Skip to main content

The end of the Scottish Conservatives opens up a new opportunity for Scotland- and for the Scottish Liberal Democrats

The election of a new Scottish Conservative leader is not usually an occasion of great moment in British politics. From being the preeminent force in Scotland in the 1950s the party now has only the rather gauche and lumpen David Mundell to represent them at Westminster, and even that is by the thinnest of margins.

Yet the choice that the Scottish Conservatives will reveal tomorrow will mark a significant change. Either they will choose the uncertain risk of Murdo Fraser, who has said openly that he intends to remake and even rename the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party or they will vote for an apparently safer choice in Ruth Davidson,who is said to be the choice of the London party leadership, but who is otherwise both rather inexperienced and a rather unconvincing proponent of the discredited status quo in the party.

In my view, whether Murdo Fraser wins or not, he has already opened up an intriguing possibility for Scottish political realignment.

The Socialist hegemony in Scotland has been a disaster- by every conceivable measure the health and wealth of Scotland has been undermined by the creation of a corrupt network of political patronage orchestrated by a political machine that for sheer malignity equals the very worst that Tammany Hall could offer. The public sector, by almost every measure, has grown to top 60% of the economic activity of Scotland. Labour became the party of the Scottish establishment over the course of the past three decades, and over that time the Scottish economy has grown ever less competitive and ever less efficient. After the Labour lock in Scottish politics was broken by the creation of the Scottish Parliament elected under a proportional system, the power of the party has undergone a dramatic decline. Socialism is increasingly dead in Scotland.

Yet the chief beneficiaries of the decline of Socialism have been the Separatist SNP. Paradoxically this is has been because they have absorbed many of the most radical Conservatives. Their solution to Socialism is to to adopt a shock therapy in Scotland similar to that of the ex-Communist countries, and the only way to do that is to break up the Common Kingdom and impose these dramatic policies by going it alone. 

However the already severe economic dislocation that such a shock therapy would impose on the Scottish economy would be compounded by the massive restructuring of the Scottish financial system that independence would force. The asset base of the RBS group alone is a multiple of the size of Scotland's economy. There is simply no way that an independent Scotland can support such a behemoth bank, particularly since at the outset an independent Scotland would have a massive deficit- which the Bank of England would force them to address, if they wanted to continue to use Sterling. An independent currency would immediately devalue against Sterling, leaving Scotland poorer, even before the impact of the shock therapy and the bank restructuring had its first impact. The Naval and RAF bases would close, yet the new state would need to take on huge new expenses, from a separate diplomatic corps to a new customs agency- even if there was no border at Bewick.

If Socialism is dead, Separatism is a dead end, with a horrible economic sting in the tail if it ever happens.

The fact is that unless we want to see the wealth of Scotland decline by 40%-50%, with all the social woes that would cause, we should address the appalling economic and social legacy of Socialism by taking decisions within the framework of the Common Kingdom. By all means let Scotland take as many of those decisions in Scotland as it can- not just in a centralized government in Edinburgh, as the SNP insists, but at the local level too- but it would be raving madness for us to lose the option of the help and assistance that can come from the rest of the UK as the country seeks a more business minded, entrepreneurial and freer future.

The Scottish Liberal Democrats are not "Socialism Lite", and never have been, even if many Socialists were prepared to lend us their votes. We are a radical free market party, that nonetheless believes in corporate social responsibility. There are many economic positions that the Liberal Democrats share with many Conservatives. Where we parted company from the Tories was in our profound belief in Home Rule. The Scottish Parliament was an achievement that was the crowning glory of such great home rulers as Rae Michie, Russell Johnston,  and dare I say it, Ross Finnie,  David Steel, Malcolm Bruce, and Jim Wallace.

The adamant "Unionism" of the Tories was in our view just as much of a catastrophe as Socialism or Separatism. Now, Murdo Fraser is putting forward an imaginative policy that is very similar to our own.

Whether Murdo Fraser achieves the leadership of the Tories tomorrow or not, in a way he has already scored a victory: he is putting forward the possibility of a positive Scottish Federalism- and that is something that the Scottish Liberal Democrats can only view with satisfaction: Murdo, it may have taken a long time, but at last you are with us. 

A Federalist bloc of Liberals and those Reformers who want to jump the walls of the Unionist Tory prison may yet be able to lead Scotland away from both dead Socialism and dead-end Separatism and create a better nation: both for Scotland and for Britain.

In my view, that is not only the best future for Scotland, it is what the people of Scotland want. 

The SNP may decline just as quickly as they surged if a positive, hopeful message is offered to the Scottish people by a Federalist bloc that rejects equally the economic catastrophe of  Socialism and the economic catastrophe of Separatism. .   


Dan Falchikov said…
Well Ruth Davidson has won...
Cicero said…
Hmm... an audited result might show something different.
Newmania said…
. We are a radical free market party, that nonetheless believes in corporate social responsibility.

You really ought to inform, the Liberal Party of this fact down here. They are way left of Labour. There are lots of interesting things in this piece
1-Scottish currency - How would that actually work. You happily supported yoking Greece to Germany and I can`t see who is going to ask the question anyway?
2- I don`t see that a banks assets and the GDP of a country are related. The fact that we have been obliged to guarantee RBS as tax payers is, one hopes,a one off
3 - Isn`t it cake and eat it time again. You want to retain your say over England but become Lord and masters North of Hadrian's Wall.

Personally it makes me unhappy to see Scotland flip England the finger every day. I have been to a couple of England Scotland rugby games and found them to be a friendly rivalry and a reminder that not every Scot hates you on sight, although many (inexplicably )do.
I also do a lot of business with Scottish Companies and again I do not come across any anti English feeling

On the other hand it is clearly unsustainable for Scotland to inflict an unmodernised Labour Party on England and don`t forget that Labour are as dead South of Birmingham as Conservatives are in Scotland.
The phenomenon of regionalisation does not stop in chilly jocko land. The injustice perpetrated on the South , the only tax exporting region outside London is unreasonable.

Your answer is to chop England into bits as if it were less a country than Scotland. That aint happening matey, end of.

I think the best option is to reduce the Scottish MPs in Westminster .
JPJ2 said…
Forget it-your party is dead in Scotland though the corpse twitches unburied.

The English have not the slightest interest in federalism and I rarely hear a Scottish Lib Dem mention it-certainly no English Lib Dem ever does.
Cicero said…
JPJ2- you might want to take a look at the organization chart of the Liberal Democrats: you will see the whole constitution has been federal for decades- the Lib Dems are now and have always been a federal party. We have also been written off in Scotland before most of the elections that I have fought, and we are still here and still fighting for the things we believe in.
JPJ2 said…
Cicero-as you must surely know, I was writing about federation for the UK, not how the LibDems organise themselves.

Anyway, dream on about a LibDem recovery in Scotland if you must deceive yourself, but Rennie's approach, portraying his party as the third unionist party, is digging the grave for the unburied corpse I pointed to in my earlier reply.

Popular posts from this blog

Trump and Brexit are the Pearl Harbor and the Fall of Singapore in Russia's Hybrid war against the West.

In December 1941, Imperial Japan launched a surprise attack on the United States at Pearl Harbor. After the subsequent declaration of war, within three days, the Japanese had sunk the British warships, HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse, and the rapid Japanese attack led to the surrender of Hong Kong on Christmas Day 1941 and the fall of Singapore only two months after Pearl Harbor. These were the opening blows in the long war of the Pacific that cost over 30,000,000 lives and was only ended with the detonations above Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

"History doesn't often repeat itself, but it rhymes" is an aphorism attributed to Mark Twain, and in a way it seems quite appropriate when we survey the current scene. 

In 1941, Imperial Japan, knowing its own weakness, chose a non-conventional form of war, the surprise attack. Since the end of his first Presidential term, Vladimir Putin, knowing Russia's weakness, has also chosen non-conventional ways to promote his domestic powe…

The American National nightmare becomes a global nightmare

It is a basic contention of this blog that Donald J Trump is not fit for office.

A crooked real estate developer with a dubious past and highly questionable finances. he has systematically lied his way into financial or other advantage. His personal qualities include vulgarity, sexual assault allegations and fraudulent statements on almost every subject. 

He lost the popular vote by nearly three million votes.

He has, of course, been under criminal investigation practically since before he took the oath of office. The indictment of some of closest advisers is just the beginning. His track record suggests that in due course there is no action he will not take, whether illegal or unconstitutional in order to derail his own inevitable impeachment and the indictments that must surely follow the successful investigation of Robert Mueller into his connections with Russia.

However, all of that is a matter for the American people. 

It is also a matter for the American people that Trump is cheating…

The rumbling financial markets

Security specialists use a variety of ways to address the risks that they face: and these risk assessments are made in the certain knowledge that the actors in the system hold only incomplete information. Although much mocked at the time, Donald Rumsfeld’s categorization of “known unknowns” and “unknown unknowns”, is now generally recognized as a succinct summery of his strategic quandaries.
By contrast, actors in the financial markets have a more sanguine assessment of the risks they deal with: they divide them into two kinds of risk: quantifiable and unquantifiable. Unquantifiable risk is not generally considered, since there is usually no financial profit that can be made except from pure supposition. Therefore for the purposes of the financial markets, any given event is priced relative to its level of probability, that is to say its quantifiable risk. 
Depending on the market, higher levels of risk generally carry higher prices, lower levels generally lower prices. Clearly such an…