JIM Murphy was accused of hypocrisy yesterday after he claimed that the SNP were acting as “David Cameron’s little helpers”. The difficulty with this, claimed the SNP’s Angus Robertson, was that the people of Scotland knew that David Cameron’s real helpers over the past few years had been the Labour Party.
Robertson, the SNP’s General Election co-ordinator, said: “Jim Murphy’s problem is that Labour were David Cameron’s big helpers for two and a half years in the referendum – working hand in glove with them, and since then Labour have voted with the Tories at Westminster for more cuts. People in Scotland simply do not buy what Labour is saying, and repeated polls have shown that people trust the SNP more than Labour to keep the Tories out of government.”
A poll for ITV by ComRes appeared to back up Robertson’s point. Analysis of results on the What Scotland
Thinks blog, Strathclyde University psephologist Profesor John Curtice said voters in Scotland were, in part, penalising Labour for their efforts during the referendum campaign.
Overall the professor’s analysis of the poll was improved news for Labour. Curtice said they could hold onto five seats, three more than had been predicted in his analysis of last week’s Guardian/ICM poll.
Curtice added: “It has, of course, been evident for some time that the reason why the SNP are doing so well in the polls is that many a voter is inclined to follow up their Yes vote last September with a vote for the SNP in May.”
“This poll provides a further clue as to why Labour finds itself in such a predicament; 35 per cent of all SNP voters and no less than 48 per cent of those who have switched to the party from backing Labour in 2010 say that ‘Labour no longer represents people like me’. Labour’s inability during the referendum to offer a distinctive vision of Scotland’s future to match that provided by the SNP is seemingly also costing it dear.”
Despite little movement in the polls, the Scottish Labour Party seem set to stick with their General Election strategy of describing each vote for the SNP as a vote for the Conservative party.
Murphy’s claim that the SNP would be David Cameron’s little helpers was initially made during an interview with Radio 4’s Today programme, and then repeated during a campaign event with Ed Balls at Glasgow’s Royal Concert Hall.
The Shadow Chancellor was in Scotland to make a speech to set out the difference between the parties on the economy. The speech was late in starting after anti-austerity protester Sean Clerkin attempted to disrupt the gathering. A fracas involving Police Scotland’s finest meant that Ball and Murphy had to find an alternative entrance into the hall. During the speech Balls said that voters in Scotland had a choice between the “extreme austerity” of the Conservatives, the “extended austerity” of the SNP, or a “vote for change with the Labour Party.”
“Working people in Scotland should judge the SNP by their record,” said Balls. “It’s the next Labour government who will introduce early legislation to ban zero-hours contracts for employees who are in practice working regular hours. A new legal right to a regular contract that will apply to workers after just 12 weeks. And it is Labour who will increase the minimum wage and make work pay.”
Balls’s plan to ban the exploitative contracts was damaged slightly by media reports that he had employed four members of staff on a zero hours contract.
Deputy First Minister John Swinney hit back: “No matter what Ed Balls claims, the fact is that thanks to the Scottish Government’s use of the economic powers currently in our hands, spending will actually be £682 million higher in 2015/16 than in 2014/15. On every level, Ed Balls is completely and utterly wrong – and that Gordon Brown is happy to join in these bizarre, delusional attacks shows how desperate Labour are becoming as their trust amongst people in Scotland continues to plummet.”
“The choice in this election is crystal clear – between Labour plans for more Tory-style cuts or for a strong group of SNP MPs at Westminster to keep Labour honest and to help bring an end to austerity.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here