credibility and so on but she is giving it her best shot.Good for her.Carry on giving I say.Lamont on the other hand could hardly be regarded in such a jocular manner given her veritably leaden delivery and grim mien.I have seen her smile but even then the geraniums wilted.In fact-especially then.Its scary.

    I’ve encountered over the years

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.