Labour the new Scottish Tories?

David Miliband who has been on a prolonged sulk since loosing the Labour Leadership contest and been earning lucrative amounts from directorships though he still supposed to be representing his constituents of  South Shields yesterday warned an independent Scotland would have to

 “take its place in the queue” if it wanted to join the EU, and couldn’t just “leave the union on Friday, join the European Union on Monday”.

He told ScotsPolitics.com:

“This argument about Europe I’m quite interested in, because I’ve sat in European enlargement negotiations… and there are 35 chapters of EU legislation that you have to go through, and every line you have to ask ‘does the entry of this country change it?’
“And then you get down to voting, because in the Council of Ministers, every country has a certain amount of votes – so when you get a new member you have to change the voting weights; and critically, you change the amount of money that different countries pay when there’s a new member.
“So you can see, there’s 7 or 8 countries in the queue already – and Scotland would have to take its place in the queue of negotiating its entry.
“So one of the things that concerns me if you vote for independence, is that you leave the UK, but you’ll be in limbo in Europe – it’s not like ‘leave the union on Friday, join the European Union on Monday’.”

But Miliband also  make s it clear that Labour would carry out the cuts agenda in the same way the Tories/LibDem are currently doing 

“There’s been a change in the psychology of the country actually – social security support has moved from being seen as a birthright to being something that’s balanced by responsibilities as part of a social contract,” 

. “And the truth is we’re storing up massive problems for ourselves. The net present value cost of that level of … unemployment is £30billion at today’s prices. There’s a hard message on this as well: you can only afford to [fix unemployment] if you’re willing to put on the table other things that you can’t then spend on.

“You know, an easy answer is ‘well, tax bankers’ bonuses’. But if we’re honest, we’re gonna have to rebalance the welfare state so that it’s much more in favour of supporting the things that are priorities rather than things that aren’t. Childcare and housing are massive drains at a time when wages aren’t rising very fast.”

A message that has already being promoted by Scottish Labour Leader  Johann Lamont, in September  who  delivered a speech challenging some of the underlying orthodoxies within Scottish politics and raising the prospect of an end to some universal benefits such as free tuition fees and free perceptions.

Not a message we hear from her compatriots in Wales .

It looks that Scottish Labour is not only the main voice of Unionism in Scotland it is also the main voice of conservatism.

In its efforts to undermine the SNP Labour have shamelessly adopted the policies of the Tories whilst hoping their current supporters will remain loyal.

And Labour Unionist are putting forward incredibly ridiculous  arguments  against Independence as Gerry Hassan points out here 

Including warning that 

• British music will no longer be our music’, and suggesting that British culture and sporting achievement would thus become foreign.(Alastair Dar;ing)
•  That independence would mean Scotland becoming the equivalent of a ‘British colony’. SNP plans  would  ‘a form of self-imposed colonialism more reminiscent of the old Empire’.(Gordon Brown)

As for Milliband dire warning that Scotland will have to join the queue to join the EU if it  voted for Independence despite no precedent or this, As no nation that was a EU Member has ever split up  although Greenland(an autonomous province of Denmark) withdrew in 1985

But if he is right wouldn't the remnant of England and Wales  also have to apply?After all it is a Union and shouldn't the new Nations that emerge from a Yes vote be treated equally by the EU?

Or is the idea of a Union of equals nothing but a myth.

EU Tory cuts and Labour games.

I must admit I have some sympathy with David Cameron over his call for a freeze in the EU Budget after all if you are making cuts through your own legislator it does seem perverse to agree to another increasing its spending
The trouble with Cameron is that he displays typical "British" arrogance" and simply looks like he appeasing those Tories who really would like the UK to quit the EU and offers no alternative to reforming the way the EU is run.

One simple way of saving Billions is to put the EU Parliament in one place

The provisional arrangements placed Parliament in Strasbourg, while the Commission and Council had their seats in Brussels. In 1985 the Parliament, wishing to be closer to these institutions, built a second chamber in Brussels and moved some of its work there despite protests from some states. A final agreement was eventually reached by the European Council in 1992. It stated the Parliament would retain its formal seat in Strasbourg, where twelve sessions a year would be held, but with all other parliamentary activity in Brussels.

So the the Parliament moves almost lock stock and barrel from Brussels to Strasbourg twelve times a year ending this cost alone might meet any cost in a rise in the EU and if Cameron really wants to change this he should make it a plank of his negotiation,.

The problem for Wales is that althoug a freze or cut in the UK budger might save the UKK some money at the moment we are net benefactors of the EU according to Plaid MEP Jill Evans on average each person in Wales contributes €195.82 per year to the EU, whilst EU funding to Wales is worth an estimated €243.98 per person annually.

And one thing can be certain if the EU Budget is cut or frozen and Wales loses EU funding then there's no chance of the Westminster government making it up even if it was to get an increase in the Tories magical rebate,

But Wales call was not helped when Ed Milliband led Labour in voting tactically with the anti-european Conservatives to seek cuts to the European budget.

So where does Labour stand do they want a freeze, a cut, or an increase in the EU budget?

Or do they simply want Cameron to fail ?

The future for EU funding for Wales looks bleak especially as the Conservative LibDem coalition government is thought to be considering proposals, as part of the ongoing budget negotiations, that would see such support reduced and allocated only on the basis of how poor Member States are, rather than looking in more detail at how poorer regions within wealthier Member States are performing as well.

As we are not a member state this could mean we will judged on the wealth of the UK alone which would be disastrous .

I began this discourse with saying I had some sympathy with Cameron and I have but the answer is to end the bureaucracy of the EU not to extend the cuts agenda further.

Of course if Wales was an Independent member of the EU we would have a say in this as even smaller countries like Luxembourg and the Baltic countries so apart from our four MEPs one of whom is a member of UKIP we have little voice.

With an increasingly Euro-Sceptic Tory Party and Labour playing silly games and not even telling us what they would do . Theres a very real chance that Wales will lose out in the next 10 years and if we want to have any relal say in Europe we need to be there on an equal as an Independent nation.

New working group in Scottish Parliament.

There has been an Interesting  development in thr Scottish Parliament where Patrick Harvie and Alison Johnstone of the Scottish Green Party have reached an agreement with Independent MSPs Margo MacDonald, Jean Urquhart and John Finnie to establish a working group under the Parliament’s Standing Orders.

Ms Urquart and Mr Finnie quit the SNP last month after the party voted to change policy and scrap its opposition to the nuclear-armed NATO defence partnership.

The new alliance will give the MSPs involved representation on the influential Parliamentary Bureau which decides Holyrood business, in turn providing them with further opportunities to contribute to debates in the Chamber.

A joint statement issued by the Independent/Green Group agreed that

5 MSPs have decided to form a technical working group to assist them in their Parliamentary duties.Patrick Harvie and Alison Johnstone of the Scottish Green Party have reached an agreement with Independent MSPs Margo MacDonald, Jean Urquhart and John Finnie to establish a working group under the Parliament’s Standing Orders.This grouping will give the MSPs representation on the Parliamentary Bureau which decides Parliamentary business, in turn providing the MSPs with further opportunities to contribute to debates in the Chamber.The Independent/Green Group agreed this statement:“The five of us have discussed ways in which we can work together, and after taking advice from colleagues on our options, have decided to form a grouping to enhance our ability to represent our constituents.“Although every member of our grouping is pro-independence and believes strongly in a more equal, sustainable Scotland, it is by no means a formal, party-based arrangement; no MSP has changed, or plans on changing, their party affiliation or on taking positions different to those they have taken in the past.“We all look forward to pushing for an independent, fair and peaceful Scotland both inside and outside of Parliament, and to working with MSPs across the Chamber to achieve these goals.”

This is a welcome mood supporters of Independence who are dissatisfied with the SNP government  and would like to vote for a progressive alternative to without having to abstain ot vote for the Unionist Parties need to feel that they have an option.

I was impressed with Patrick Harvie the Scottish Green Leader during the last Scottish elections and was disappointed the Greens didn't get more members elected to the Scottish Parliament.

Of course the Scottish Greens a re a separate Party unlike the Greens in Wales who are an offshoot of the Greens in England.

The new alliance will  also have the same Number (5) s the Lib Dem Holyrood, who currently get a slot at FMQs two weeks out of three: So they will be seeking a  similar response.Though whether Harvie will be seen as leader and ask the opposition question or it will be divided amongst them waits to be seen.

Welsh Assembly 1 Attorney General 0

So it was comprehensive victory for the Assembly  Government,in  a historic Supreme Court verdict over the validity of the first bill it produced.

The five justices sitting on the case, which was brought by the UK Attorney General Dominic Grieve, ruled unanimously that the Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill did not breach the Assembly’s law-making competence.

It was claimed that the Bill which was the first to be passed by the National Assembly – was referred to the Attorney General by the Wales Office, which had concerns that the Bill’s provisions removed confirmatory powers from UK ministers without its consent.


In the judgement, handed down by the Chief Justice Lord Neuberger, the justices said the removal of confirmatory powers was necessary for the Byelaws Bill to work.

It added: “The removal of the Secretary of State’s confirmatory powers by the Bill in relation to the scheduled enactments would be incidental to, and consequential on, this primary purpose.”

“One of the streamlining and modernising purposes of the Bill would be undermined if the Secretary of State’s confirmatory function remained in respect of any of the scheduled enactments.
“There would be no point in removing the Welsh Ministers’ confirmatory function in relation to the scheduled enactments unless the Secretary of State’s concurrent function was also disposed of.
“Indeed, the notion that the Assembly would intend to remove the Welsh Ministers’ confirmatory function while retaining that of the Secretary of State is "bizarre.”

I must admit it was probably worth the expense and time of bringing the case to the Supreme Court as the ruling appears to be clear and that the Assembly can now make Laws that touch on the powers of Ministers other than the Welsh Secretary.

If the Assembly Government had lost the case then it would have been seriously restricted in its Law making powers. Particularly in those devolved areas which are still tied in some ways to departments  of the Westminster Government.

A London Health Minister may have argued that  laws by the Assembly aimed at Health reforms affected his or her department.and was therefore ilegal.

Or some individual or organisation   may revert to Law in order to argue that a Welsh Bil may be illegal on some minor constitutional ruling..

It does seem that the the first bill that the Assembly made law  The Official Languages Act which  faced a similar challenge because the billas it was then  dealt with both the devolved Welsh Language and the non-devolved English Language would have found the same ruling on the basis that to legislate o n Welsh Language equality was bound to affect English and to claim that the Welsh Government were prevented from affecting English was equally bizarre.

So it may be that this was a worthwhile move by the Welsh Office and  Attorney General though I would like to know Who picks up the bill?

But I very much doubt that any challenge was ever considered when the Scottish Parliament started way back in 1999 making laws on its own and it still looks like we need a greater understanding of devolution and what it means from Ministers in London.

Should Plaid concentrate on looking beyond Silk

Are Plaid preparing to temper enthusiasm for the Silk report and leave it to the Unionist to fight out?

Commenting on yesterday First Minister Question veteran BBC reporter Vaughan Roderick pointed out that Plaid Leader  Leanne Wood yesterday  concentrated on calling on the Welsh Government to spearhead legal action against banks and energy companies over market rigging. leaving the Silk commission call  on Tax varying powers to the Libdems La Pasionaria.

Vaughn  thought it was odd

But was it?

As I said yesterday Plaid should be arguing for parity with Scotland not this drip feed devolution where heaven the current proposal talk about them being implemented in 2020 after a referendum.

And even if  the Scottish Independence referendum  fails it is highly probable that will be granted further Autonomy measures after  the next General election.

At this rate it will  take 50 years to  catch Scotland and in the meantime  we fall further behind .

Also the Silk proposals are not the gift of the Assembly but Westminster and will depend on it being in the Manifesto for the 2015 or 2020 General Election.

Already ED Balls is lukewarm so there's no guarantee  it will be in Labour's manifesto.The Tories will be lukewarm and the only enthusiasts will be the LibDems who face extinction.

So should Plaid, really be wasting their energies on this rather then concentrating on calling for a whole package of powers to be devolved including Justice and Policing to achieve parity with Scotland  and openly state that this is only a prelude to independence.

Well yes . There's nothing in Silk for Plaid except to point out its limitations and the length of the process.

It may not be a Dead End but it is narrow and twisted passageway where the destination is unclear.

Another unnecessary referendum?

The Silk commission  main recommendations  that the Assembly will be able to borrow money and there should be full devolution of business rates, stamp duty, landfill tax, aggregates levy and long-haul rates for Air Passenger Duty, with full devolution possible in future, as well as increased power for the Welsh Government to introduce levies.

Tommy showed his Mother and Father he was responsible by getting a Paper Round.

The Commission puts forward a model where income tax structures would be determined by Westminster, but then reduced by 10p in the pound at each level, and Wales would then have the power to vary the rate. This would be accompanied by an equivalent reduction in Wales’ block grant.

Clear?  perhaps not

Basically the plan is to devolve the right for the Assembly the right to raise taxes over a period of 8 years to 2020 when similar powers that were granted to Scotland in 197 will be introduced

But then only after another referendum.

The reason for this will be that there a precedent from the Scottish referendum and such powers can only be seen as legitimate if Wales


In September 1997, two questions were put before the Scottish electorate: one on the principle of establishing a Scottish Parliament, the second on whether or not any such Parliament should have powers to vary the basic rate of income tax by 3p in the pound.

But this was part of the main devolution question . It was not the major issue of the day. But the vote  cannot  it be seen in isolation?

But an even bigger change came in 2012 when a new Act passed with the support of the three Unionist parties in Westminster allowed

 The government to amend the way in which Scottish ministers can borrow to include bond issuance, without the need for further primary legislation.
Remove the need for Scottish ministers to absorb the first £125m of tax forecasting variation within their budget, providing more flexibility when responding to changes in spending levels, due to variations in tax income compared to forecasts.
Allow Scottish ministers to make discretionary payments into the Scottish cash reserve for the next five years, up to an overall total of £125m, to help deal with tax income changes, in the initial phase of the new system.

And yet there was no move to put this to the Scottish people.

There will be at least one General Election before 2020 and it remains to be seen whether the whole or part of  the Silk commission recommendations on whether Wales can earn a bit of pocket money on its own . Will this  be part of the main Unionist Parties manifestos.

So unless they call for a referendum . Why can't it be seen as any other Manifesto commitment?

Of course the reason the Unionist want it is they secretly hope the Welsh people will reject-it.

If they are then that should be it , There should be no need for a referendum . Whilst it is likely that even if Scotland rejects Independence they will be granted even further autonomy and support for this from Scotland will be taken for granted.

Plaid's response to sSlk should be that its irrelevant to the future of Wales and we should accept nothing less than parity with Scotland when it comes to devolution.

What Silk proposes is the equivalent of a teenager being told by his or he r parent that if they want a extra money they should get a paper round and if they prove their can act responsible in this a then in future they can get Saturday job in whatever the equivalent of Woolworth  is today,

Guardian get it wrong on Catalonia

The Guardian website had  a head line

Catalan leader will fall short of majority to press for independence, polls say

The report said ..

Catalan president Artur Mas's party will fall short of the overall majority it needs at regional elections on 25 November to hold a referendum over Catalonia's independence from Spain, opinion polls published in several Spanish newspapers on Sunday have predicted.
A survey by the Metroscopia polling group in El País, Spain's biggest selling non-sports paper, predicted Convergència i Unió's (CiU) haul would be unchanged at 62 seats in the 135-member Catalan parliament after next Sunday's polls. Meanwhile, Barcelona-based daily La Vanguardia forecast the conservative party would garner 62-64 legislators in the assembly, compared with the 68 they would need to govern without the support of six other parties expected to win seats.

However; as a number of commentators have pointed out this is either deliberately misleading or the result of a poor understanding of Catalan Politics.

As the polls indicate that the even more  Pro-Interdependence minded   Republican Left of Catalonia (ERC) is likely to win  12-16 seats and another party Iinitiative for Catalonia Greens (ICV-EUIA)are also likely to back a referendum. With the combined Anti vote PPC ,PSC, Cs .likely to get under a combined total of under 50 seats.

68 seats needed for a majority

Date	Poll source	CiU	PSC	PPC	ICV-EUiA	ERC	C's	Others / undecided	Margin
18 November	SEGRE	– 60–64	– 16–19	– 18–21	– 11–13	– 12–16	– 8–11	– 0–3	–
14–16 November	Crònica.cat	– 63–64	– 18–19	– 16–17	– 12	– 14–15	– 5	– 5	–
13–16 November	Sigma Dos	36.6% 60–63	15.3% 21–23	13.8% 20–21	8.1% 10–12	9.5% 14	4.5% 5	12.2% 0–2	21.3
13–16 November	GESOP	38.0% 62–64	12.0% 15–17	11.6% 15–17	9.8% 13–14	12.8% 19–20	– 6–7	– 0–2	25.2
12–16 November	DYM	39.6% 60–62	13.2% 17	14.0% 18	8.3% 9–10	12.5% 18	4.4% 6	8.0% 4–7	25.6
12–16 November	Feedback	– 62–64	– 17–19	– 16–18	– 13–16	– 14–15	– 7–8	– 0–2	–
8–15 November	Metroscopia	37.3% 62	12.3% 18	13.2% 19	7.9% 10	12.2% 18	5.7% 6	11.4% 2	24.1
6–9 November	Feedback	40.0% 64–66	12.0% 16–18	12.3% 17–18	10.2% 12–13	10.9% 15–17	7.0% 7–8	7.6% 0	27.7
30 October–2 November	Feedback	39.7% 64–65	13.1% 18	12.7% 17–19	10.7% 14	10.1% 14–15	5.4% 6–7	8.3% 0	26.6
29 October–2 November	Crònica.cat	– 66	– 17	– 18	– 12–13	– 14–15	– 3	– 4–5	–
29 October–1 November	GESOP	39.5% 63–65	13.0% 18–20	12.0% 17–18	9.0% 11–12	11.0% 17–18	5.5% 5–7	10.0% 0–1	26.5
22–30 October	CEO	43.4% 69–71	12.0% 15	12.5% 18–19	8.0% 10	9.5% 14	5.1% 6	9.5% 0–3	30.9
9–29 October	CIS	36.8% 63–64	12.9% 19	11.0% 16–17	8.1% 11	11.1% 17	6.0% 7	14.1% 1	23.9
25–26 October	Ara	39.0% 64–66	13.3% 19–21	12.9% 19–20	8.0% 9–12	11.2% 16–18	5.0% 5–6	10.6% 0	25.7
22–26 October	Feedback	40.9% 65–66	13.4% 18	11.4% 17	10.1% 12–13	10.6% 16	5.6% 6	8.0% 0	27.5
18–22 October	GESOP	39.1% 64–65	14.0% 20–21	11.5% 15–16	9.4% 13–14	10.2% 15–16	5.0% 5–6	10.8% 0	25.1
15–19 October	Feedback	40.7% 67	15.0% 21	12.2% 17	9.6% 12	9.7% 14	4.2% 4	8.6% 0	25.7
8–11 October	Feedback	43.2% 68–69	15.2% 20–21	12.0% 17–18	8.6% 10–11	9.3% 13	3.1% 3	8.6% 0–4	28.0
30 September–1 October	GESOP	41.0% 64–65	14.5% 20–21	9.9% 12–13	7.7% 10	11.3% 17–18	5.0% 5	10.6% 5–6	26.5
29 September	NC Report [Note 1]	35.6% 58–59	16.6% 24–25	13.4% 20	8.9% 12	9.0% 14	3.5% 3	13.0% 3	19.0
26–28 September	Sigma Dos	39.2% 64–65	16.9% 24–25	12.8% 18–20	8.5% 11	8.2% 12	3.3% 3	11.1% 0–2	22.3
21–27 September	Feedback	43.0% 66–67	15.7% 21	11.8% 15–16	9.6% 12	10.1% 13	3.6% 4	6.2% 3	27.3
16 September	Telecinco	– 58–60	– 23–25	– 15–16	– 12–13	– 17–19	– 3–4	– 4–5	–
15 September	NC Report [Note 1]	36.8% 58–62	15.4% 22–25	13.2% 20	8.7% 11	9.5% 15	3.7% 3–4	12.7% 3	21.4
23 July	Ara	34.5% 55–57	16.6% 26–28	11.2% 16–17	9.7% 11–13	9.9% 15–16	3.4% 0–3	14.7% 0–4	17.9
4–18 June	CEO	36.2% 60	16.4% 24–25	10.5% 15–16	9.5% 12–13	9.7% 15–16	3.7% 3–4	14.0% 0–4	19.8
30 May–7 June	Feedback	37.9% 58–60	17.7% 26–28	11.8% 16	9.9% 13	9.3% 15	3.2% 3	10.2% 1–3	20.2
7–9 May	GESOP	33.9% 56–57	18.4% 28–29	10.2% 13–14	9.7% 13	10.6% 17–18	4.5% 5	12.7% 0	15.5
6–21 February	CEO	37.0% 62–63	16.5% 25–26	11.7% 18–19	8.1% 10–11	9.6% 14–15	4.0% 3–4	13.1% 0	20.5
16–19 January	GESOP	35.2% 62–63	16.9% 27–28	10.5% 14–15	8.6% 12–13	9.0% 13–14	3.8% 4	16.0% 0	18.3
2012
27–28 December	Feedback	38.5% 61–62	16.9% 25	12.2% 19	10.0% 13–14	9.8% 15	2.1% 0–2	10.5% 0	21.6
20 November 2011	General Election (seat extrapolation)	29.4% (46)	26.7% (38)	20.7% (31)	8.1% (10)	7.1% (10)	N/A	8.0% (0)	2.7
19–21 June	GESOP	36.7% 62–63	17.5% 27–28	– 19–20	– 11–12	6.5% 8–9	– 3	– 0–4	19.2
2011
28 November 2010	Election Results	38.4% 62	18.4% 28	12.4% 18	7.4% 10	7.0% 10	3.4% 3	13.0% 4	20.0

Indeed the Unionist vote seems to have drifted to the The Citizens – Party of the Citizenry which describes itself as centre-left and non-nationalist, although in fact it is a Spanish nationalist party.Which opposes even the extent of autonomy Catalans now enjoy. They are likely to increase their seats but not to an influential extent

The Guardian continues 

A recent survey by Catalan government-funded research group CEO predicts 57% of Catalans would vote to break away from Spain. However, the central government has said a referendum in the rich but indebted region would be unconstitutional, and the constitutional court in Madrid blocked a move to hold a similar vote in the northern Basque country as recently as 2008.

Can Spain really Bloc the democratic wishes of the Catalan people? Will they physically prevent a referndum  as some Madrid politician seem to be suggesting? read here
.
The Guardian  continue.....

Another potential stumbling block for a separation has been raised by doubts over whether an independent Catalonia could remain in theEuropean Union. When asked on Saturday at the Iberoamerican summit held in Cádiz, European commission president José Manuel Barroso replied that the bloc would stand by rules drawn up in 2004, ie states that secede would have to apply for membership.
"The legal situation has not changed since 2004. The Lisbon treaty has not introduced any modifications in that respect," he said

He doesn't say whether what remains of Spain will have to also apply for membership? But sureley the indication is that they would.

Indeed Barroso  is playing a dangerous game throughout Europe the EU is not actually the most popular Institution at the moment and Euro-Scepticism  is on the rise  (Though I haven't succumbed yet).

The thought that they may have to reapply and get a better deal from Europe might well be an encouragement for Catalans and it may be something the SNP might consider  a slogan

Vote Yes for a better deal with Europe

 might just have some effect,