Scotland – more Scandinavian ? In suicides maybe

 

I recently went to an event organised by The Church of Scotland and Mackay Hannah where we discussed ‘Ethics and Politics ‘.

One of the most interesting presentations was by Richard Wilkinson, part of the double act with Kate Picket, joint authors of The Spirit Level.

I intuitively, and on their  evidence,  I find  a lot  to agree with in their  book and their arguments . However, as I get older I get pickier and something caught my eye.

So I noticed in his presentation  of the various  aspects of equality  variance in different societies  there was one big  element missing .

What was not listed alongside various inequality factors such as  income variations  ; mental distress; lack of trust; crime rates  etc. was the subject matter of early work by Durkheim – suicide.

Seeing that omission took me back to the Wilkinson/Picket book where they do refer to suicide , but fleetingly,  as an apparent  and unexplained counterfactual to their  equality findings . “ The only social problem we have encountered which tends to be more common in more equal countries [ but not significantly  amongst more equal states in the USA ) is, perhaps surprisingly , suicide.” [ W&P,Edition 1: p175 ].

A distressing conundrum – particularly in Scotland .

 

Suicide Rates per 100000 adult pop.

Most recent data for each country  [Eurostat, OECD, ONS, GRO Scotland  & NHS Data ] varies from 2008 – 2010 and  there is acknowledged data variation that relevant reporting organisations are trying to standardise.

 

European Union /EEA	10.2
Denmark	9.9
Estonia	14.8
Latvia	17.5
Lithuania	28.5
Finland	16.8
Sweden	11.1
Iceland	11.5
Norway	10.8
Japan	23.8
USA	12.0
Scotland	14.5
Northern Ireland [ 1998-8.6 to 2010 figures..]	16.0
Wales	8.6
UK	6.4

 

Sturgeon signals shift on universality or targeting ?

 

Nicola Sturgeon [ Deputy First Minister of Scotland ]; Emile Zola [ dead French writer]; Ken Bates [ sometime chairman of Chelsea, now Leeds ].

What  a trio ; so   what can they add to the current heated discussion on universality and/or  targeting  for public services in Scotland ?

Actually , they all in different ways throw some light on  aspects of this policy conundrum  , part of a discussion that will not disappear , even if protagonists sling the most damning of comments at each other….heir of Blair…. Osborne in a kilt ….. neo –liberal  etc. …Tartan Tories.

Let’s start with Nicola Sturgeon , who , handling First Minister’s questions while Alex Salmon was recently away,  told her main opponents :

“I remind Johann Lamont gently that the people of Scotland chose: in May 2011, they overwhelmingly chose free prescription charges, a freeze on the council tax and free university education for working-class young people . “ [emphasis  RK ].

And Zola ? In The Red Lily he famously wrote that:

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Ken Bates, for his part,  once offered a typically direct comment to a celebrity pressing him for a comp ticket : -

“There are no complimentary tickets; they’re just tickets somebody else has paid for .”

These three comments all have relevance to our current , and continuing, debate on Universality. They address – in this order   :

·         who we provide for   with such universal services ;

·         who actually benefits from such services ;

·         and how we make choices about what our  available tax revenues are spent on, because as all economists would say , all resources are scarce.

Start with  Nicola Sturgeon. To be fair  , she was speaking in a heated exchange , and probably extempore, but what she is recorded as saying in the Parliamentary Report is not current public policy in Scotland . Our current HE  regime doesn’t just provide under-graduate education with no direct fees  for ‘working class kids’ ; it provides that same arrangement for everybody regardless of income, or family income, if they meet the criteria for fee-free entry : status as a Scottish resident  or EU resident from countries other than the 3 other home countries of the UK  .

So does this statement [ made twice in the same session  ] signal the possibility of some policy change ?

Perhaps ; because at the same time that these statements were being made , change to means testing for student bursaries was announced by the government .

The only students to get full bursaries of £1750 per annum will be those in households with total incomes under £16999 per year, all others will be subject to some form of income assessment and no bursaries will be awarded to a student in a household with income of over £34000….universalism or means testing?

Zola? Well his famous phrase has most often been used as a powerful critique of simplistic notions of liberty .

However, it can also be applied to simplistic assumptions that  universality of provision will guarantee that all classes will take advantage of that provision . Simply because a facility or service is provided ‘free’ or with no initial entry charge does not mean it is uniformly used or enjoyed by the whole social spectrum of any population .

Higher education is actually just  example . Much of the available research data tells us that access to HE – whether there are fees or no fees – is taken up more widely by the already well educated and the already privileged . In some of the ancient Scottish universities this phenomenon is widely acknowledged – but to date very little has been done about it. Interestingly , this is an aspect of HE in Scotland that the government is now pressing  the elite universities on.

There are other examples . Many public galleries and museums do not charge  for entry to regular collections; the visitor profile is skewed up the social class scale despite this  .

It appears from early research that free eye tests for older people  , with their collateral  capacity to provide early diagnosis of various health conditions , has an uptake skewed toward  higher social class .

The reality of experience, whether in Scotland or the wider UK  is the same  whether such facilities and services are nationally provided or locally operated. Discretionary and ostensibly  universal services and facilities are most enjoyed  by the already privileged .

So, Ken Bates – what’s he got to  do with all  this ?  His  colourful  riposte  about the comp. tickets is a pretty concise and graphic metaphor for the opportunity costs associated with any decision on resources.

It is simple , readily apparent , and there are  countless examples that when resources are constrained – and they always are – choosing to spend on one activity is also a choice  not to spend on some other activity or, in technical terms ,  to misallocate resources.

Public services of most  kinds other than classic ‘public goods’  sit on a  4 dimension matrix  balanced  between the universally provided and the targeted; between those organised  free at the point of access and those that are charged for on consumption rather than through general taxation  .

The balance of this matrix  varies over time and from society to society whether it’s Scotland, Scandinavia or Texas .

We probably haven’t got that mix right in Scotland ; or elsewhere in the UK ; or indeed elsewhere outside these islands.  Discussing this is of more value than shouting about it with a tone of fake certainty.

 

 

 

 

First Group or Virgin ; chose your favourite outsourcer?

 

Sir Richard Branson has a remarkable talent ;   not necessarily for running airlines , banks or railways – he employs hard-nosed industry professionals to do that – but for securing great and usually positive media coverage for  even his most self-serving actions . We have seen that yet again over the past week or so in the manner that so many people , from commuters and rail travellers to former government ministers and people who probably never travel on a train ,  have fallen over themselves to tell us what a  tragedy it is that Virgin Rail lot the West Coast franchise to First Group.

For that you have to admire him , and also recognise that that other hard-nosed business people admire his talent for positive publicity as well. After all, when Sir Brian Souter of Stagecoach and Singapore Airlines are both willing to accept a 51:49 ownership in favour of Branson in respect of their respective joint ventures [ Rail and Air travel ] there must be good reasons for that .

What is more remarkable  in this affair  is that shadow ministers and opposition MPs  who should  be calling for the whole franchise arrangement to be wound up are – in effect – supporting  a company whose engagement in rail travel has been a form of ‘subsidy farming ‘ and who want to continue doing that for another few years .

There seem to me to be several  different aspects of this that have been overlooked in all the heat and sound .

1.       Although it is difficult to assess the overall price of  a multi - year contract agreement , for an incumbent to lose to a competitor by 10-15% of overall price is not totally unknown in  re-tendering exercises. Even before the decisions were made , investment analysts  were suggesting that First would win .

2.       The finances and returns of the various Virgin companies are hard to penetrate and understand . Overall ownership is shared in diverse forms and in some instances Virgin has secured naming rights for a very small proportion of the equity invested . Ultimate domicile and ownership of the group companies  is hard to track through various legal domiciles . It is a private company , which given the scale of business operations would normally raise some eyebrows in the city…….

3.       Because the finances are so obscure any attempt to make  a straight assessment of the income and expenditure is of limited value . Some people have tried [ the indefatigable Eion Clarke for one ] but the figures produced are so rogue they don’t help a lot .

4.       Virgin group appeared happy with the tendering process until they lost – a common reaction of unsuccessful contract incumbents – and  critically commented on by the  Financial Times yesterday .  The recent counter – proposal from Virgin Air  of wasting Heathrow slots on domestic flights from Manchester  smacks  of the most childish spite and is hardly consistent with claims to : “…Get low carbon: Strive to emit minimal carbon and other greenhouse gases.1 planet not 2: Learn to use the planet’s finite resources responsibly.”

5.       I accept that both First and Virgin are serious players in this game and so knew exactly what they were doing in their respective bids  ; if First are close in their suggestion of what can be squeezed out  in revenues over the franchise period , and Virgin had won at a lower price  , Virgin would have walked away with a substantial return . It seems clear that both companies were  gaming the system  here ?

6.       That they were both gaming the system confirms why there is now a widespread  acceptance that the Major rail privatisation was disastrous in both   form and consequences . It’s sometimes fascinating to see how The Guardian can contain Seamus Milne and Sir Simon Jenkins on the same page but on this issue both of them have been in agreement for  a long time .

Unfortunately for all of the rest of , whether as citizens or passengers , there isn’t  a party represented in Westminster  that appears willing to address the many failures of rail privatisation . Cosying  up to a man with a beard who doesn’t wear a tie is not a policy that helps retrieve our rail network .

 

 

 

 

 

Kafka’s Bus Pass

Kafka’s Bus Pass ; or Free Bus Travel at age 60 years and  ….3 or 4 weeks .

In general I am a supporter of the provision of some form of concessionary bus travel for older people.

I think it unfortunate that as a policy choice by governments  it has not been as extensively evaluated  as it might have been to see if the overall social benefits are as  great as they are sometimes  claimed to be.

I also think that for those of us on higher incomes Free Travel  should be assessed as a taxable benefit – but that’s for another time and place.

What has caught my interest recently is the experience of one applicant whom I spoke to , and what this might tell us about this administrative process  that is available to all as they reach the age of 60 [ and many younger people who have mobility problems .]

My experience of applying for   a pass a few years ago was painless, and I  recall it as relatively quick , so as is so often the case when such systems  work  you don’t pay as much attention to the processes  as much as you might .

The experience described to me by a recent applicant illustrates much of the weakness of administrative processes  in transition between paper and electronic  technologies  in a world of articulated and outsourced public services

Here’s  how this rolled out .

The application form states , boldly  in the first paragraph :  “you can apply …two weeks before your birthday , but the card will not be activated until the date of your birthday .”

The application form is completed by hand [ in black ink obviously] and a passport photo attached .

The applicant completes  the form , buys   a passport photo and takes   the completed form into the local library [ the  preferred validation point in Edinburgh] a few days before the 60th birthday - admittedly on a  Sunday  .  The applicant is warmly congratulated on completing the form correctly [ name , address , age, usual complex stuff etc. …]  as though this was a major achievement … [ although on reflection ] “..hhmm , is this a worrying sign ?”

Almost three  weeks later , no sign of the card and the applicant phones the appropriate Edinburgh contact number to be told : “ not in our  system …delays sometimes …please phone back in a  few days ..”

Calls  back a few days later applicant is told it’s:  “ not in the system …suggest you check with the library…”

The library is called . They suggest  the applicant checks with the  Edinburgh contact number that has  already been called .

 “I’ve done that , they said  to contact you … what did you do with the form ?”

“ Oh, we posted the form to Hull [ 2 days after it was completed ]”

“ Where in Hull ?”

“ Don’t know , we just post these forms  .. I suggest you try the contact centre in Edinburgh..”

Back in touch with contact centre Edinburgh .

“ I’ve spoken to the library and they say they have sent this to Hull – who can I speak to in Hull ?

“ You can’t…the forms must be  being processed”

“ How do you know it’s being processed?

“ Because it’s not in our system …”

“ But I was told 2 to 3 weeks ..”

“ But it’s not 3 weeks yet………..”

The applicant phones the library again and the library call the Edinburgh contact centre and the librarian is told : “ Well we say 3 weeks  ,   but sometimes it’s  4 or 5 weeks …”

The applicant calls the contact centre again : “ … you say it’s not on your system therefore it’s being processed [ presumably in Hull]  but you don’t know that ; it could be lost somewhere in a hole between here and Hull….. So what happens  if it’s lost ? I don’t want to wait 4 or 5 weeks to then be told it’s lost. Can I raise this with a manager .”

“ No ; I can’t report it until it’s been 3 weeks .”

“ But it’s in the 3^rd week now ..”!

“ But it is not three weeks yet!”

It’s three weeks today , and still no bus pass has arrived . 

So, the phone call loop is now extended to Transport Scotland .

Transport Scotland : “ We deal with policy; we can’t help you with actually getting a bus pass . Perhaps you could re-apply ?”  [ There'sa real signal of system confidence from people who 'do policy']

I reckon the Scottish Transport Minister , Keith Brown MSP,  now owes this applicant 2 weeks free bus travel … hope he  gets in touch.......he might manage it before the bus pass arrives .

Scotland’s Disgrace in numbers? 53; 5; 2 & 25

Scotland’s Disgrace is the name often attributed to the unfinished replica of the Parthenon in the centre of the city . I think there is a contemporary  disgrace in Scotland  more immediate , all the more appalling  because we have  not made much of an impact on this despite many years of effort.

That contemporary disgrace is how we handle what are now called ‘Looked after Children ‘ ; or as a major government publication put it: ‘These are our Bairns ‘ [ children ].

This is not just a Scottish problem, not even a UK problem. I am willing to bet that whatever country you read this blog in things are no better there – perhaps much worse – for those children whose live chances are smashed at a young age because of the loss of their parents , or because those parents fail their children  .

I don’t often think of myself as easily shocked . I’ve lived and worked  in various places, posher and poorer ; I’ve worked  overseas; I’ve had various forms of employment and self-employment , including working in prison; I have been a city councillor for a mixed area. Through all of those experiences I have read, watched, listened, and my reaction has rarely been that mixture of surprise and rage that some people seem to demonstrate a lot of the time and which decorates the front page of various newspapers every day.

Within the past few weeks I’ve filtered through my mind some figures that came to me from very different sources and which did shock me – to the point of outrage – is that I have been part of this failure.

The numbers above? Well first they come with a health warning because I can’t track them down and source them in the way I would always hope to. One set came to me from listening to an academic speaker whose work I admire [ but these figures are contradicted by differently categorised official data]  ; the others from a BBC report that I can’t verify.

So; these come with health warnings, and they refer to:

53 % of children in Scotland  who get a set of good passes at Standard Grade [ age 15/16 examinations ];

5% of children in care* who  get the same level of passes;

2% proportion of adult population [UK ] that has or will have some engagement with the prison system .

25% that is the proportion of people in the prison system who have  been in care.

The difficulty I have had is that consistent, comparable and good time series data are hard to find. But the information that is officially available and recorded tells a similar picture of bleak misfortune.

In 2009-2010 in Year 1 of our primary school system [that’s 5 year old children – remember ] we excluded from school 10x as many ‘Looked after Children ‘as we did children from the general population and that kind of exclusion ratio continues through each of the Primary years. It is only if they make it into the later years of secondary that such youngsters see their prospects  of being slung out of school reduced to as marvellous  a ratio as 8:1 compared to their peers with families.

It’s not surprising then that such children leave school with overall outcomes [in terms of accumulated grades] at about 40%- 50% of their peers who have family homes.

There have clearly been lots of heroic and imaginative efforts to do something about this, particularly in the past decade.  Who cares? Scotland shows some of these efforts

But’s for us it’s not yet working and it’s not been working through successive governments: Conservative or Labour in the UK; and  here in Scotland, Lab/LibDem and Scottish National Party governments .

We should all be ashamed and embarrassed about that, because when the worst of circumstances arise it’s the council where we live that becomes the Corporate Parent. It’s not just social workers – who get much of the blame – and teachers who struggle to cope with seriously messed up kids [ even at 5 …] it’s the entire council . And we elect them to do this for society as well as empty our bins and maintain street lights .

If they’re failing ; so am I – and you.

*In Scotland we now use the term ‘Looked after Children’; a classic example of renaming or recategorising  a phenomenon in the hope that things will improve.  

Coalition in local government ; will you still love me tomorrow?

Coalitions in local government; will you still love me tomorrow?

2 weeks after the council elections, both here in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK we are almost at the point of knowing what multi-coloured combination of different parties will run non-majority [is unmajority a word?]  Councils in England/Wales and Scotland; I ‘m concentrating on the latter. Strictly speaking we are discussing what kind of party /non-party combination will   run these councils for this current year and any successive years they decide to stick with.

What do we know about this and what should we think about it?  Well, as always the best source for finding out who’s doing what, where, is probably this BBC website, which tends to update more frequently than others.

There are various  questions that we can ask and answer about coalitions in local government, and sometimes the answers to those questions  can go some way to explaining what we have and why , and what might be some possible implications for such  arrangements  in the future.

Are coalitions needed?

Not necessarily. Councils don’t declare war; axe benefits; reduce/increase taxes; sway exchange rates so they rarely decide matters that are life and death. It is perfectly possible for a reasonably sized minority party to assume control of a council if these conditions can be met:

·        all the other parties are  broadly equally balanced in numbers  ;

·        are willing to signal in advance what matters  they intended to dispute or oppose; and

·        Those other parties don’t engage in the kind of guerrilla war of opposition that just grinds everybody down.

The other key factor always worth bearing in mind is that the procedures of most council provide for committee convenors etc. to be elected annually and only challenged annually. Convenors of each council in Scotland [whatever their formal title] are elected for the life of the council. So a minority can run a council, if they can shrug off occasional defeats on some of the proposals they make to the council. They can also generally ignore grandstanding ‘motions of no confidence ‘…it doesn’t matter a toss whether other parties have no confidence in you , it’s loss of confidence in your own party that counts – vide Culture Secretary  Heremy Junt  M.P. [ as this unfortunate  now appears to be known] .

Are coalitions that novel?

No, not at all. They  may return , but the days of solid  party majority councils have been under pressure for  the better part of 30 years , although there now appears to be a shift back to more solid  2 party conflict in some parts of the UK   .

Read an excellent paper by Chris Game of  Birmingham University in an Institute of Government publication from earlier this year, to see the extent of what  has been a  mixed picture over time and one that still has a lot of complexity to it . Chris  points out that from a high point of about 1/3  of councils being NOC  [ No overall control ] we have recently come down to about 25%. He also points out that the previous enthusiasm for ‘power sharing ‘ , a term using more often than ‘coalition ‘ has tended to move toward minority control councils . Whatever the longer term direction, the work by Game suggests that there are dynamic factors at play in different councils rather than just numerical calculation.  Actually if you think about this critically any form  of coalition is but  a temporary formalisation  of No Overall Control and so in Scotland we have  about ¾ of councils that are in this more or less  fragile territory .

But most councillors  don’t like minority  councils do they?

No.

 Let’s face it, the logic of standing as a party candidate  , and a party  that aspires to run things is that you really , secretly , want to win every contest, and sometimes that happens. When the blood is up in an election , not only do the most absurd delusions hit some candidates , they also want to obliterate the opposition – don’t believe anybody who tells you otherwise, even if the pretend they’re in a nice party .

In  Scotland [ on currently held voting attitudes]  , STV makes the total  obliteration of all opponents impossible. Even where everybody elected is an ‘Independent ‘,  then the clue is on  the banner  – they are independent of each other as well as independent of party . In some cases, apparently  none the nicer  for it .

Even in all out election councils in England such wipe outs do not  happen as often as they   used to, when 60 out of 60  was not unusual in some urban councils .

In the kind of STV system we now have for council elections in Scotland , there is a reasonable expectation that parties can have some sense of the minimum number they can hope to elect, and have to project /hope/guess the maximum they might win .

But do leaders  anticipate coalitions  ?

They deny it ….however.

In English and Welsh councils , with a plurality [FPTP] voting system,  most serious parties , other than in  periods they have suffered a demoralising defeat still stand candidates for every vacant position , though knowing they won’t elect them, as a gesture to show how serious they are  .

Incidentally, on two occasions when I have interviewed newly elected councillors , the most unhappy  were those who had been assured they were ‘paper ‘ candidates and then unexpectedly found themselves to be elected – adding much disruption and resentment  of their party  to their lives .

Of course, no matter what parties  say in public,  most  of them  have  accepted  they cannot win a majority in a council; the clue is in the number of candidates  . In various councils this time round  , ranging from South Ayrshire [ Labour/Conservative now ],  to Midlothian  [ SNP / ‘sometime ‘ Conservative  now ], to Edinburgh [ Labour /SNP now ] and East Ayrshire [ SNP / Conservative now ],  all the serious parties nominated insufficient candidates to ensure a party majority .

They, and contestants in many other council,  knew that even if they did very well , they would at best be in coalition, .

Did parties [ and their leaders ]  plan for coalitions in advance ?

As far as I hear , not in the sense of formally discussing who might chum up with whom and who might hold the various offices in a council . Clearly in some places where results always looked to be tight and where there were some individual councillors [ whether Independents or prominent members of real minority parties ] there was likely some vague speculative discussion beforehand .

After all , in various Scottish councils  , council control has been won in the past by trading an office [ usually Lord Provost , Provost , or Convenor  ] for a vote/s. Remember ; unlike in England or Wales , such positions are elected for the full term of the council, are not annual and honorific  and therefore have real ‘vote trading’ power. [ East Lothian results , 2012 : 10 Labour ; 9 SNP ; 3 Conservative; 1 Independent councillor  . Labour /Conservative  council ;  Conservative Provost].

In councils where all expectations were about the post May 2012 membership being an assortment of various parties of greater or lesser size  then there were clearly instances of discussion /speculation /whimsical chat and gossip . In Glasgow , at points  when the SNP  and many others really thought they were on a winning roll , the expression of a view  by the Green candidates  that they ‘…thought it time for a change ..’ was seen as white smoke  for an SNP + some others  coalition , whether formal or otherwise.

What does a coalition need ?

Apart from the obvious first condition that parties seek to achieve , i.e.at least 50% of the votes + 1,  what is often sought is the minimal model of coalition . That is the fewest number of parties involved in order that each party can maximise its ‘spoils ‘ from coalition . Actually , this academic proposition  does not actually have   great predictive force whether in Scottish councils or multi – party European governments [ think Borgen here ].

The experience of council coalitions  seems  to suggest  that local and dynamic effects play an important part. Can parties and councillors  set aside high order ideological differences and focus on what they can do and agree to do locally ? Where they have competing approaches to specific options and policies can they craft a form  of words  that captures both points of view? In Edinburgh , the Labour-SNP coalition has drafted a lengthy document  [ which is a bit too legalised for my taste] that outlines some 50   ‘commitments ‘ . I happen to agree with most of them but: 

a] you’d have  a heart of stone to disagree with many of them; and

 b] only about half a dozen are specific, itemised and in any way time bound.

Have people worked together before across formal party boundaries ? Do they have trust in each other  as an entire team or , if some /many are  newly elected are there trusted figureheads?  In discussion with councillors it is quite  common to find that they’ll often  have  considerable  respect for people from another party. That kind of thing makes coalitions work. Look at East Renfrewshire , where the SNP and Labour have had one coalition for the past 5 years and now have another … it’s getting to be a bit like those Elizabeth Taylor re-marriages of old .

This is Jim Fletcher, Labour Leader:

“"When we began working with each other in 2007, there was a natural mistrust - we were the first Labour and SNP groups to do this in Scotland and it was new and novel.

"We got over that mistrust and on a day-to-day level the way the two parties have worked has been very harmonious."

In Fife they have today   elected  Jim Leishman as Provost [Convenor] of the council .

The other factor that can force  coalitions to  emerge – though whether they work in the longer term is still to be tested -  is that what we see emerge  is not always the first attempt . In several of the councils mentioned above – and others  not mentioned – the first discussions were between parties that eventually decided not to   coalesce .

The contrived  anger of  those  left on the edge of the dance floor  is amusing to read /watch… the SNP in Fife ; Labour in Dumfries  .  Actually in most councils it appears that discussions were multilateral in form , whether covertly or openly so a variety of combinations were always possible .

Creating a successful coalitions probably don’t need people chipping in from the wings in real time either.

Chic Brodie,  SNP MSP for South of Scotland, represents a list region that includes Dumfries and Galloway ; East Ayrshire; and  South Ayrshire.

On Sunday 13^th we were told that Chic thought:

“Labour's commitment to progressive politics is in question after the party formed even more formal coalitions with the Tory party in councils across Scotland says the SNP.

SNP MSP for South Scotland, Chic Brodie, who represents South Ayrshire where one of these formal coalitions is in place said “ Labour had also betrayed their voters with their decision to form administrations with the Tories in local authorities across Scotland.”

Over the next few days  , in rapid succession , council coalitions were confirmed in :

East Ayrshire [ SNP /Conservative ] and

Dumfries and Galloway [ SNP/Conservative ].

Maybe Mr Brodie  assumes  a different class of Conservative is to be  found in Dumfries and East Ayrshire; or maybe nobody talks to him .

Just how solid and formal is all  this coalition stuff ?

Well ; first all coalitions are transient in form ; it is just that the time span varies .

Sometimes it is for an agree period ; or the completion of  a given set of objectives ;  or until a given staging point in a programme  .

Experience , observation and time will tell us . Given that in various parts of Scotland there are now coalitions between  all parties  regardless of prior expressions of long term rivalry and indeed animosity, I think we can reasonably consider three possibilities that might occur 2012-2017.

·        Those now in place last a  full run barring unforseen deaths ; resignations ; or sudden conversions of party . In The  Highland Council one happened just the day after the elections, which is supercharged  Britney Spears   I guess.

·        Some parties review their choices mid term  or at a year end, and do a  swop of  partners .

·        Some coalitions drift with increasing internal dissent and resentment and parties peel away leaving minority councils.

I am running  a book allocating various councils into some of these categories ;

I’m not offering odds yet. Try Paddypower .

RK  May 2012