lib dems force first minister’s handunder-fire education supremo moved

Salmond’s resignation bluff is called as he sacks Hyslop

By Cameron Brooks

Published: 02/12/2009

First Minister Alex Salmond was forced to sack his education secretary yesterday to avoid dissolving his minority SNP government and calling an election.

The Liberal Democrats claimed ministers threatened to step down from office if there was a no confidence vote in Fiona Hyslop at the Scottish Parliament.

The party, which planned to vote on her performance tomorrow, said the government reminded opposition MSPs of the consequences as late as yesterday morning.

Lib Dem chief whip Mike Rumbles – who alerted ministers to the no-confidence motion on Saturday – said his party was determined to force Mr Salmond’s hand.

Labour leader Iain Gray, who said Mr Salmond’s bluff was called and he “blinked”, said his party would have supported the Lib Dems.

And a spokesman for the Conservatives, who have been calling for Ms Hyslop to be sacked for months, said their MSPs would not have moved to save her.

Mr Rumbles, West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine MSP, and north-east Tory MSP Alex Johnstone, said forcing Mr Salmond into a reshuffle had severely damaged his authority.

Ms Hyslop has swapped roles with Culture and External Affairs Minister Mike Russell, but will take charge of a reduced portfolio.

She has been under fire for the SNP’s failure to reduce primary school class sizes, deliver new school buildings and tackle falling teacher numbers for many months.

Mr Rumbles said the final straw for Lib Dems came on Friday when she warned that responsibility for education could be removed from councils unless they took action to raise teacher numbers.

Mr Salmond, who is taking responsibility for the independence referendum bill, insisted that his Cabinet reshuffle, the first since the SNP came to power in 2007, was not an admission of failure.

“Schools policy has reached a difficult period with our disagreement with many local authorities about their failure to reduce class sizes by sustaining teacher numbers, while we have achieved a new record low in primary school class sizes,” he said.

“It is appropriate that a fresh look is taken at this and other schooling issues to break the impasse for the benefit of parents, teachers and children.

“I believe that Mike Russell can bring new thinking to this tough task.”

Ms Hyslop, who attended a joint ministerial committee meeting in London yesterday – her first engagement in her new role – insisted she had not been sacked.

“I think it is correct that a new minister takes that (new approach to education policy) forward,” she added.

“It is a new stage for the minority government but it is a stage that we are driving forward with real focus.

“I think the first minister is quite correct as we are a minority government and have to move and regroup.”

But Mr Rumbles insisted Mr Salmond was forced to act because he knew he would “lose the vote and face” at Holyrood tomorrow.

“I personally informed the government of this and was threatened that ministers would resign en-masse if we went ahead but it was a disreputable bluff,” he added.

“The fact is Fiona Hyslop was pushed before she lost the vote and the first minister knew the game was up.”

Mr Johnstone described Ms Hyslop as an ineffectual education secretary, adding: “Alex Salmond appears no longer to be the one making the primary decisions.

“His actions are now being dictated by events and that is a sign of weakness in a political leader.”

Highlands and Islands Labour MSP Peter Peacock, a former education minister, said Ms Hyslop paid the price for a catalogue of failures.

“Alex Salmond had to find someone to sacrifice and take the blame,” he added.

“The truth is it is his whole approach to funding councils and national policies that is the problem and for that he is responsible.”

Lib Dem leader Tavish Scott, MSP for Shetland, said he hoped Mr Russell would now rebuild trust and create a relationship with councils and schools which would help children and teachers.

Mr Salmond’s spokesman said Ms Hyslop, whose salary will drop from £96,259 a year to £83,347, was an able and capable minister who made a “formidable contribution” as education secretary.

He said her successes included boosting apprenticeship numbers, increasing university funding levels and investment in colleges.

Ronnie Smith, general secretary of teaching union the EIS, said he looked forward to working with Mr Russell.

The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, which clashed with the government last week over a plan to allow councils to borrow £10million to allow 500 teachers to take early retirement to free up posts for new teachers, declined to comment.

Reader's Comments

So Scott, Grey, Goldie r proud of their actions - I for one will NOT be voting for any of their parties next election - I never voted SNP before but I will be now. As for Salmond blinking - I would say watch this space.
Ian mackay
Report this comment

How can councils reduce the class numbers if they are not given the money to do so? Education budgets have been cut in real terms during the whole of the SNP time in government and councils cannot raise the deficit as they are not allowed to increase the council tax. A question for Ian Mackay..What have Scott, Gray, and Goldie done? They have carried out exactly the same actions as wee Eckie has done all through his political life. I for one cannot see what Mike Russell can do without the cash to pay for changes! Wave a magic wand perhaps!!!!!
John Ross
Report this comment

Someone's starting to spread a nasty rumour that we all want union. Well, its not true, honest, don't believe it!
manniewe naename
Report this comment

And the SNPs best kept secret has been blown! Salmond blinks. He's not a machine, oooooh! The devils that they are, they're actually using a real live person as their leader. Aye, that's them blown it now, the truth is out!
manniewe naename
Report this comment

Well, I want to see an independent Scotland buit I'm not really convinced by the SNP. I'll be voting Green.
John Wood
Report this comment

Mr Ross - Glasgow Council WERE given money BUT for Labour reasons chose not to spend it on schools.They have NOT advertised for teachers or schools related vacancies for months. Theirs is a political game by a Labour council and it is a despicable tactic in an area where they have ruled for decadeds and which is about the worst for everything in Western Europe 0 THAT is what Labour r at and it will backfire on them.
Ian mackay
Report this comment

you are all mad scotland can never run on its own
bob seivwright
Report this comment

Just like Eire can not run on its own??????????? or Norway!!!!!
Ian mackay
Report this comment

Well, gee thanks bob! Nice to see the value you place on your fellow countrymen/women..god you doom mongers and fear merchants P me off. Can't you get it? Anything's better than being telt you're a nae user! Sick sick sick! Of it.------------Nice 1 J Wood, as lang as we get there in the iyne!
manniewe naename
Report this comment

Glad to see that someone thinks that wee Eck is human and blined, I thought he was just another weather baloon. Full of hot air. To liken us to Eire of Norway is quite laughable. We have been a Union for over 300 years along with all the ups and downs. But seriously think that we have been worse off with an SNP Government that we ever were with Westminster apart from the Thatcher years. It was this government that has led us to where we are today. No council houses, because they were all sold off and new ones never built. The public sector Steel Gas Coal Rail etc. were all sold off to cover their recession . Now we have to pay through the nose for the utilities. So if anyone thinks that Scotland can run alone espescially with the bag of wind leading us - Think Again.
minnie moan a lot
Report this comment

Minie how are things down in Surrey? You must be one of those little Englanders that dream about the good old days of the Empire, and when every "Sweatie" knew his place ie:(taking orders from the english) I just want my country to run it's own affairs, there is nothing wrong with that, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, New Zealand, Ireland etc etc get alone just fine, why can't Scotland? I you care (which I doubt) have a look at the following link which will show that Scotland as an independant country will be a GREAT success. http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/013_the_great_deception.pdf Oh and Salmond is just one man, we don't need him to run Scotland. But I do think he does a good job, considering the anti Scottish Goverment and anti SNP lies and smears we get daily from Westminster and in all the press.
alan reid
Report this comment

John Wood, I would be voting green if it made a change to the UK. But there is no way England would vote Green. Therefore I vote SNP, once Scotland is independant I would never vote for the SNP again, they would have done their job. Best thing I can see is help the SNP untill independance and after vote for who ever you want whether it be Conservative, Labour Green etc.
alan reid
Report this comment

A little bit from THE GREAT DECEPTION - GERS- 2005 “ I f you te l l a lie b ig enough and k eep repeating i t , people w ill eventual l y come to believe i t . The l i e can be m ain tained only fo r such tim e as the S ta te can shie ld the people from the pol i t i cal , economic and/ or m i l itary consequences o f th e lie. I t thus becom es v ita lly important for the State to use a ll o f its pow ers to repress d issen t, for the tru th is the m ortal enemy o f the lie, and thus by ex tension , the t ruth is the g reates t enemy o f the S tate.” Josef Goebbels. Hitler’s propaganda chief. In May 2000 I wrote the original article called ‘The Big Lie.’ It was an exercise to establish the truth of the often repeated claims of the British Government that Scotland was too economically weak to stand on its own two feet. In fact the claim has been made that the English Taxpayers are subsidising the Scots. After months of painstaking research the results were astonishing to say the least. The reverse was actually true, it was Scotland that was substantially subsidising the rest of the UK. However this Big lie is still repeated by the Scottish Executive and Labour Politicians, both in Holyrood and Westminster in the form of the GERS report and accordingly I have been retained by an Independent policy think tank and the newly formed Scottish Enterprise Party to verify the truth or otherwise of the GERS report. According to the GERS Report, Scotland is an economic basket case which requires £11.2 Billions annually from the UK exchequer to balance the books. My remit is to establish the truth or otherwise for this claim. The British Government have made vast improvements in the online services available for researchers using the Internet over the past 5 years Most of the data is now online. The one major source of information has been http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/ links from this website give additional information. I am using the UK Governments own statistics for comparison with the GERS report and where interpolation has been required the figures err on the conservative side giving the benefit of any doubt to the UK statistics. http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/013_the_great_deception.pdf In my original article North Sea Oil revenues were difficult to track down as the UK Government regarded these as special resources of the UK (Extra-Regio Territories) and not Scottish, even though the Oilfields are in Scottish waters, are policed by Grampian Police and supported by an Infrastructure, at NE Scottish Ratepayers and Council Tax payers expense without any financial support from Westminster. Following this UK Government convention, the GERS report compilers have done likewise, thus North Sea Revenues are EXCLUDED from the allocation of revenues received from Scotland. The UK government have created a new country named Extra Regio Territories in order to conceal the Oil revenues from the Scottish account. Accordingly I have ignored this new creation and included the North Sea Oil revenues in the comparitor. When the Scottish Parliament was established, the UK Government annexed 6000 square miles of Scottish Waters rich in Oil, Gas and Fish and transferred them to English jurisdiction. In these cases, I have re-allocated this areas Tax revenues to the Scottish Tax Revenues account under the original international boundary. I have also re-allocated the Scottish operations proportion of the Corporation and other taxes paid by the International Oil Companies based in London whose taxes are credited to the London account. These would naturally accrue to the Scottish treasury if Scotland were independent. I am still not satisfied that I have gained a true picture of North Sea Oil and Gas revenues as I am certain some of these have been allocated to the Gross operating surplus and Crown Estates Income. In this event, they may well be understated for the Scottish North Sea Tax revenues, but I have found it next to impossible at present to penetrate the veil of obfuscation from HM Treasury that surrounds this heading. The U.K. Government use the figure of 8.6% (Red Book 2004) to express the percentage of Scottish Populace to the U.K. Population as a whole, and I have used this percentage in Annex A where it was impossible to ascertain the correct percentage. (Comparitor of Taxation Revenue and Percentages). It should be Noted that the least ambiguous site was HM Revenue and Customs. The worst site being the Treasury.
alan reid
Report this comment

http://www.scottishdemocraticalliance.org/attachments/013_the_great_deception.pdf Also given that Scottish rugby and Scottish football is in a very bad way, why did the Scottish tax payer have to pay for the New Wembley? I mean to say "£240 million yet came in with a final figure of £790 million" thats a bit steep is it not? http://www.propertycommunity.com/property-in-the-uk/110-is-new-wembley-the-great-hope-for-the-future-or-a-great-white-elephant.html Well i'm sure the English football supporters will be gratefully to the Scots, Welsh, and Northern Irish for a pay out, another Union divedend!
alan reid
Report this comment

For a less anti SNP media check out the link.http://newsnetscotland.blogspot.com/
alan reid
Report this comment

Democracy in Britain - now there is a joke. An artificial nation which has a second chamber of appointed nobles for life where dukes,duchesses, marquises, marchionesses, earls, countesses, viscounts viscountesses, barons and baronesses are manufactured on some warped puppet production line. With another Conservative Government about to be imposed on Scotland by England it would appear the production line for these puppets is to be ramped up yet againn. "David Cameron plans influx of new peers" see - tinyurl.com/ylqq648 No need to bother with elections, representation or even basic fairness in this British 'democracy' - just manufacture some sycophantic nobles for the cause. Meanwhile Scotland does not remotely have the representation of a State or a Canton never mind a nation. "In Australia the the constituent states have equal and elected representation - with the smallest Tasmania with only 2.7% of the population of the largest having the same representation - 12 senators each. see - tinyurl.com/5gjodp & tinyurl.com/2cqnjs In the United States Wyoming is 1.47% of the largest State California, but both have equal and elected representation in the second house with two senators each. see - tinyurl.com/b6hbt "the Council of States which has 46 representatives (two from each canton)" The smaller cantons (e.g. Schaffhausen with a population of 74,527) has the same representation as Zurich with a population of 1,307,567. see - tinyurl.com/bltemn Democracy indeed ..
alan reid
Report this comment

Alan Reid – a nationalist rant to make my eyes water and my blue daub run. Me, I favour getting rid of the Scottish Parliament; seems like such a waste of money – second rate windbags telling me how to live my life, maybe third rate; perhaps the second raters are in Westminster.
paul day
Report this comment

The Press and Journal is happy to encourage discussion and debate on the topics featured within our newspaper and on our website.

However, we would urge people to respect the opinions of others even if they do not agree with them. We will not tolerate abusive comments of any type and such posts will be removed with the people responsible facing a ban from this website.

Only registered users can supply comments, and your registered name and location will automatically be appended to any comment that you upload.

We reserve the right to remove comments from anyone using a false name or pseudonym.

To post a comment, please login using the form at the top of the page, or click to register.