An all time high

So, according to the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey, support for Scottish independence is now at its highest level for 6 years. It’s now at the dizzy heights of a third of the population. It was last this high during the last Labour administration at Holyrood. No wonder Alex Salmond wants to delay the referendum, at this rate will be well in the 2020′s before there’s a majority.

No doubt the SNP will be hailing this poll as yet another victory for them, but what is more interesting is that there is a majority for increased powers. No doubt this explains why the SNP seem so desperate to have the so-called “Devo max” on the ballot paper for the independence vote.

An interesting detail in the survey is that people would be more likely to vote for independence if it gave them an extra £500 a year. Bought and sold for nationalist gold? Perhaps now we know why the SNP are building such a war chest for independence.

The best use for pension funds

In September, I wrote about the need for local state-backed commercial banks, to help revitalise our regions. Now, it appears that the Strathclyde local government pension fund is going to do something very similar.

To be fair, it’s not quite a bank in the traditional sense, but rather an investment fund which local businesses can access, worth £100million. But it is also being used to drive the city council’s social and economic policies, with businesses using the fund having to commit to creating new jobs, and paying Glasgow’s Living wage of £7.20 an hour.

The new fund will be used to support new and existing firms in the Glasgow and West of Scotland area, although a reasonable return will have to be delivered to pension fund members. Presumably by spreading the risk across a larger number of investments the overall return will be satisfactory.

This is something which all the pension funds, not only across Scotland, but across the UK could consider. My own fund in Tayside is sitting on assets of £1.75billion as at the last report for 2009-10, and it should prove easy for it set up a similar fund for SME’s across Tayside to access to boost employment in the region. If it was to invest £50million in local businesses, it would be less than 3% of their overall assets, yet would have a massive impact on the local economy. Jobs would be created and the local economy put back on its feet. Small businesses would have the capital to grow, and take on more people. Money would be spent in the local economy, creating even more jobs.

Such projects would also break down the “Them and Us” culture which has grown up between the public and private sectors. And that can only be a good thing.

The long march for pension Justice

Today I marched on strike for the first time in my life. Despite the fact that, as I explained yesterday, I am not technically on strike as Angus Council moved one of our Bank Holidays, I wanted to stand shoulder to shoulder with colleagues from across Tayside.

We started off from Dudhope Park, down the Lochee Road. The organisers had told the police they were expecting 2,500. But as you can see there were more - a lot more!

This was my first ever march, as I suspect it was for the large numbers of Primary School teachers, Midwives, Radiologists and many other groups who joined us on our walk into City Square in Dundee. The traffic was held up by the officers of Tayside Police, and many of the drivers waiting patiently honked their horns in support.

Once we arrived in City Square, it was announced that the Police said we had between 8,000 and 10,000 folk on the march. There then followed a number of very good speakers, from all the main public sector unions. 

Sadly, I think this day of strike action will not be the last. We will have to come out again to show the strength of feeling on this issue. This was certainly no “damp squib“.

Why I am Striking on November 30th

Well, actually I’m not technically going on strike. Angus Council, several years ago, decided that in order to celebrate St. Andrews Day, it would move a bank holiday elsewhere in the year to the end of November. So I already had tomorrow off. But I will be marching in Dundee alongside my colleagues from other councils, and across the public sector.

The argument is about more than pensions, it’s about fairness. Is it fair to expect public sector workers to pay an extra 3% of their wages in order to reduce the deficit caused by the banks? No, of course not. Is it right that people should be expected to work longer, pay in more and receive less? No, it isn’t. Are public sector pensions unaffordable? No, they’re not.

So, if there isn’t anything wrong, why the changes? And why are they being forced upon us? The only answer is that these are ideological cuts, aimed at destroying the public sector. It is aimed at forcing a divide between the public sector and the private. To make people think that we get gold-plated pensions is to try and turn the public against us. It’s really an attempt to portray the current Government as somehow standing up for the private sector against the public – a cynical attempt to garner votes through smears and slurs – truly the Daily Mail-ification of politics.

Everyone deserves a decent pension. I’m fighting for mine, and for those of my colleagues in the public sector. When I worked in the private sector, and saw decent pension schemes for ordinary workers closed I didn’t think “well, if I can’t have a good pension, neither should public sector workers”.  I thought to myself that these schemes can’t be that bad, if the directors and senior managers can still have them.

That’s why I’ll be out on strike, marching in Dundee, to show my solidarity. Not because I’m in the public sector, but because the cause is just and honourable.

A vision for Scotland’s Railways

I wrote earlier this year, that the SNP didn’t seem to get Railways. The last forward planning document from the Scottish Government was published in 2006, when Labour was in power. The ScotRail franchise comes up for renewal in 2014, and Transport Scotland, the governments transport agency has issued a consultation document giving options for the future of rail services in Scotland. Those expected a forward thinking positive vision for rail have been let down once again.

The headline in the Daily Record says it all – slower, fuller and dearer. Although this is only a consultation, seasoned observers of the bureaucratic machine will know that the Government has already made its mind up, and one of the options within this document is what it wants. And what it wants are trains which are slower (“to help meet punctuality targets”), fuller (overcrowding does not mean extra carriages) and dearer (“ensuring the rail network remains financially sustainable”).

Rather than services being expanded, it seems that at least one of the Caledonian Sleeper services is for the chop (“removing …. financial support and reducing the provision”); while cross border trains will be terminated at Edinburgh. This last suggestion is particularly galling, seeing as the SNP have campaigned vigorously in defence of such trains in the past. The arguments Mike Weir made then are true now, and it is shameful that it is his Government which is proposing these cut backs.

Instead of looking at ways of increasing the number of stations, serving parts of the population which need rail services, mention is made of reducing the number stations! The examples given of urban stations in Glasgow within a mile of each other is poor, as these are designed to serve commuters, while the discussion on those stations which are lightly used does not mention the appalling service these stations receive. By providing additional services, these stations will pay for themselves, but this is not even considered an option.

While the desire to see Wi-Fi fitted on trains, little thought has been given to electrification providing scope to provide better trains, especially on those lines with rolling stock near to life expiry. Although the document says that Leasing companies are more willing to provide new electric trains, it does not follow this through by suggesting the new franchise could extend electrification, acquire the new electric trains and use those units displaced to replace the oldest trains on the network. Surely this shows a massive lack of joined up thinking?

One of the biggest changes which have been suggested in the past is the use of longer franchises in order to help companies invest in improvements. It is no coincidence that the most successful franchise, Chiltern Railways, received a 20 year franchise in 2002. Not only is Chiltern amongst the most punctual of operators, but it also has one of the highest levels of customer satisfaction, as well as delivering hundreds of millions of pounds worth of investment which simply wouldn’t have been possible without the length of franchise.  However, we are not to be allowed to enjoy this in Scotland, as “We are mindful that the coming years are likely to bring significant organisational and operational change across the industry as … there may also be, particularly for Scotland, significant constitutional changes”. So it seems that because Scotland “may” become independent in the future, we can’t have a long term franchise agreement to provide benefits to passengers now. The option of a mutual or co-operative solution is mentioned, if only to dismiss it by talk of the need for large performance bonds.

What we needed was a positive vision for the future of Scotland’s Railways. What we got was the promise of a poorer, more expensive system. It seems that not only do the SNP don’t get Railways, they positively hate them. Now who’s talking Scotland down?

The Union IS Positive

Anytime anyone tries to argue the case for Scotland staying inside the United Kingdom, nationalists tell us to stop being so negative, as if only their view of the constitutional arrangement is positive. But when you think about it, the very idea of the Union is intrinsically positive.

When Scotland finally joined England in creating the United Kingdom in 1707, it brought to an end over 1,500 years of battles between those living in what is now called Scotland and what is now called England, barring a few wee skirmishes. Such a triumph, carried out neither by colonisation, nor by conquest is virtually unique in the world today – and certainly was in the early 18^th century. The ending of years of warfare, of terrible consequence to both the people of Scotland and northern England is surely the most positive benefit to have come from the Union that one could imagine?

And although such fighting would be unimaginable today, even if Scotland were to become independent, there have been as a consequence of the mutual coming together of the two nations, a much better nation as a result – certainly more productive than either could have been on its own. In the fields of science, industry, engineering, and medicine, Scots have worked alongside colleagues from elsewhere on these islands to improve the life and welfare of everyone. This collaboration, unthinkable between any two countries anywhere else in the world until recently have brought to life almost everything in our modern world, right back to the industrial revolution itself.

The firm of Boulton and Watt, now commemorated on the £50 Bank of England note, symbolised the power that the Union between England and Scotland could achieve. Neither was able to succeed on their own, but after forming their partnership created many of the foundations for the entire industrial revolution, from railway locomotives through to steam powered ocean going liners. Mining become much easier – and more economical – while transport was faster and cheaper too.

The very idea of uniting together, working together – even fighting together, for shared values and beliefs is a most positive thing. It’s something we as socialists encourage everywhere else and actually breaking up the most successful partnership in the history of the world is actually the negative campaign.

Hiding their light?

Those who follow the SNP Government closely know they are not slow at coming forward. If there’s even a slight chance of a bit of positive publicity, or some reflected glory, they’ll announce it, sometimes more than once. This makes it surprising that they have been so reluctant to release certain legal advice.

First there was the farrago over the advice on the Local Income Tax. Then it was the advice on minimum alcohol pricing. Now it seems the Scottish Government doesn’t want us to know what advice it has received on whether an independent Scotland would have to join the Euro. Also under question is whether an independent Scotland would have to pay into the Euro stabilisation fund – a total of £8billion.

The SNP are never short of a trick or two when it comes to publicity, and self-promotion. If there is anything which can help their case for independence they will do it, whether its lowering the voting age, setting up their own body to oversee the referendum, or ignoring the independent Electoral Commission over the wording of the actual question. Even the timing of the referendum is likely to be such as to maximise the chances of a vote to leave the UK. Which is why it is surprising that they have been keeping quiet over these latest pieces of advice.

Surely, if the advice was “No, Scotland wont have to join the Euro”, and “No it wont have to pay into the bailout fund”, and other such positive things for the nationalist cause, it would be trumpeted from the rooftops at Edinburgh Castle.

Since it hasn’t been, one is left to only one conclusion. That the SNP don’t like the answer they got.