Jim Murphy

Gerry Hassan brings us A Tale of Two Labour Manifestos: ‘Choice’ and the Absence of England, well worth a read.

Voters in Scotland and Wales increasingly have a complex labyrinth to navigate working out whether an issue is Scottish/Welsh or British. Moreover, the wider democratic deficit in the entire process is actually England, for the supposed British Labour manifesto is in fact in many respects an English manifesto, with many of its proposals not travelling north to Scotland or west to Wales. However, it is an implicit English agenda, rather than an ashamedly explicit one, lacking the straightforwardness of being labelled as ‘English’ and lacking any sense of aiding and nurturing the development of an English voice and democratic space.

Previously the Times had informed us that Scottish Labour would ditch "guarantees to voters on health and education being made in the rest of the UK and will fight the general election instead on key pledges on knife crime and apprenticeships". But the BBC's at-a-glance guide to the Scottish Labour manifesto includes a plethora of promises on health and education.

For example:

• Make hospitals cleaner and safer.
• Placing literacy and numeracy at the centre of the primary curriculum

So, what gives?

Labour have decided that the Scottish public should have the right to decide on devolved matters even in a General Election that elects the legislature that deals with reserved matters; as Secretary of State for Scotland, Jim Murphy, tells us in his introduction to the Scottish Labour Manifesto, "The fact we are in opposition in the Scottish Parliament will not deter us from voting our values into laws".

And under Labour's twisted logic, everything English is British, rather than explicitly English, so it makes perfect sense for Scots to take devolved issues - which may be matters for the Scottish parliament, or matters that by rights should be decided by English MPs on behalf of the English public - into consideration at the General Election.

Shouldn't the Electoral Commission take a stance on this manifesto muddlement?

UPDATE

From the Scotsman:

In Motherwell, on the site of the former Ravenscraig steel works, Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy revealed the party's Scottish manifesto, stuffed with pledges on devolved issues that Labour cannot deliver even in the event of a general election victory.

In doing so, the party fired the starting gun for the 2011 Holyrood poll, pledging to push for the enaction of policies on health, education and justice in opposition in Scotland, before using them as the basis of its Scottish election fight.

This article in the Scotsman is illuminating:

In a significant move, the UK government has asked HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to set up a panel of advisers to help with the "technical and practical implementations" of handing more tax powers to Scotland.

Making the announcement, Scottish Secretary Jim Murphy said giving greater powers to the Scottish Parliament – part of the recommendations from the Calman Commission – would help to grow the economy while protecting jobs and businesses.

His move came just hours before a study, published today, suggested that a "devolution backlash" is growing in England as a result of voters' perception of a democratic and financial deficit within the devolution settlement in the UK.

The Calman Commission recommendations clearly can't wait until after the General Election now that fault-lines have emerged between the Unionist parties.

The Scottish Labour Party are panicky about the findings of IPPR's new report on English attitudes to the Union, and the St David's Day poll that found that 56% say they would vote for a Welsh Assembly with full legislative powers . There is a feeling that the devolution juggernaut is careering down the hill, out of control. I expect that Labour are also extremely conscious of George Osborne's embryonic plan to abolish the Barnett Formula in favour of a needs-based formula:

“My initial look at the formula suggests that Wales might well be missing out under the Barnett arrangements. I think it is in Wales’s interest that we have that needs-based assessment, which is independently done … My view is that you want to move on it pretty quickly, as soon as a new Government is elected.”

Ironically the very last thing that the Labour Party wants is a funding formula based on social need (see Killing Home Rule by Kindness).

The Secretary of State for Scotland, Jim Murphy, has promised Scotland that Labour will deliver for Scotland if they win the next election.

Speaking exclusively to The Times, he put forward, for the first time, a specific timetable within which Labour, if elected, would deliver the proposals on devolution, published last year by the Calman Commission.

“We will legislate early in the first year of the next Parliament,” he said. “It would be in the first legislative programme of a fourth term.” Both the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, and the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, he said, were “signed up” to the timetable.

Gosh, Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling are with the programme and ready to deliver for Scotland! Salmond must be quaking in his boots. I wonder if Jim Murphy has considered that England may yet have its say, through the House of Commons? The anti-English Labour Party may not be prepared to give England a positive choice in how she wishes to be governed, but there is nothing to stop MPs elected in England from speaking negatively for England by preventing more power moving away from Westminster in a manner that damages English voters further, thereby preventing an increase in the democratic deficit.

Murphy reflected on why the Scottish people had turned against independence.

"Scottish people know that if it had not been for the taxpayers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, we could have been in as bad a situation as Iceland and the Republic of Ireland."

Who said idealism is dead?

It will be interesting to hear what Cameron will promise for Scotland - I can tell you now that he won't promise anything for England.

What an intelligent and erudite fellow that Jim Murphy is, I wish we in England had an English Secretary of State with but a fraction of his razor-sharp wit and repartee.

I cite this exchange from the "Jim Murphy webchat" on the No. 10 website as an example.

Ulysses: Why not have a devolved Parliament for the English?

Jim replies: That’s up to the people in the regions of England and we had a referendum on regional assemblies in the North East of England and they voted no. So that hasn’t gone any further.

You chinless, pasty, arrogant, anti-English twat.