On the wrong track

As England and Wales adjusted to the new political landscape following Labour's drubbing in the local elections, the thorniest issue in Scottish politics was thrust back into the centre of debate by the leader of the Labour Party in the Scottish Parliament, Wendy Alexander. Bring on the referendum on independence, she challenged the SNP, claiming that its commitment to bringing a referendum bill before the Scottish Parliament in 2010 is too slow a timetable. The idea of shooting the fox by getting the issue of the referendum out of the way has obvious tactical attractions for Labour, but will be regarded as political point-scoring rather than effective opposition by the public.

Ms Alexander's haste on this issue will be seen as a significant U-turn. She was, after all, the prime mover in the collaborative exercise between Labour, Liberal Democrats and Conservatives, the three pro-Union parties, that set up the Scottish Parliament Commission on the future of devolution, excluding the independence option. Its membership has only just been established under the independent chairmanship of Sir Kenneth Calman, Chancellor of Glasgow University, and it is due to report by the end of the year.

Opinion polls show support for the SNP growing in the wake of populist policies being enacted at Holyrood, but also consistently find more people in favour of increased powers for the Scottish Parliament, which Ms Alexander also advocates, than for independence.

So why this sudden gamble by the Labour leader in departing from her previous stance? There is no evidence that the Scottish electorate is impatient for a referendum before 2010 and her political partners in the commission were distinctly unimpressed by what they saw as a panic reaction to Labour's disastrous results south of the border. Opponents of Labour in Scotland might see this as a tactic to divert attention away from the failings of the party at UK level. After three days in which both cabinet ministers and back-bench loyalists acknowledged that Labour had taken a beating at the polls and sought to explain this as a result of the current financial climate, Gordon Brown spent his Sunday morning in high-profile appearances on television. Once again he admitted his mistakes, promised to listen and assured voters that he did not come from a wealthy background and so "felt their pain" over increased costs. The problem with this is that, while some traditional Labour voters have been telling interviewers that they find the Prime Minister remote, it is not just empathy that they want, but policies. Above all, the abolition of the 10p tax rate has become the totemic indicator that a policy driven by philosophical principles (to redistribute wealth in favour of the poorest children and pensioners) without transparency about the effects on others on low incomes runs the risk of being seen as uncaring and underhand.

Now that the chips are down, both electorally and economically, it is time to abandon the complications of stirring the fiscal pot and come up with some simple solutions. Explaining exactly how he is going to compensate the losers for the abolition of the 10p tax rate would be a good start.

Mr Brown has two years before he must call a General Election. He talks of opportunity and aspiration, yet presses on with policies that are not only unpopular with the electorate but which do not have the unequivocal support of his own back benchers. It is time for a rethink on the requirement for 42 days' detention for terror suspects, for which he has failed to make a convincing case. There is a similar problem with the commitment to bring in identity cards. Now that he has admitted his mistake over the 10p tax rate, there is little to be lost but billions to be gained by abandoning those plans and using the money to combat child poverty or in education. On both sides of the border, the electorate is increasingly looking for real policy as opposed to political point-scoring.