Municipal Socialism
Richard Leonard posted the following comment on Twitter yesterday which I responded to by pointing out that 'municipal socialists' were in charge of Scotland's largest councils - including Glasgow City Council - when low paid women workers were cheated out of their right to equal pay.
Great to be at the Cunninghame South Labour Party today talking municipal socialism. #ForTheMany
Years of 'municipal socialism' and the terrible arrogance of Scottish Labour is what caused the unequal pay scandals in Labour-run Glasgow City, North Lanarkshire and South Lanarkshire Councils
Glasgow's 'Mr Anonymous' (02/02/18)
Glaswegians are not normally shy and retiring types, but the former 'senior official' referred to in this article from The Times suggests that major cuts and a fire sale of assets might be required for Glasgow City Council to meet its obligations over equal pay.
Now I suggested last week that this was probably a 'put-up' job by disaffected elements in Glasgow's Labour group who were turfed out of office in May 2017 after presiding over the city's unequal pay scandal for many years.
The Times article also contains a quote from the former council leader Stephen Purcell who at least had the courage to go 'on the record' with what he had to say, which is that he was given advice (from officials) that a settlement back in 2005/06/07 would have bankrupted the city council.
Complete bollix, of course, and the only reason the bill is so large today is that Glasgow has been cheating and robbing its low paid women workers out of their right to equal pay for the past 10 years!
In other words if the City Council had done the right thing back in 2005/06/07, it would be in much better shape in 2018!
I bet this anonymous official has long retired with a generous final salary pension scheme and eye watering 'tax free' lump sum which those still fighting for equal pay can only dream of, sadly.
I suspect the anonymous official speaking to The Times is the same person who advised Stephen Purcell (Glasgow's Labour leader in 2005) to bring in its cockamamy 'WPBR' pay scheme which was judged recently by the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, to be 'unfit for purpose'.
In which case they have no right to be taken seriously and not just because they are speaking from the shadows, but because their advice was clearly ill-conceived and helped make Glasgow's equal pay problems a whole lot worse.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/equal-pay-cost-of-equal-pay-is-500m-jobs-services-and-glasgow-s-crown-jewels-says-council-g2j3fc2bn
Glasgow council faces tough choices to settle massive equal pay bill
By Marc Horne - The Times
Nicola Sturgeon and SNP candidates campaigning in Glasgow. The SNP took control of the council from Labour and pledged to tackle the equal pay issue - DANNY LAWSON/PA
There were raised fists and roars of approval when Nicola Sturgeon made an unequivocal and unexpected pledge during her showpiece conference address to the SNP faithful in October.
“For years, under Labour, women were denied the equal pay they are entitled to,” the first minister said. “It may take us a bit of time to fix Labour’s mess, but I make this promise today: fix it we will. The injustice suffered by low-paid women in Glasgow will be put right.”
There were further cheers from union activists who had mustered outside the city chambers last month when news filtered out that city council members had voted to open negotiations finally to settle the dispute.
At a stroke it brought an end to the council’s decade-long effort to fight and frustrate the pay claims in the courts. The nub of the workers’ case was that the authority paid many thousands of its female workforce, many of them in already low-paid jobs, £3 an hour less than male council employees.
The council’s wider pay and benefits system will also have to be re-examined after it was found that a 2006 review designed to close the gender wage gap actually introduced further discrimination against women workers.
The swift moves of Susan Aitken, the leader of the city’s first SNP administration, are in stark contrast to the length of time it took previous Labour regimes to confront the issue seriously.
Now that the cheers have subsided and the placards have been put to one side for the time being, there is a growing recognition that radical and almost certainly unpopular action will be needed if the council is to be steered away from a looming financial iceberg.
Stefan Cross, the QC representing many of the women, says that price will be in the region of £500 million, which represents about one third of the council’s stated net assets. The sums are so large that there have been suggestions that the council could be forced to sell the city’s “crown jewels”, including the same SEC in which the first minister made her barnstorming speech.
One former senior official claimed that everything from the council’s magnificent Victorian headquarters in George Square to Christ of Saint John of the Cross, Salvador Dalí’s masterpiece, which takes pride of place in Kelvingrove Museum, could be used to try to bridge the yawning financial gap.
“We are talking about a sum which represents around a third of the total revenue budget of the council,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Selling the Dalí and the SEC and mortgaging the city chambers would barely scratch the surface. Paying such an enormous sum could unleash cuts to jobs and services on a scale which would be both unprecedented and utterly devastating.”
He said that previous Labour administrations supported equality, but not at any cost. “We all want women to get equal pay but we also want our children to be educated, we want secure jobs, our sick and vulnerable to be looked after and for potholes to be filled,” he said. “Putting these things at risk is not progressive, it is an utterly irresponsible abdication of responsibility.”
Steven Purcell, who led the council between 2005 and 2010, said that he wanted to settle the dispute more than a decade ago. “I was trying to implement the fairest possible deal but I was told it would have literally bankrupted the council,” he said. “The administration needs to settle this bill to fulfil a manifesto commitment, but who could argue that it could be done in a way that could risk bankrupting the city’s public services? We are looking at the potential for a national crisis that ministers would have to get involved in.”
Mr Cross, founder of Action 4 Equality Scotland, which has won equal pay cases for more than 250,000 women, was incensed by the idea that his stance was putting jobs and services at risk.
“Suggesting that women claiming equal pay would be responsible for cuts in services is no better than blaming the hostesses at the Presidents Club for the sexual harassment they endured,” he said. “The women in Glasgow are the victims here, not villains. By underpaying these women for more than a decade the council will have saved billions of pounds, far more than they will ever have to pay. These women have been treated appallingly and for them to be blamed for seeking their entitlement is just another form of sexism.”
A senior council source said that the minority administration had secured all-party agreement on the issue and that there was no looming financial crisis.
“Edinburgh and the Lanarkshires have been through this without Armageddon taking place,” he said. “Most other authorities don’t have the revenue-raising potential that Glasgow has. Labour got us into the mess — without leaving any financial contingencies whatsoever — and we are now cleaning it up.
“It is absolute rank hypocrisy for the same people who put structures in place which are inherently discriminatory to issue warnings now.”
Q&A
How has Glasgow city council found itself facing a bill of up to £500 million?
There were raised fists and roars of approval when Nicola Sturgeon made an unequivocal and unexpected pledge during her showpiece conference address to the SNP faithful in October.
“For years, under Labour, women were denied the equal pay they are entitled to,” the first minister said. “It may take us a bit of time to fix Labour’s mess, but I make this promise today: fix it we will. The injustice suffered by low-paid women in Glasgow will be put right.”
There were further cheers from union activists who had mustered outside the city chambers last month when news filtered out that city council members had voted to open negotiations finally to settle the dispute.
At a stroke it brought an end to the council’s decade-long effort to fight and frustrate the pay claims in the courts. The nub of the workers’ case was that the authority paid many thousands of its female workforce, many of them in already low-paid jobs, £3 an hour less than male council employees.
The council’s wider pay and benefits system will also have to be re-examined after it was found that a 2006 review designed to close the gender wage gap actually introduced further discrimination against women workers.
The swift moves of Susan Aitken, the leader of the city’s first SNP administration, are in stark contrast to the length of time it took previous Labour regimes to confront the issue seriously.
Now that the cheers have subsided and the placards have been put to one side for the time being, there is a growing recognition that radical and almost certainly unpopular action will be needed if the council is to be steered away from a looming financial iceberg.
Stefan Cross, the QC representing many of the women, says that price will be in the region of £500 million, which represents about one third of the council’s stated net assets. The sums are so large that there have been suggestions that the council could be forced to sell the city’s “crown jewels”, including the same SEC in which the first minister made her barnstorming speech.
One former senior official claimed that everything from the council’s magnificent Victorian headquarters in George Square to Christ of Saint John of the Cross, Salvador Dalí’s masterpiece, which takes pride of place in Kelvingrove Museum, could be used to try to bridge the yawning financial gap.
“We are talking about a sum which represents around a third of the total revenue budget of the council,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “Selling the Dalí and the SEC and mortgaging the city chambers would barely scratch the surface. Paying such an enormous sum could unleash cuts to jobs and services on a scale which would be both unprecedented and utterly devastating.”
He said that previous Labour administrations supported equality, but not at any cost. “We all want women to get equal pay but we also want our children to be educated, we want secure jobs, our sick and vulnerable to be looked after and for potholes to be filled,” he said. “Putting these things at risk is not progressive, it is an utterly irresponsible abdication of responsibility.”
Steven Purcell, who led the council between 2005 and 2010, said that he wanted to settle the dispute more than a decade ago. “I was trying to implement the fairest possible deal but I was told it would have literally bankrupted the council,” he said. “The administration needs to settle this bill to fulfil a manifesto commitment, but who could argue that it could be done in a way that could risk bankrupting the city’s public services? We are looking at the potential for a national crisis that ministers would have to get involved in.”
Mr Cross, founder of Action 4 Equality Scotland, which has won equal pay cases for more than 250,000 women, was incensed by the idea that his stance was putting jobs and services at risk.
“Suggesting that women claiming equal pay would be responsible for cuts in services is no better than blaming the hostesses at the Presidents Club for the sexual harassment they endured,” he said. “The women in Glasgow are the victims here, not villains. By underpaying these women for more than a decade the council will have saved billions of pounds, far more than they will ever have to pay. These women have been treated appallingly and for them to be blamed for seeking their entitlement is just another form of sexism.”
A senior council source said that the minority administration had secured all-party agreement on the issue and that there was no looming financial crisis.
“Edinburgh and the Lanarkshires have been through this without Armageddon taking place,” he said. “Most other authorities don’t have the revenue-raising potential that Glasgow has. Labour got us into the mess — without leaving any financial contingencies whatsoever — and we are now cleaning it up.
“It is absolute rank hypocrisy for the same people who put structures in place which are inherently discriminatory to issue warnings now.”
Q&A
How has Glasgow city council found itself facing a bill of up to £500 million?
For more than a decade the authority has faced claims, now totalling more than 6,000, from female workers, carers, cleaners, catering staff, classroom assistants and clerical workers, who claim they were typically paid £3 an hour less than male council employees. For years various Labour administrations have contested the equal pay claims in court, while arguing the city simply could not afford them. The SNP won control of the city in May with a pledge to resolve the dispute, backed by Nicola Sturgeon.
When will the council have to settle the claims and how much exactly will it cost?
It is not yet clear. Negotiations between representatives of the female claimants and the council will last for at least a year, with a series of agreements likely to be thrashed out for different groups of workers. A council report states: “Although (legal firm) Action 4 Equality has publicly referenced pay outs of £500 million, there are numerous elements that might attract cost. The council has not, therefore, identified figures for settling.”
What does the SNP’s manifesto for Glasgow say on equal pay?
“We will work with trades unions and others representing representing women who were victims of discriminatory pay policies with the aim of resolving and settling all outstanding equal pay claims within this council term.” It also commits itself to a policy of “no compulsory redundancies”.
Did the SNP administration’s lawyers support their decision to end legal action in favour of negotiated settlements with the claimants and their representatives?
No. Council documents say they advised councillors to pursue an appeal against the equal pay claims at the Supreme Court. A report says: “The advice from the Queens’ Counsels (John Bowers and Brian Napier) who have been representing the council is that the council should seek leave to appeal and, if granted, should pursue and appeal because, in their opinion, we have arguable points of law which may be successful and, additionally, because the amounts at stake are very large indeed.”
Is Glasgow alone in this?
No. The Accounts Commission has confirmed that Scotland’s 32 councils have already paid out more than £750 million to settle 70,000 equal pay claims. Glasgow is expected to face the largest individual council settlement bill.
What do the other parties in Glasgow say?
Labour previously opposed reaching a negotiated settlement but has had a change of heart. Last month its members voted, along with the Greens and Conservatives, to support the minority SNP administration in ending legal action against the claims.
The Fight for Equal Pay in Glasgow (27/01/18)
Here are two articles from The Times newspaper both written by the same journalist, Marc Horne, who is very generous, shall we say, towards Frank McAveety despite comparing the former council leader and MSP to a 'cockroach'.
Now journalists never reveal their sources, but can it be just a strange coincidence that Marc set out to write a 'sensationalist' story about unprecedented cuts in jobs and services instead of focusing on the real issue - a decade of blatant pay discrimination by Scotland's largest council while under Labour Party control?
So I suspect this was a 'put-up' job by Frank in an effort to divert attention away from the shameful track record of Labour in Glasgow with this scaremongering talk about cuts and job losses.
But I've got news for Frank - it's not going to work! Glasgow's equal pay claimants are not going to be bullied and browbeaten over their employment rights.
If you ask me, Labour in Glasgow has backed the wrong horse yet again and it's time they had some new leaders who are prepared to face up to the party's track record on equal pay.
Because even though his mum was a cleaner (like my own) and presumably very low paid, Frank doesn't seem up to the task.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/glasgow-leader-demands-devolution-of-powers-from-holyrood-qfgjf0jvd
Glasgow leader demands devolution of powers from Holyrood
By Marc Horne - The Times
Frank McAveety said Glasgow had been poorly treated by Holyrood - Photo credit: JAMES GLOSSOP FOR THE TIMES
Glasgow needs greater devolution from the rest of Scotland, with power over health, transport and business rates, the council leader has told The Times.
Frank McAveety insisted that the city had been badly treated by Holyrood and should have the right to opt out of the present funding settlement and negotiate directly with the UK government.
The Labour councillor believes that Glasgow has more in common with Manchester than Edinburgh and wants to emulate its “Northern Powerhouse” deal, in which responsibilities over billions of pounds were transferred from Westminster.
Mr McAveety claims that devolving health, transport and business rate powers to Glasgow and its surrounding area could transform the economy.
The former Scottish culture minister claimed that Scotland’s largest metropolis had been drained of resources.
He said: “Since the establishment of the Scottish parliament there has been a sucking of powers from local government towards a more centralised model.
“The SNP has levered £250 million out of our budget since 2007. Instead of things being sucked into the centre and being directed by Edinburgh and by ministers, let’s trust local democracy to deliver the changes that really matter.
“Powers need to be devolved from the Scottish parliament down to communities and local government.” Mr McAveety said that Greater Manchester, which has gained control of a £6 billion health and social care budget, as well as a new transport network and the right to retain money from local business rates, was his preferred model.
He said: “The idea that some civil servant sitting in Edinburgh or Whitehall is going to find a solution is wrong. Even the Tories have worked that out. Manchester will now have significant powers. The first minister always says she would love to have the economic levers. I’m saying the same. We would love to have levers to pull.”
Mr McAveety said: “Glasgow has a particular dominance in Scotland and we need to reflect that in terms of our public policy decisions and resource allocations. We are competing with Manchester and cities in Germany and Holland.”
David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, has previously suggested that Glasgow would struggle to compete. In a speech made in the city late last year he said: “Glasgow, which can hold its own internationally in so many fields . . . cannot be said to enjoy a globally powerful system of governance.”
A Scotland Office spokesman said yesterday that it was keen to work with the city, saying: “The UK government has already committed £500 million to the Glasgow region city deal, which will support 28,000 new jobs by 2035 and generate about £1.75 billion of extra activity a year.”
A spokesman for Derek Mackay, finance secretary, said: “The SNP government is delivering a great deal for Glasgow.”
Glasgow needs greater devolution from the rest of Scotland, with power over health, transport and business rates, the council leader has told The Times.
Frank McAveety insisted that the city had been badly treated by Holyrood and should have the right to opt out of the present funding settlement and negotiate directly with the UK government.
The Labour councillor believes that Glasgow has more in common with Manchester than Edinburgh and wants to emulate its “Northern Powerhouse” deal, in which responsibilities over billions of pounds were transferred from Westminster.
Mr McAveety claims that devolving health, transport and business rate powers to Glasgow and its surrounding area could transform the economy.
The former Scottish culture minister claimed that Scotland’s largest metropolis had been drained of resources.
He said: “Since the establishment of the Scottish parliament there has been a sucking of powers from local government towards a more centralised model.
“The SNP has levered £250 million out of our budget since 2007. Instead of things being sucked into the centre and being directed by Edinburgh and by ministers, let’s trust local democracy to deliver the changes that really matter.
“Powers need to be devolved from the Scottish parliament down to communities and local government.” Mr McAveety said that Greater Manchester, which has gained control of a £6 billion health and social care budget, as well as a new transport network and the right to retain money from local business rates, was his preferred model.
He said: “The idea that some civil servant sitting in Edinburgh or Whitehall is going to find a solution is wrong. Even the Tories have worked that out. Manchester will now have significant powers. The first minister always says she would love to have the economic levers. I’m saying the same. We would love to have levers to pull.”
Mr McAveety said: “Glasgow has a particular dominance in Scotland and we need to reflect that in terms of our public policy decisions and resource allocations. We are competing with Manchester and cities in Germany and Holland.”
David Mundell, the Scottish secretary, has previously suggested that Glasgow would struggle to compete. In a speech made in the city late last year he said: “Glasgow, which can hold its own internationally in so many fields . . . cannot be said to enjoy a globally powerful system of governance.”
A Scotland Office spokesman said yesterday that it was keen to work with the city, saying: “The UK government has already committed £500 million to the Glasgow region city deal, which will support 28,000 new jobs by 2035 and generate about £1.75 billion of extra activity a year.”
A spokesman for Derek Mackay, finance secretary, said: “The SNP government is delivering a great deal for Glasgow.”
‘I can save Labour’s scarlet citadel from falling’
By Marc Horne - The Times
Frank McAveety, a Barmulloch boy who grew up to be twice leader of Glasgow city council, says that he is “the most powerful elected Labour politician in Scotland” - Photo credit: JAMES GOSSOP FOR THE TIMES
Generations of Glaswegians drew pride from the fact that theirs was the second city of the empire. It was an empire founded on Clyde-built vessels and it stretched from Cumbernauld and Coventry to Canberra and Calcutta, but it has vanished into the history books.
Now there are suggestions that the sun is about to set on another once mighty institution: Labour Glasgow.
Frank McAveety, the city’s leader, concedes that his Nationalist opponents are on the march and the odds, and the polls, are against him.
However, it is clear that he is no mood to pull down the red flag and hoist up a white one. Instead, he is pumping himself up for the biggest fight of his political life.
“If you’re a shrinking violet, you’ve got nae chance,” he declares, surveying his office, a magnificent Victorian eyrie overlooking George Square.
“This is a big job for big personalities and I think I’ve got a big personality. You can quote me on that.”
John Curtice, the University of Strathclyde’s elections expert, has crunched the numbers in advance of next May’s council elections and they make grim reading for Labour’s remaining standard bearers.
Even so, Mr McAveety should not be written off. The Beatles and Celtic-loving former English teacher is a survivor, the political equivalent of the proverbial cockroach that scuttles, undaunted and unharmed, from a nuclear blast.
In 2004, he was sacked from his post as culture minister after he turned up late to answer questions at Holyrood. He told the presiding officer that he had been “unavoidably detained” at an Arts Council gathering, but it emerged that he had been eating pie, beans and potatoes in the staff canteen.
Six years later, he was forced to step down from parliament’s public petitions committee after he was overheard describing a female sitting in the public gallery as “very attractive . . . dark and dusky”. It turned out she was a 15-year-old schoolgirl on a work experience placement with the Green Party.
His political obituary was written for a third time when he lost his seat in the 2011 SNP landslide, but he bounced back as leader of Scotland’s largest city, for the second time last September.
Perched on a municipal armchair, he suggests that the first minister, who has indicated that Labour’s last bastion is there for the taking, could yet be made to eat her words.
“Back in 2012 we heard that Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP were going to sweep into Glasgow. What actually happened was that they were repelled at the door.”
Stifling a chortle, he adds: “The city chambers would have had to consider opening the door a bit wider to get Salmond’s head through.”
The one-time apprentice electrician describes himself on his Twitter biography as an “observer of all things Glaswegian and Caledonian” and an “external optimist”.
Outwardly he is defiant, passionate and chipper, but inwardly is he resigned to Labour’s domination of the city coming to an end on his watch? “No, no, no. “I’m an eternal optimist. I always want to be positive about things.”
His Pollyannaish devotion to the bright side must surely have been tested by Labour’s recent humiliations.
Mr McAveety, 54, offers bold remedies for the party’s woes but gives the impression that he has been overlooked by the party hierarchy. “I’m the most powerful elected Labour politician in Scotland in terms of budget and the exercise of executive power,” he declares, indignantly. “Let’s work with those of us who have got the experience to make a real difference for the future.”
Labour must, in his opinion, drive the final stake through Blairism and rediscover its Scottish patriotism if it is to stumble out of the electoral graveyard.
“People want us to be saying more about Scotland and caring more about the country.
“We need to show we are not in thrall to anyone. We need to emphasise that Labour is all about everyone getting a fair chance in life, rather than being concerned about the powerful and the people with money and influence.”
This Barmulloch boy, a son of a cleaner and a labourer, insists he is no career politician. “I come from humble stock and everything I have ever done in politics has come from a desire to change things and nudge things in favour of ordinary people.”
He will fight tooth and nail to prevent this monolith of municipal socialism, Labour’s scarlet citadel, from falling. “Nationalist politicians are determined to win Glasgow, to go on and win the only thing they really care about; independence,” he says. “Glaswegians don’t want to be used for that.”
Generations of Glaswegians drew pride from the fact that theirs was the second city of the empire. It was an empire founded on Clyde-built vessels and it stretched from Cumbernauld and Coventry to Canberra and Calcutta, but it has vanished into the history books.
Now there are suggestions that the sun is about to set on another once mighty institution: Labour Glasgow.
Frank McAveety, the city’s leader, concedes that his Nationalist opponents are on the march and the odds, and the polls, are against him.
However, it is clear that he is no mood to pull down the red flag and hoist up a white one. Instead, he is pumping himself up for the biggest fight of his political life.
“If you’re a shrinking violet, you’ve got nae chance,” he declares, surveying his office, a magnificent Victorian eyrie overlooking George Square.
“This is a big job for big personalities and I think I’ve got a big personality. You can quote me on that.”
John Curtice, the University of Strathclyde’s elections expert, has crunched the numbers in advance of next May’s council elections and they make grim reading for Labour’s remaining standard bearers.
Even so, Mr McAveety should not be written off. The Beatles and Celtic-loving former English teacher is a survivor, the political equivalent of the proverbial cockroach that scuttles, undaunted and unharmed, from a nuclear blast.
In 2004, he was sacked from his post as culture minister after he turned up late to answer questions at Holyrood. He told the presiding officer that he had been “unavoidably detained” at an Arts Council gathering, but it emerged that he had been eating pie, beans and potatoes in the staff canteen.
Six years later, he was forced to step down from parliament’s public petitions committee after he was overheard describing a female sitting in the public gallery as “very attractive . . . dark and dusky”. It turned out she was a 15-year-old schoolgirl on a work experience placement with the Green Party.
His political obituary was written for a third time when he lost his seat in the 2011 SNP landslide, but he bounced back as leader of Scotland’s largest city, for the second time last September.
Perched on a municipal armchair, he suggests that the first minister, who has indicated that Labour’s last bastion is there for the taking, could yet be made to eat her words.
“Back in 2012 we heard that Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP were going to sweep into Glasgow. What actually happened was that they were repelled at the door.”
Stifling a chortle, he adds: “The city chambers would have had to consider opening the door a bit wider to get Salmond’s head through.”
The one-time apprentice electrician describes himself on his Twitter biography as an “observer of all things Glaswegian and Caledonian” and an “external optimist”.
Outwardly he is defiant, passionate and chipper, but inwardly is he resigned to Labour’s domination of the city coming to an end on his watch? “No, no, no. “I’m an eternal optimist. I always want to be positive about things.”
His Pollyannaish devotion to the bright side must surely have been tested by Labour’s recent humiliations.
Mr McAveety, 54, offers bold remedies for the party’s woes but gives the impression that he has been overlooked by the party hierarchy. “I’m the most powerful elected Labour politician in Scotland in terms of budget and the exercise of executive power,” he declares, indignantly. “Let’s work with those of us who have got the experience to make a real difference for the future.”
Labour must, in his opinion, drive the final stake through Blairism and rediscover its Scottish patriotism if it is to stumble out of the electoral graveyard.
“People want us to be saying more about Scotland and caring more about the country.
“We need to show we are not in thrall to anyone. We need to emphasise that Labour is all about everyone getting a fair chance in life, rather than being concerned about the powerful and the people with money and influence.”
This Barmulloch boy, a son of a cleaner and a labourer, insists he is no career politician. “I come from humble stock and everything I have ever done in politics has come from a desire to change things and nudge things in favour of ordinary people.”
He will fight tooth and nail to prevent this monolith of municipal socialism, Labour’s scarlet citadel, from falling. “Nationalist politicians are determined to win Glasgow, to go on and win the only thing they really care about; independence,” he says. “Glaswegians don’t want to be used for that.”
