As political leaders in Wales and NI join Labour’s Chancellor in condemning 14 years of Tory damage, BBC Scotland reveals Labour’s plan to persuade voters here to blame the Scottish Government instead.

By stewartb

It’s been instructive to compare and contrast the reporting of the Labour PM’s initial visits to Edinburgh, Belfast and Cardiff.

Northern Ireland

The BBC News website (July 8) on its NI page has this headline: ‘What does the Labour government mean for NI?’ The BBC’s NI economics and business editor provides context: ‘The single most important influence on Stormont’s budget is the spending policy of the Westminster government. Most of what Stormont spends is the ‘block grant’ which comes from Westminster.’ (my emphasis)

And adds: ‘For years the Stormont parties have complained about the negative impacts of “Tory austerity”, so they may have been hoping that Labour would open the money taps.’ The article gives this caution: ‘However the party’s manifesto contains little sign of that. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, an independent think tank, says “Labour’s additional day-to-day spending commitments are essentially trivial”.’

In a PA News report picked up by various newspapers on the same day there is more on the PM’s visit to Stormont: ‘All of the political parties that met with Sir Keir Starmer at Stormont on Monday said they had raised issues around budget pressures’ noting that ‘Public finances in Northern Ireland have been under strain for several years, with particular concern about the health service and hospital waiting lists which are the longest in the UK. All of the main Stormont parties have appealed for more funding for the region.’  (See https://uk.news.yahoo.com/pm-pledges-constructively-resolve-ni-123929664.html)

NI’s First Minister is quoted: “We have taken every opportunity to press home the need for a proper funding model for here for us to be able to reverse the damage the Tories have inflicted on us for 14 years.” Starmer is quoted: “I understand the case in relation to investment and financing in particular. We will work to resolve those issues constructively.”

Wales

The PM has also visited Cardiff. In its stream of ‘live reporting’ (July 8), the BBC News website had this heading: ‘Analysis: What’s on the agenda for Starmer’s Wales visit?’ We’re told that ‘high on (Wales’ FM) Gething’s list of talking points will be a request for more money – or at least a guarantee that the current funding formula for Wales will be reformed.

‘He will know that Starmer isn’t touring the UK with a pocket full of cheques to hand out – there is already acceptance that money from the HS2 project will not be passed on to Wales. However, having spent years blaming the Conservative UK government for failing to provide enough funding to Wales, the first minister will be desperate to secure some extra cash.’

Meanwhile in Scotland

So having insights into the views of politicians in NI and Wales on the harmful impacts of 14 years of Tory governments on their nations, what are we being told by the public service broadcaster about Scotland?  In an article under the heading ‘Starmer sets his sights on Scotland’ (July 8), BBC Scotland’s James Cook opts to amplify Labour’s clever campaigning wheeze aimed at the Holyrood elections in 2026.

Cook writes: ’Is your life better after 14 years of Conservative government? That, in a nutshell, was the question Labour asked voters in this general election campaign. You don’t need me to tell you that it worked, rather well. Now the party is already talking about repeating the feat at the 2026 Scottish parliamentary elections by asking “is your life better after 19 years under the SNP?”

Inheritance

So the attempted framing in news reporting  – and indeed it seems in upcoming Labour Party campaign messaging – is notably different for consumption by Scotland’s electorate: underplay the negative impacts of Tory governments and their austerity policies, but only in Scotland. Instead focus here on what the inheritance for Scotland is from successive SNP governments, regardless of the UK political and economic context, regardless of malign Westminster influences.

The duplicitous nature of Labour’s intentions in Scotland as set out by BBC Scotland’s Cook becomes even more clear when one examines the big speech (again July 8) by the new Labour Chancellor, Rachel Reeves. What follows is taken from the transcript of her speech (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-rachel-reeves-is-taking-immediate-action-to-fix-the-foundations-of-our-economy):

Reeves states: ’… let me address the inheritance. I have repeatedly warned that whoever won the general election would inherit the worst set of circumstances since the Second World War. What I have seen in the past 72 hours has only confirmed that.

‘Our economy has been held back by decisions deferred and decisions ducked. Political self-interest put ahead of the national interest. A government that put party first, country second.’

‘We face the legacy of fourteen years of chaos and economic irresponsibility’.

And expanding on the consequences of the track record of the Tories in government: ‘All governments face difficult choices – and I will not shrink from those choices. Those choices are made harder, however, by the absence of the economic growth necessary to not only balance the books but also to improve living standards.

‘New Treasury analysis that I requested over the weekend shows that, had the UK economy grown at the average rate of other OECD economies this last 13 years, our economy would have been over £140 billion larger. This could have brought in an additional £58 billion in tax revenues in the last year alone. That’s money that could have revitalised our schools, our hospitals, and other public services.’

Ah, so now we know the cause of the problems in England’s public services, the same underlying cause as in NI and Wales!

The BBC Scotland piece tells us that Labour’s ploy for 2026 is to persuade voters in Scotland to discount the negative impact of what Reeves judges to be the “legacy of fourteen years of chaos and economic irresponsibility’ caused by Westminster which has had serious negative impacts on public services in England, NI and Wales. And despite Reeves’ assessment of the Tory legacy, Labour will now campaign to persuade voters in Scotland to lay responsibility instead at the door of the SNP.

So when Labour in Scotland tries it on in the lead up to 2026 we will be entitled to ask: ‘Is it conceivable that Scotland, uniquely amongst the four nations of the UK, has been immune from “the worst set of circumstances since the Second World War”?

But might this ploy succeed in 2026? Well yes it might, not least because it chimes with a decade of gaslighting Scotland – and a decade of context-free, perspective-free news reporting – by BBC Scotland and the dominant Union-supporting mainstream media.

12 thoughts on “As political leaders in Wales and NI join Labour’s Chancellor in condemning 14 years of Tory damage, BBC Scotland reveals Labour’s plan to persuade voters here to blame the Scottish Government instead.”

  1. Absolutely spot on. BBC Scotland editorial policy completely aligned with unionist parties and their narratives. Lacking any context with what is happening across UK unless of course the comparison is narrow and shows Scotland performing “worse” – eg one set of health statistics.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  2. The importance of comparing BBC Scotland’s reports to those elsewhere has long been highlighted here. The political intent is clear, like a pack of hounds they scent blood and are trying to move in for the kill. This of course is matched with a refusal to cover anything that might credit the Scottish government with good governance and policy decisions, a narrative that is being hammered home on X, countless phone in shows and elsewhere

    We know this, we know what is happening and we have our own sources which give us another side of the story. What we need to work out now is how to counter – a SNP rebuttal unit will never get a platform to do this effectively and X is an unstable platform to rely on. We need to be smarter!

    We have a struggling news channel in Broadcasting Scotland. Ok, it can seem amateurish at times (and that’s not a criticism of the volunteers, just a comparison with what we’re used to) but more support, more input from supporters could see it grow beyond just a news channel, why not also a place to watch indy supporting podcasts, a debate/conversation show, even a desert island disc type show. Not only might this grow support and funds, it could be open to all but comments only from subscribers so that we create a safe place to share thoughts and even disagree

    We have a thriving cultural sector with many indy supporters among them. Could they hold an event once a year to raise funds for indy supporting parties who rely mostly on membership fees? There’s a lot of speculation on SNP finances today with the loss of individual MP contributions and short money, lets not see them laughed out of town

    And we have a lot of intelligent, thoughtful, respectful and insightful people posting comments here and elsewhere. There are many other channels where our contributions might be useful to get a wider audience – papers, X, phone-ins and blogs. For those not interested in joining a political party or marching/demonstrating this could be an ideal outlet especially when backed up with info from here and other trusted sites. Not the “we are right and you are deluded” type contribution but honest reason and analysis. Work together to flood the BBC etc with complaints about content and bias may seem pointless but if enough folk do it who knows

    Analysis of labour’s election strategy showed some key messages we would do well to consider for all our communications, not just party ones. Clear, consistent messaging –

    pick a couple of slogans and stick with them no matter what (change anyone?)

    good communication channels – ok for them with the MSM support they had, we need to develop our own

    target seats, not vote share – being more responsive to the needs of different constituencies, not worrying about winning hearts and minds across the country. Personally I think we need a bit of both but I’m no strategist

    and finally discipline, discipline in messaging (stick to the script), discipline in party (no veering off the party line, no publicly aired grievances

    It’s all food for thought, just lets not be still whingeing here in 2026 having done nothing but carp on the sidelines. Join a political party and give us a stronger voice in the political arena, join Believe in Scotland and march/demonstrate or just do what you can with the skills that you have

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply

  3. Frustratingly as has been highlighted here when Slabour (with the help of MSM) use this very same ‘successful’ strategy in Scotland the SNP Government almost seems reluctant or unwilling to effectively counter it in Parliament. Using this very same context in the public eye blaming Westminster seems counter productive and urgently needs a different and more radical approach. I do miss the very robust responses Salmond used as FM which I feel has been replaced by IMHO a ‘failed conciliatory’ approach used by Sturgeon and now by Swinney which in my view does not work. Has the SNHS ‘improved’ under the SNP Gov? Well I guess we all hope it has but the public perception is cleally different.

    For eg. Do we really need individual Health Boards and the huge bureaucratic cost that comes with it to the public purse? Are the needs of people that much greater or different in Dundee/Tayside than they are say in Glasgow that requires a more tailored approach? As we have seen in the Police I would like to think by removing/reducing a very costly top tier we could release much need money for front line services and AI which it seems has been identified as the key to better and more effective health care.

    Gerry R

    Like

    Reply

    1. ‘For eg. Do we really need individual Health Boards and the huge bureaucratic cost that comes with it to the public purse?’

      Recall this from 17 Feb 2023 in The Herald: ‘SCOTTISH Labour has proposed the mass merger of the country’s health boards moments after attacking the SNP’s plan to centralise case services.

      ‘Deputy leader Jackie Baillie said her party would reduce the number of territorial boards from 14 to three if it came to power at the 2026 Holyrood election. She said the days of sticking plaster solutions were over and it was time to be “bold”. (my emphasis)

      ‘The change would see huge boards created in the West, East and North of Scotland, with the three island boards absorbed into the Northern Board.’

      Source: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1905518116

      In the lead up to the 2026 Holyrood elections whilst there may be a demand for a ‘de facto’ referendum on the constitution from many Yes supporters there will be a (seductive) counter agenda for change to be fought This will be proposed by Labour – on the NHS and more besides (on social care, education, local government finance, social security, housing, poverty reduction etc?).

      Campaigning on Labour’s change agenda will be now aided by a powerful, enabling government in Westminster together with the usual sympathetic BBC Scotland and mainstream media. And it will be promoted in a situation in which public attitudes in Scotland in general may be supportive of ‘change’.

      Will the argument that addressing public priorities is best done through independence win over enough voters when set against a Labour manifesto offering desirable change more directly, more immediately without what may still be perceived by many as the risk and uncertainty of independence?

      The picking ‘a couple of slogans and stick(ing) with them no matter what (change anyone?)’ advice (from brendarobb @1104 am) may be wise in principle but I suspect it will be non-trivial to design successfully in the prevailing circumstances.

      Making the case that independence is the best route to address Scotland’s ills whilst Labour’s ‘change’ agenda is proposing not too different solutions (when viewed at the level of individual policy areas) to the self same ills but still within the Union seems like quite a different challenge from countering a 2014-style ‘project fear’. Much may depend on Labour’s credentials after two years in government in Westminster.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

        1. Your counter point is well made Stewart and I bow to your knowledge on this issue but at the same time are the Scot Gov not talking about doing the same with Care Homes?

          Gerry R

          Like

          Reply

          1. ‘ … are the Scot Gov not talking about doing the same with Care Homes?’ Probably, yes.

            It’s kinda the point I’m trying to make but struggling to articulate clearly.

            An SNP manifesto set up to act as a ‘de facto referendum’ on independence – essentially proposing a radical path to solving Scotland’s ills – will be competing with a Labour manifesto that is described in my btl post as ‘Labour’s ‘change’ agenda (is) proposing not too different solutions (when viewed at the level of individual policy areas) to the self same ills but still within the Union’.

            As I say, seems like quite a different campaigning. challenge to countering a 2014-style ‘project fear’!

            Liked by 2 people

            Reply

      2. The picking ‘a couple of slogans and stick(ing) with them no matter what (change anyone?)’ advice (from brendarobb @1104 am) may be wise in principle but I suspect it will be non-trivial to design successfully in the prevailing circumstances.

        This was written tongue in cheek as I’m not convinced it is the best tactic despite the success of change, get Brexit done, take back control etc. Or maybe its success lies in the underlying idea the slogan refers to and the implication the party will deliver?

        Will the argument that addressing public priorities is best done through independence win over enough voters when set against a Labour manifesto offering desirable change more directly, more immediately without what may still be perceived by many as the risk and uncertainty of independence?

        I think this is a very real challenge for indy supporters. Labour now has the means and the support to address issues of concern, over-riding or undermining the Scottish government’s attempts to do this which are ignored by the press anyway. Any attempts to challenge perceptions of labour achievement can be twisted to seem like sour grapes from the SNP. We will need to choose our challenges wisely and build support over time, bearing in mind labour may no longer enjoy the total protection from the media they have been used to in Scotland. It feels like a step back but hopefully we can be smart enough to take 2 steps forward next time

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  4. The BBC Labour Mafia nepotism. Do not get the facts right, hopeless at statistics. Ignorant and arrogant beyond belief.

    It needs Flynn and Forbes to keep them right. They know the answers and statistics. The BBC control by Westminster. Total propaganda.

    Westminster on average raises £800Billion in tax revenues. Spends £1000Billion. Loan repayments £50Billion. Scotland raises £87Billion in tax revenues. Spends £54Billion. Westminster decides how the rest is spent.

    Reeves raising a national fund. £7.5Billion. What the point of that. It just adds to the debt repayments.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.