STEPHEN DAISLEY: The SNP's £100m empire of spin comes at a cost that money can't buy - credibility and trust of voters
The Scottish state is committed to spending your money wisely, and just so you know how wisely, it is spending more than £100m telling you about it.
As revealed by the Scottish Daily Mail's Michael Blackley, the Scottish Government and 93 other public bodies now employ 642 spin doctors between them, each tasked with presenting their institution in the most favourable light possible.
Given the track records of some of these organisations, that is no small feat, but breaking through the £100 million cost barrier, and in the space of three years no less, lays bare the price of the SNP 's empire of spin.
There is something faintly absurd, in a comedic style reminiscent of the Soviet Union, about the state having done such a good job for its citizens that it must hire hundreds of public relations specialists to help its citizens realise this.
You might not see any evidence of a bountiful wheat harvest, comrade, but the Five Year Plan for Revolutionary Grain Farming has met all its targets.
This is, of course, an exercise in propagandistic profligacy, as foolhardy a use of scarce resources as the outrageous spending that was allowed to go on at the Water Industry Commission for Scotland and the six-figure sum frittered away fighting and losing the For Women Scotland case on the definition of sex in the Equality Act.
What sticks in the craw of the public is that there is never any accountability for these decisions. Just some faux contrition and mumbling about 'lessons learned', the lesson seemingly being how not to get caught the next time.
But this is more than a matter of pounds and pennies. The top-heavy spin operation of the Scottish Government and other public bodies risks stifling transparency in a country where it is sorely needed.
The Scottish state is a creature that stalks the shadows, opting to do its business behind closed doors and away from the prying eyes of the public.
Understandably, there are matters which cannot be attended to under the harsh aspect of sunlight, issues like security and emergency situations, but these are exceptions to the rule that to govern well is to govern openly.
The Scottish Government, and the whole cosmos of devolved power, appears to be allergic to openness. They know best and they'll let the rest of us know when they're good and ready.
This attitude was exemplified in the cover-up of the first Covid-19 outbreak, in central Edinburgh, early in the pandemic.
Despite the cases being linked to an international conference, in a busy city, after which delegates would have dispersed nationally and globally, neither the public nor businesses in the surrounding areas were alerted to the risk.
It wasn't until 69 days later, and via a BBC Scotland investigation, that the outbreak became public knowledge. It was a breach of trust that would have required resignations in any other government but under Nicola Sturgeon was just the way things were done.
The Edinburgh cover-up paled in comparison to the investigations into Alex Salmond and their fallout. Accused of misconduct, the former first minister was investigated by a procedure later found unlawful and prosecuted on charges of which he was later acquitted.
Yet when the Scottish Parliament came to interrogate the circumstances behind these extraordinary events, it was met with unminuted meetings, informal chats, absent civil servants, and the almighty power of silence in an institution in which those who know the most know to keep their mouths shut.
All sorts of assurances were given in light of what we were told were lapses. Only, the famous lessons had not been learned when the time came to manage the pandemic.
We learned thanks to the Covid inquiry that the country was being run by a shadowy group, Gold Command, the existence of which was unknown even to senior ministers. Life or death decisions taken in secret with no minutes recorded. That should chill the blood of any democrat.
Yet there was more contempt for open and accountable government yet to come when it was revealed that Nicola Sturgeon and John Swinney deleted their messages during the crisis. The one hope Scots might have had of learning who made the fateful decisions, how and why — snatched away.
We hear a lot these days about the hostility some members of the public harbour towards politicians, and obviously threats and abuse are unacceptable, but there isn't nearly enough recognition of just how much hostility some politicians, including the most senior in the land, harbour towards the public. It is not enough that they have power over us, they insist on having it without any responsibility.
If the battalions of spin doctors to be found across government and the public sector were there to share key information to the population, we would not learn about such things via leaks and inquiries and press exposes.
But these highly paid, generously pensioned apparatchiks are not in the business of communicating information but of controlling it, of trying to gull journalists into presenting ministerial perfidy as public service and managerial failure as imperfect success.
They are massagers of truth, rehabilitators of lies, and dealers in the plausible and the deniable.
Scotland is hardly the only nation where government and public sector encircle themselves in a praetorian guard of press officers, but it is one in which the imbalance between journalists trying to unearth the facts and propagandists trying to keep them buried is so very pronounced.
It means that, no matter how diligently they strive to separate fact from falsehood, to compose the most accurate picture of what has transpired behind closed doors, and to put this information in front of the voting public, reporters will always be outnumbered and outgunned by a taxpayer-funded manipulation machine.
Spending £100 million on spin in three years is indefensible given the duty to use taxpayer's money wisely and hypocritical given oft-heard complaints about insufficient finances. But it is more than that.
Recruiting so many spin doctors that the journalists tasked with holding you to account will always be unequal in manpower and resources is intrinsically anti-democratic.
On the surface, it meets all the outward requirements for open, transparent government, but where it matters, on the level of substance, it is a cynical pretence.
The Scottish Government and the myriad bodies and agencies that run this country do not want you to know what they are up to with your money. They want you to know only what they want you to know.
When the state cloaks itself in this much spin and secrecy it is because the state has something to hide.
When it spends so much cash defending its policies, cash that could have gone to improving services, it's only natural to ask whether the decision-makers have the public's best interests at heart.
However cynical you feel towards the governing class, you do not feel anywhere near cynical enough.
A government or a public body that would spend so extravagantly to shield from your eyes the consequences of its actions is one that has forfeited your trust. Trust is what this whole racket runs on.
They can make you hand over your money, but they can't force you to trust them.
£100 million pays for a lot of spin, but it costs government something money can't buy: credibility.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Anas Sarwar should not expect to oust John Swinney yet, says polling guru
John Curtice said the battle for the South Lanarkshire seat always looked as if it would be a close affair and that's how it turned out. Anas Sarwar should not expect to oust John Swinney as first minister just yet despite Labour's success at the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, Professor John Curtice has said. The election guru said the battle for the South Lanarkshire seat always looked as if it would be a close affair and that's what happened. The Strathclyde University academic told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'If you take in the opinion polls, what's happened in Hamilton, and the ups and downs in Labour and SNP support since 2021, we see Labour at 31 per cent and the SNP at 31 per cent. 'So the contest always looked to be close and that's what's been proven in the end. Labour has done slightly better and the SNP slightly worse, but there is nothing in the result to suggest Labour has turned around the polls. 'But equally what's true is there are no signs in this result that the SNP are making much progress in reversing the losses from last year. 'The recent message from opinion polls are the SNP is running at just over 30 per cent, Labour is around 20 per cent, so it seems a reasonable expectation that such a result would not mean Anas Sarwar is Scotland's next first minister.' Curtice also said that the by-election was positive for Reform, even though it came third after some pundits predicted it could finish higher. Nigel Farage's party took 26.2 per cent of the vote - well above the 19 per cent it is sitting at in the national polls for Scotland. Writing in The Times, he said: 'Once again it is Reform's political prospects that now look brighter. 'As in the English local elections, so in Hamilton the party outperformed its current standing in the polls, winning as much as 26 per cent of the vote. 'Hitherto politicians in Scotland have comforted themselves with the thought that Nigel Farage could never make the political weather in a country that voted against Brexit and which seems less concerned about immigration. 'However, as in the rest of the UK, that is not a thought that is credible any more.' It is estimated around one in four Conservative voters in Scotland from last year's general election have switched to Reform, along with one in six Labour voters. Curtice said: 'Reform UK is damaging both of the principal unionist parties in Scotland. 'In this instance, it was not enough to save the SNP's bacon. But across Scotland there is still the likely prospect that the SNP will be the largest party in the next Holyrood election, but much diminished and much less powerful than the one currently occupying the debating chamber.'
Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Booze, wood-burners, Sunday roasts... as the list of everyday pleasures targeted by the SNP grows longer, have we EVER been subjected to a more censorious nanny state government?
They've clobbered smokers. Thought – aloud – about criminalising the ownership of cats. Its Fife panjandrums are now leaning on local chippies to slash portion-sizes – in the averred interests of public health: now, SNP surrogates threaten your Sunday roast. The ink had barely dried on the first Scottish Parliament minutes before that first cohort of MSPs had banned fox-hunting and hare-coursing. Passed a whole Act about dog-fouling. Our underemployed, overwaged legislators are still after anyone gasping for a fag - in the latest wheeze, you can now be prosecuted for puffing within fifteen metres of a hospital boundary, even if you are on the other side of the street. Disposable vapes are in their sights too: for years it has been an offence to vape at any Scottish railway station, even on a platform in the open air. No pleasure seems safe from the Nats, from their fatuous efforts to police football chants – indeed, the initial law was so intrusive, and so unworkable, it had to be abandoned. Forget that soothing drink, by the way. 'Minimum pricing,' whacked up again last year, means you're now shelling out more for a litre of sherry than, back in 1999, you had to hand over for a bottle of Famous Grouse. Our English neighbours enjoy cheaper beer than we do. And now the Nats have a real new beef with us. The Scottish Government's Climate Change Committee, wagging a sententious finger, says we should all be eating 30 per cent less red meat. And that farmers – as if they did not have trials enough, with scant profit-margins and over-weening bureaucracy in one of Scotland's loneliest jobs – should rear a third fewer sheep and cattle. Even that shocker has had to jostle for attention with other ridiculous headlines. NHS Fife, for instance, is leaning on the hot takeaway trade to cut the typical portion of, for instance, fish and chips. And the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission suddenly has anglers in its crosshairs. Fishing practices should be reformed, it drones, as fish are 'sentient beings' with 'emotional experiences that matter to them.' It hopes ministers will soon review the law regarding 'actions that occur in the normal course of fishing.' Such a move, panted one newspaper and as if it had just unmasked Lord Lucan, 'could outlaw many aspects of angling such as hooking a fish and removing it from the water.' SAWC does, admittedly, have form. Only in February, it thought about forbidding cat ownership in parts of the country where there was demonstrable predation on birds and small mammals. It would make still more sense to shoot every last bird of prey out of the sky and, if SAWC wants a rough guide, between 1837 and 1840 gamekeepers in forested Invergarry killed 285 common buzzards, 63 goshawks, 27 white-tailed sea eagles, 15 golden eagles and 18 ospreys. Not to mention six gyrfalcons, eleven hobbies, 275 kites, 371 rough-legged buzzards, 462 kes-trels, 78 merlins, 63 hen harriers and seven orange-legged falcons. The First Minister, of less stern stuff, limply assured the public that the SNP administration had no plans to ban pet cats. Last year, too, the Nationalists were even forced to abandon a crazed scheme to ban wood-burning stoves in new-build houses. It feels increasingly as if you cannot take three strides in what one of John Swinney's predecessors once hailed as 'the best small country in the world' without being lectured, harangued, re-proached and disapproved of. Tobacco, sugar, booze, salmon or that jumbo-sausage supper… ministers have their beady little eyes on us. And, no doubt, others have eyes on them too. It is only fair to point out that this culture of censure, rebuke and righteously rapped knuckles long predates the SNP's 2007 ascent to power. From practically the start, the devolved new Scotland rapidly won much wry comment for eat-your-vegetables nanny statism. After the first MSPs had solemnly voted themselves a com-memorative medal. In 2005, for instance, Nora Radcliffe – Liberal Democrat MSP for Gordon, till Alex Salmond toppled her from obscurity into oblivion – called for a ban on the boiling of live lobsters. The Scottish Executive, as it then was, pelted us with posters and raucous TV ads about the horrors of everything from eating too many crisps, through dodgy electric blankets, to the enormity of consigning your Christmas turkey to the fridge before it was completely cold. And, in April 2006 and to widespread trepidation – many journalists hurried up from England, hoping for riots on the streets – Jack McConnell's administration banned smoking in enclosed public spaces. A policy, in fact, first suggested by a Nationalist MSP, Stewart Maxwell. But Scots submitted to it so meekly that one wonders how much it emboldened another First Minister, fourteen years later, to impose all sorts of ridiculous restrictions on our liberties during Covid. At its height, you could not sit down on a park bench, enjoy coffee with a neighbour in your garden or leave your house more than once a day. It was even decreed an offence to venture beyond the bounds of your own local authority. When I in March 2021 had briefly to scamper back to my Hebridean lair, by deserted roads through silent towns, for an armful of Astra-Zeneca, I was so terrified of being stopped and challenged I carried a sort of letter-of-transit from my GP. Meanwhile, our unfortunate children shuffled down school corridors in sweaty masks as – concerned about classroom ventilation – ministers wondered aloud about sawing the bottoms off doors and Nicola Sturgeon tut-tutted that Prince William dared to visit Scotland. Behind this are two dark realities. The first is that, while finally responsible for a host of public services, the Scottish Government (and, by extension, the Scottish Parliament) delivers virtually none of them. Local authorities school most of our children; local health-boards direct primary care and hospitals, and so on. When it finally did have an immediate and grave responsibility, from the dawn of 2021 – vaccinating the elderly and the vulnerable against coronavirus – the Scottish Government made such a laboured fist of things that, quietly and with the deepest tact, Whitehall sent in the army. The second reality is that there is a very old middle-class tradition in Scotland of censuring working-class pleasures. In an era when, for most ordinary people, Sunday was their only day off, clergy insisted on the shuttering of galleries and museums. In a noted Court of Session case – with consequences, generations later, for the Western Isles – it was finally ruled that the good and respectable folk of Burntisland, most conscious of their goodness and respectability, could not ban the Sabbath visits of excursion steamers. In 1875 the Religion and Morals Report for the Free Church General Assembly railed that, to a large extent, 'our farm servants are ignorant, licentious, profane and rude'. What yokels might have thought of Free Church ministers is not recorded. Meanwhile, Presbyterians grew so obsessed with the demon drink that, by the Great War, many congregations celebrated Communion with non-alcoholic wine. And, in 1907, a United Free Church minister assailed a new social phenomenon as 'perfect iniquities of Hell itself,' capped in Glasgow Corporation's 1909 roar about 'the great and increasing evil' it was doing to the city's young men and women. Business ventures 'owned by 'aliens and Roman Catholics,' touting an unnecessary product 'epitomising,' gasped one gentleman, 'the evil of luxury being smuggled into the souls of Glaswegians.' The target of such ire? Italian ice cream cafés. As if not to be outdone, the Free Presbyterian Magazine warned young Highland lasses, seeking urban employment, of the perils of the white-slave trade. They should not, for instance, accept sweets from strangers. Retreating from such past larks to the latest decrees from those with the rule over us, it is striking how few stand up to logical examination. Take the Scottish Climate Committee's clamour for less beef and fewer cows; the reduced bleating of sheep. This is presumably pegged to three core tenets of tree-hugging faith: that reduced upland grazing will in scant decades see the regeneration of much Scottish forest; that cattle-feed is a wildly inefficient use of grain; and that cows, naturally flatulent, are responsible for about 14.5 per cent of global greenhouse gases. The precise figure is, in fact, disputed. But the Committee's lordly loftiness flies in the face of basic realities. For one, about 65 per cent of all the land in Britain can bear nothing but grass. Cows and sheep – hold the front page – eat grass. We cannot. Our cloven-hooved stock will, accordingly, be an essential part of our food economy till the end of time, and the beef industry in particular has for years been working hard to reduce its carbon footprint. For another, much of upland and coastal Scotland is too high – or too exposed to salted winds – to bear significant woodland. Life in somewhere like Lewis or Tiree is, as someone once said with feeling, like living on the deck of an aircraft-carrier. Snow can fall on Ben Nevis in any calendar month of the year. And, even were it otherwise, the Climate Change Committee seems to be blithely unaware of the real menace: deer. The deer population on Britain, as Patrick Galbraith details in his rather good book about Brit-ain's vanishing birds - In Search of One Last Song - is completely out of control: two million beasts on the trot, the highest in a thousand years. The ideal on a well-managed Scottish estate is five deer per square kilometre – on some, numbers are at an unsustainable twenty per kilometre. The depredations of muntjac alone have wiped out the nightingale in many parts of England. Deer threaten the survival, too, of black grouse, ptarmigan and the capercaillie. They are, additionally, responsible for many fatal road-accidents; and there is no more ferocious foe of forest than browsing Bambi. But households remain reluctant to buy and cook venison – and, absurdly, much of the venison for sale in Britain today is imported. In any event, most of us eat less red meat these days, not least because it is so expensive: you will struggle to buy a family-sized pot-roasting cut for less than a tenner. And in the Hebrides, well within living memory, it was a rare treat: fish and potatoes all week, with meat (and the related broth as the first course) on Sundays. There are other environmental realities that seem to have eluded the Climate Change Committee. Without cattle, as the Royal Agricultural Society of England has pointed out, 'there would be no dung, which would vastly reduce the presence of dung beetles in their habitat. 'As well as delivering a myriad of ecosystem benefits, such as sequestering carbon into the soil, dung beetle larvae are a key food source for ground-nesting birds. It is estimated that dung beetles save farmers in the UK £367 million per year…' Then we have that NHS Fife obsession: how big is your fish supper? In fact, fish and chips – cooked properly and well – is a remarkably healthy meal. There is, for instance, no added sugar. It is rich in Omega-3 fatty acids, vitamins B12 and D, and high-quality protein – and less fat than a typical serving of, say, chicken tikka masala or an oil-slicked Chinese takeaway. 'Typically,' assures one authority, 'fish and chips on average have 9.42 grams of fat per 100 grams, while the average pizza has 11, chicken korma 15.5 and a donner kebab a whopping 16.2…' We come to SWAC's vapourings about angling. One rather doubts such solicitude extends to every creature of the earth. Even the Commission's august personages doubtless prefer life without headlice, tapeworms and rats and most, presumably, vaccinate their children. It remains official NatureScot advice to smash dead any American signal crayfish you meet in our fresh waters and, for over two decades, it has been determinedly exterminating feral mink in the Western Isles. Where SWAC may have a point is the dubious practice of 'catch and release.' My own view is that you should only venture out with the rod for fish you can eat and, having caught your salmon and thumped it on the head, you head for home and the deep freeze, rather than hauling in fish after fish, weighing them, measuring them, taking a few snaps for social media and then returning them to the deep. Not forgetting a protracted chat about emotional experiences that really mattered to them. But, in coarse fishing, catch and release is the whole point: we might, perhaps, command barbless hooks, or even the soluble sort decreed in the pursuit of bluefin tuna. The wild Atlantic salmon may not always be with us; the typical Scottish political animal will add to the gaiety of nations for decades to come. Bossy, virtue-signalling, carefully picking its targets, and unconsciously living what Ronald Reagan once mocked as the prevalent tenets in modern statecraft. If it moves, tax it; if it keeps moving, regulate it – and, if it stops moving, subsidise it.
The Sun
7 hours ago
- The Sun
Surge in support for Reform in by-election puts Labour seriously under threat, warns expert
A SURGE in support for Reform in a hotly-contested by-election puts Labour seriously under threat, an expert has warned. Nigel Farage's party finished a close third with more than 26 per cent of the vote narrowly behind both Labour and the SNP in the ballot in Hamilton, Scotland. The party said it was a 'remarkable' turnaround picking up 7,088 compared to just 58 votes in the constituency in 2021 as it attempted to win its first seat in Holyrood. Election guru John Curtice said it would be a 'serious misreading' to believe that Labour had turned round its election fortunes, with the Scottish elections next May. He told the BBC: 'Reform are making the political weather north of the border, as indeed they are south of the border.' Reform deputy leader Richard Tice said: 'We've come from nowhere to being in a three-way marginal, and we're within 750 votes of winning that by-election and just a few hundred votes of defeating the SNP.' The performance came just hours after Zia Yusuf resigned as party chair plunging the party into chaos following a row about banning burqas. In a parting shot, he said he no longer believed trying to get Nigel Farage elected as PM was a 'good use of my time'. Mr Yusuf's shock resignation - just weeks after masterminding their local elections triumph - came after an internal row about banning the burqa. The multi-millionaire ex-businessman had attacked the party's newest MP Sarah Pochin as 'dumb' for asking Sir Keir Starmer to outlaw the Muslim face covering in the Commons. But insiders said tensions at the top of Reform had been brewing for some time, with the chairman feeling increasingly sidelined. In a statement, Mr Yusuf said: 'Eleven months ago I became Chairman of Reform. Watch moment Nigel Farage makes back door exit as Reform UK leader dodges protesters in Scotland 'I've worked full time as a volunteer to take the party from 14 to 30 per cent, quadrupled its membership and delivered historic electoral results. 'I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office.' 2
