Great Double Acts

I came across these two opinion pieces in recent days - the first is by Alan Cochrane in The Telegraph and the second by Jenny Hjul in The Sunday Times (Scotland).

Now I was struck at first by the fact that two such well known papers were having a 'go' at Alex Salmond - nothing unusual in that, you might think, because the First Minister is fair game and it's always good copy to give him a bit of a bashing.

But then I thought 'hang on a minute' - 'isn't there a close connection between Alan Cochrane and Jenny Hjul?' 

Now the last time I saw Alan and Jenny together they were partners - man and wife for all I know now, at that time or now - attending a dinner hosted by the then First Minister, Jack McConnell. 

So, isn't it a great coincidence that Alan and Jenny should both come up with a similar line of argument - in separate and independent Scottish newspapers, don't you think?

But that's separation and independence for you - an area of great public debate, but completely jam-packed with curiosities and contradictions.    

First Minister picks a fight that should be beneath him

Alex Salmond has demeaned his office by getting involved in a banal dispute with a local council about his visit to a school before an important by-election

By Alan Cochrane, Scottish Editor - 7 August 2013

Even for someone with Alex Salmond's poor judgment when dealing with critics, his astonishing behaviour in relation to Aberdeen city council really does take the breath away.

He has chosen to take part in a running battle with the Labour/Tory-run council but in a stupid escalation yesterday, the First Minister demeaned his office yet further in a letter that suggests that the strains of political life may be getting too much for him.

The details of this row are banal in the extreme and should certainly not tax someone, like Mr Salmond, who prides himself on being a "big beast" in our national life.

They concern what Mr Salmond did or didn't do during the successful SNP by-election campaign in the city's Donside constituency.

He has allowed what he should have regarded as no more than a minor irritant, and something that was well beneath him and better handled by some of his many minions, to provoke him in an extraordinary manner.

What he did was to write a letter to the chief executive of Aberdeen city council in which he sought to defend a visit he made during the by-election campaign to a school that was threatened with closure.

There had been criticism of this visit from Labour councillors, the allegation being that the First Minister's visit was of a purely party political nature and was intended to boost the chances of the SNP candidate in that Scottish Parliament by-election.

That criticism was contained in a letter, written nearly two months ago, by Valerie Watts, the chief executive of the city council.

In his reply, released to the press yesterday, Mr Salmond stretched our credulity to the utmost by saying that his visit was not "pre-planned".

He insisted it had been arranged at the invitation of a member of the school's parent council and that he had been "delighted" to talk to pupils "about their project on democracy". But the First Minister then went on: "The visit was totally private. There was no press, media or party or Government officials and I was accompanied at all times by the class teacher and the parent council member."

And it's this assertion that is causing him trouble because of the simple fact that on the very day of the school visit, the SNP issued a clear and unambiguous invitation to all newspapers and broadcasting organisations to meet Mr Salmond at the school and, significantly to my mind, also telling them that the trip was indeed part of the by-election campaign.

But, challenged about this obvious discrepancy, the Nats compounded their nonsense by saying, in effect, that while Mr Salmond was outside the school gates his visit was public but once he went inside it became private.

They really are asking us to believe this wholly outrageous and unbelievable claim.

But the row wasn't just over that school trip. Labour in Aberdeen had also accused Mr Salmond of trying to influence the by-election result with a £100,000 Scottish Government donation to a memorial to the victims of the Piper Alpha tragedy.

But Mr Salmond said there was no ban on such donations during by-election campaigns and that all his government had done was to acknowledge the 25th anniversary of the disaster with its donation.

This spat led the First Minister to accuse the Labour councillors in the city of behaving in an "extreme manner", adding that they were "in danger of bringing the council into total disrepute".

It is highly likely that most of those witnessing these exchanges will agree that someone is bringing something into "total disrepute".

I'm happy to leave it to you, dear readers, to decide who's the guilty party.

Aberdeen fiasco may herald Salmond's exit

By Jenny Hjul Published: 11 August 2013

Aberdeen has, until the past week, been in the news for all the right reasons. It may be Scotland’s third-largest city, but in terms of prosperity it is at the top. With the highest average earnings in the UK outside London and one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country, it is a boom town.

Investment in the oil and gas industry has helped create a job density of 1.2 full-time posts for every person of working age living in the city, which has led to a growth in population, with the knock-on effect of opportunities in other sectors such as housing and the NHS.

It is not surprising that Aberdeen was recently voted one of Britain’s happiest cities — and not surprising either that it is coveted by politicians.

Aberdeen city council was one of the SNP’s main targets, after Glasgow, in last year’s local elections and one of its greatest disappointments when it went to a Labour-led coalition. But that alone does not explain the animosity shown by Alex Salmond to the city fathers, and nor does it excuse his antics this summer, which even his supporters must find bizarre.

The trouble started in June when Scotland’s first minister dropped in on a local school during the Holyrood by-election campaign for the safe SNP seat of Aberdeen Donside. Since the Dunblane massacre of 1996, access to school premises is tightly regulated, yet Salmond, who believes rules are for other people, is said to have snuck into Bramble Brae, without the head’s consent, through a fire exit. An investigation was ordered and the council’s chief executive wrote to the first minister raising concerns.

At this point, his aides might have advised him to take a conciliatory tone, considering that he looks to be in the wrong. But Salmond does not take advice; not from his political appointees and not from his civil servants.

He said his visit was private and unplanned, but it quickly came to light that the press had been invited, so Salmond now faces accusations of lying. To compound things, he rounded on the official who wrote the letter.

“No other council behaves in the extreme manner of Aberdeen city council over a range of issues,” he complained.
“I would suggest that the majority group are now in danger of bringing the council into total disrepute.”

The intemperate language and combative stance are worrying enough, but most incredible is that the first minister decided to pick a fight at all with the local authority, instead of leaving it to his own SNP councillors, and over a by-election that his party eventually won, albeit with a much reduced vote.

Barney Crockett, the Labour leader of Aberdeen, described Salmond as “wild” and “out of control”, “smearing” and attacking those who disagree with him.

“We know he will bully anyone, whether it’s the BBC, journalists, newspapers, foreign politicians and now local councillors if they dare to speak out against him.”

There is something about this spat, petty though it is, that should ring loud alarm bells within the nationalist camp. It’s not just the rearranging of the facts to suit Salmond’s version of events, or the wriggling of his spin doctors to get him off the hook. It is the exposure of the way he operates, with disdain for the democratic process and disregard for the checks and balances of his office.

No one doubted that the permanent secretary to the Scottish government, Sir Peter Housden, would clear Salmond of any wrongdoing in Aberdeen. Sir Peter is said to be cowed by the first minister and incapable of holding him to account. Imagine if Scotland were independent; that would be the end of the matter and our political leader would have proved himself to be beyond his critics’ reach.

But we still have higher authorities and one of them, Sir Robert Kerslake, the head of the civil service, has now been dragged in, asked by Crockett to investigate Salmond’s alleged breach of security at Bramble Brae primary.

How demeaning this is, not only for the Scottish government but also for Scotland. Just when we’re told we should be contemplating weighty constitutional affairs such as national identity and fiscal responsibility, a mandarin in Whitehall has questions in his in-tray about our first minister’s use of fire escapes.

The nationalists are obviously anxious because they have sent in Nicola Sturgeon, Salmond’s deputy and the minister deployed to calm things down whenever her boss has apparently lost the plot.

Sturgeon met Crockett on Thursday and they discussed the need for the Scottish government and the city council to work together for the good of Aberdeen. But even she cannot keep her reckless leader in order. His judgment has appeared to falter in relation to the nationalists’ fortunes and one wonders whether he has the resilience he was once famed for.

The only SNP big-hitter on the national stage, he has always been his party’s greatest asset (in his opinion at least), afraid of no one as he fought Scotland’s corner. But a series of bad calls — over Europe, his involvement in BBC debates, lobbying on behalf of Rupert Murdoch — are a sign of his desperation as his life’s goal slips from his grasp.

With just over a year until the independence referendum, the separatists remain outnumbered by nearly two to one, according to an Ipsos Mori poll last month, which found 28% in favour of breaking up Britain and 57% against. The Yes campaign has failed to make any progress in converting Scots to its cause, as voters — including many who put the SNP in power in 2011 — no longer trust Salmond to defend their interests.

On top of the poor polls, high-profile departures and rumours of infighting at Yes Scotland’s Glasgow headquarters hint at a campaign in disarray.

Salmond, who until fairly recently had maintained legendary party loyalty, is facing dissent in the ranks, with separatist fundamentalists at odds with him over Nato membership, keeping sterling and the monarchy, and capping welfare benefits. No one would have thought the SNP leader would ever be a liability to his party, but in the wake of the Aberdeen saga that is indeed what he has become, almost an embarrassment in his misreading of the national mood.Scotland will grit its teeth and go through the process of the referendum, but there is a sense that people want to move on, preoccupied as they are with the serious business of earning a living and paying their bills. They can see the future but, for the first time, not Salmond’s place in it.