Bonnyrigg candidates announced

Nominations have now closed and for those with an ear to the ground, the ballot form for the Bonnyrigg ward will hold no surprises. Once again the Lib Dems are not standing and this time none of the socialists or anti-cuts candidates are present.

Jackie Aitchison, as expected, has resigned from the Labour Party to stand as an independent. This is no surprise, given how he has been treated, and it will be interesting to see how much his personal vote holds up. More interesting will be what he says and does during the campaign, and should he fail to be re-elected, where his lower preferences go. His resignation also means that Labour goes into the election without holding an overall majority on the council.

For the SNP, sitting councillor Bob Constable, being above his little known running mate Thomas Munro on the ballot form, I would expect Bob to be re-elected early on in the count. In 2007, Bob received 400 surplus votes and was comfortably elected on the first round of counting. That won't happen this time and Munro will naturally pick up most of Bob's eventual surplus if he can avoid an early exit.

The Conservative candidate Emma Cummings is from Gorebridge and completely unknown in the ward. I am surprised local Tory stalwarts Marnie and Bill Crawford are not standing this time, or at least finding someone a bit more local to fly the flag. However, given a complete lack of activity from the Tories here over the last five years, they must know they have two chances of success - fat and slim - and perhaps it's a case of giving future hopefuls a bit of electioneering experience. Who knows?

The Labour ticket, however, is much more interesting. Sitting councillor and council leader Derek Milligan must fancy his chances now he's above his running mate on the ballot form (I could say more, but space doesn't allow...). Louie Milliken is very much a newcomer and, surprisingly for Labour in what used to be a stronghold for the party, has had little involvement as far as I'm aware, in the community.

Labour looks likely to lose one of its two seats in Bonnyrigg this time. Derek Milligan is the marmite of Bonnyrigg politics - you either love him or hate him, and his name has certainly cropped up a few times on the doorsteps, without my prompting, I should add! The spread of first preferences between these two candidates will be interesting to say the least; however, I do expect alphabetical order to play the biggest hand and Derek will get back in.

So my guess is Bob Constable will be elected early on, followed by Derek Milligan. Without Labour backing, I can't see Jackie surviving. Which means the final place will be between myself, Thomas Munro and Louie Milliken. In local elections, visibility and community activity over a period of time count for much more and personality over party label also plays a part. Turnout will be lower, which will probably hit the Labour vote more than most, and these elections - being separated from the Holyrood vote which took place on the same day last time - will not be clouded by national issues.

On that basis, therefore, I have grounds for a good deal of optimism. However, there's all to play for and I'll be taking nothing for granted over the next few weeks.

Knock knock - diary of a canvasser

With five weeks to go, nominations close today for the local elections on 3rd May.

Canvassing is now well underway and I've knocked on around 400 doors in the Bonnyrigg ward. Although so far I've mainly been covering areas where we traditionally pick up support, the response has been amazing. Yesterday while out leafletting, someone came up to me saying he wanted to vote for me but will be going on holiday on 2nd May. I popped round with a couple of postal vote application forms and while chatting, someone else cycled past and stopped to say he and his wife will be giving me their first preference votes after I'd spoken to them on the doorstep the previous day.

I also now have a few people who have offered to display a Vote Green window poster - important as the council has now banned lamppost placards.

If elected, there'll be no time for a rest - I have a growing list of issues people have spoken to me about and I've taken their contact details and will be taking up their cases immediately.

There's a lot of hard work to do over the next five weeks. A three member ward is hard for Greens to break into and there is still a lot of what I call 'tribal' voters - those who vote Labour or SNP by habit and for no other reason. However, most of those seem happy to give me a second or third preference, which could give me a crucial boost once one of the two Labour or SNP candidates is elected and their running mate eliminated during the count. Getting enough first preferences is the priority though, to stay in the count and pick up those transfers.

Five years ago I only canvassed 40% of the ward - those areas where we are most likely to pick up support. This time I'm adding on a few areas where we need to break into the Lab/SNP vote, and yesterday I was in one such street. The result was very encouraging, including the offer of a window poster and a warm reception on most doorsteps.

People want change. The consistent message I'm getting is that the councillors they have are not worth voting for, but they only vote for one lot because they dislike the other lot even more. That makes my job of persuading people to vote for us much easier, of course, but it makes me even more determined to prove that Green councillors are different. Without the tribal vote, Greens have to work hard to get elected, and we have to work hard to get re-elected; and that can only be good for those we hope to represent.

Campaign gets underway

Only 40 days to go and for me, that marks the start of the election campaign proper. Nomination papers are in, election newsletter deliveries started and canvassing sheets printing off as I write.

Tomorrow I start canvassing in the leafy lanes of Lasswade. I was down that way a few days ago delivering newsletters and already got caught up in conversations with people I met - some of whom I already know.

It seems that every street I go down there's someone I know, and over the last few days I've already logged three people I've promised to get back in touch with if elected, to help with issues they are interested in - and doorknocking hasn't even started!

So far there seems little evidence of activity from other parties. Labour has delivered two newsletters - both claiming the credit for new infrastructure provided by the Scottish Government or NHS Lothian, so I'll be interested to see how the SNP campaign reacts to this!

I've also heard that the two Labour candidates have been knocking on doors in Polton. I hope they continue as one  of them once confided to me that he didn't like doorknocking as it tends to alienate as much support as it attracts. In his case, understandable.

In 2007, we were the main recipients of voter transfers in the Bonnyrigg ward. However, a worrying number of votes did not transfer through to the last round of counting. This could be for the legitimate reason that the voters had no preference beyond those they expressed, or it could be because people don't fully understand how the system works.

One questionnaire I had returned said the voter (who had voted Lib Dem previously) wouldn't vote for us because we're too small a party - a bit ironic as the Lib Dems have fewer MSPs than we did at our high water mark and in 2007 we came fourth in this 3-member ward and the Lib Dems didn't stand.

Hence the need for me to speak to people individually. If people want a Green councillor, then they should vote for one with their first preference, and if we're not elected, their vote simply transfers to their second preference. A simple message I will be putting to people over the next five weeks.

Taxpayers' cash and political footballs

I am more intrigued by people's reactions to what is going on at Rangers Football Club than the eyewatering revelations which emanate from Ibrox on an almost daily basis. 

My immediate and continuing reaction is simple. I pay my taxes on time and so should they. If I didn't then I would have no-one else to blame and certainly would not expect the likes of Alex Salmond to plead with HMRC on my behalf. If this means the end for them, then tough. However, there are many who do not share my view. But if Rangers, or any other club for that matter, is so precious that it shouldn't be allowed to fail, then sorry, the safeguards should have been built into the way it was run to prevent it from ever happening.

As with Rangers, so with RBS, Greece, or any other institution for that matter. Failure, default and liquidation are as much a fact of life as death and taxes, and should be just as inevitable for those who deserve it.

The same sentiments expressed towards Rangers were expressed by some members of the public towards Bonnyrigg Rose when an investigation by Midlothian Council found that it did not have 'visibility' of  £26,000 of Midlothian taxpayers' money which had been granted to the club.

When I highlighted this, instead of people being indignant that taxpayers had been diddled of their contributions, I was accused by some of attacking the club. As with Rangers, Bonnyrigg Rose refused to open their books to scrutiny to clear matters up. I was  accused of threatening the viability of the club by asking what Midlothian Council is going to do about recovering taxpayers' money. Excuse me, but if the club is too important to fail, then those who run the club should have been better monitored and mechanisms put in place to ensure it couldn't get into the kind of mess it now finds itself in.

Whether it's £100 million from HMRC or £26,000 from Midlothian Council, the disappearance of taxpayers' money is not a victimless crime. However, unlike HMRC, Midlothian Council has done nothing to recover the missing money - despite its own audit report recommending a completion date of 31 May 2011 for doing so. Perhaps Midlothian Council is not as strapped for cash as has been claimed.

Dial M for Machiavelli

Things are certainly heating up in the letters page of the Midlothian Advertiser as we head towards the local elections in May, and my old adversary, Councillor Milligan has clearly been hard at work behind the scenes.

Unfortunately for him, I do have my moles in the Midlothian Labour Party and I am well aware of what's going on. The letters, written by his close associates, all bear the hall marks of issues he's fond of complaining to his comrades about. Whether it's my involvement as a community councillor, the town's Twinning Association or the community council newsletter, all his favourite grouses appear in most of the letters. One of this week's letters even suggests the Council's Audit Committee might take an interest in the fact the twinning association merged with the community council. I suspect the the Audit Committee has enough to be going on with over the Bonnyrigg Rose car park saga than concern itself with this - after all, unlike with the car park, no public money has been lost.

It's a pity the Sherwood Management Committee has been dragged into all of this. Having met with the committee I was under the impression the matter of the Bonnyrigg Primary snagging problems had been resolved. Do these people realise they have to work with councillors of all colours, not just the ones they favour? The partisan views expressed (in a highly unprofessional manner) by a body which receives grant funding may attract the attention of, er, Midlothian Council's Audit Committee.

News has just reached me, however, of something altogether underhand, and which is further proof of the threat Councillor Milligan regards I pose to his chances of re-election in May. On Sunday, the candidate selection meeting was held for Labour candidates in the Bonnyrigg ward. There are currently two Labour councillors, Derek Milligan and Jackie Aitchison. Jackie's problem is his name begins with A and Milligan's with M, and it seems that most people who trundle into the polling booths in Bonnyrigg and want to vote Labour don't bother more than looking down the list and voting '1', '2' against Labour candidates. Bad news for Derek!

So 6 months ago (according to my Labour mole), he and another Labour activist, Louie Milliken, recruited friends and family ahead of the deadline to ensure they would be eligible to vote in the selection process. You can guess the rest - Aitchison out, Milliken in, and the problem is solved.

It's not for me to interfere in the internal workings of the Labour Party, but to date, sitting councillors are normally only deselected if they've been particularly bad boys or girls and in all my years in Bonnyrigg, I don't see that Jackie has done anything bad.

What happens next will be interesting. When your cupboard is crammed with skeletons you need to be careful about how you treat those who hold the keys.

Musings on neutrinos

As a Physics graduate I can't help but being a little excited over the discovery that something may have exceeded the speed of light.

Admittedly, my main interest at Uni was Atmospheric Physics, so if you want a discussion on saturated adiabatic lapse rates, thickness lines or how polar lows are formed, I'm your man, but on neutrinos and anti-matter I'm just about as clueless as the rest.

What sparked my disinterest in that side of physics was my introduction to the dual nature of light. It can be treated as a particle or a wave, I was told, depending on what you want to prove. Waves work best when studying diffraction and particles for other things (what, I'm not sure - you can see I was starting to lose interest already). What clinched it though, was when I was told that even a single particle would still obey the laws of diffraction, passing equally through two holes and interacting afterwards like a wave. Rather like a train splitting and each half going through a separate tunnel and joining up again at the other end. It's easy to see why physicists don't run the railways.

What confuses me though is why even eminent physicists are saying this could mean we can travel back in time. Call me a sceptic, but if this were at all possible at some time in the future, surely there would be even one account of someone in the past having met up with someone from the future carrying a mobile phone or something. On the other hand, maybe it's possible but we will have wiped ourselves out well before the H G Wells time machine even gets to prototype.

I can't even get to grips with the theory. Apparently, if I stood at the point in Italy where the neutrino arrived, I would have seen it arrive several nanoseconds before it left CERN. True, I would see it arriving, then see it leaving CERN, but that's only because the image of it leaving took a little longer - it still left before it arrived.

There's another thing I can't understand about all this. We're told that billions of these neutrino things pass through us every second. So how on earth do they know the ones they detected in Italy were the same ones they fired off at CERN. Do they each come with a bar code?

All very confusing. Think I'll stick to politics, where time travel to the past is possible. Cross into Midlothian and you travel back forty years.

Oil, debt and why the old politics will no longer work

I'm currently reading Richard Heinberg's new book "The End of Growth", which can only be described as the most topical book on sale. I've just finished James Howard Kunstler's "The Long Emergency", which although written in 2004, predicted with frightening accuracy the financial crisis of the last four years. Both books point to burgeoning household and government debt as well as depleting oil supplies as major factors in determining a sea change in how we live our lives over the next few decades, and as I watch the daily news bulletins, it's clear that most politicians have either not read them or are failing to grasp the message.

Although global in context, both books, written by American authors, naturally concentrate on the impact on the US, with Kunstler highlighting how alarming dependent the US has allowed itself to become on oil, and on regimes which produce it now the country's own stocks are depleting.

Critics of peak oil say there is still a lot of oil around and alternatives will be found once the market drives up the price of oil, and there is some truth in this. The problem is not so much a shortage of oil in the short term, but more the fact that the era of cheap oil is now past, and this itself has profound consequences, not least in the debates over deep water drilling and the derivation of oil from tar sands and shale. The fact that these debates are taking place is a testament to the argument that the easiest, and therefore the cheapest, resources are no longer available. Future energy supply will also use more energy to extract, some of it not being worth the energy required, whatever the market value. After all, if there is a lot more oil to be extracted, why has nobody been building new refineries for decades?

It is, however, the combination of this and the spiralling debt problem which gives Heinberg's arguments such force. Debt is not a problem in itself. The UK for example, has one of the lowest debt to GDP ratios in its history. The problem is the amount you have to pay to service it; this is influenced by the deficit (i.e. the annual increase in debt) and the interest rate charged (hence the fixation on credit ratings). A further problem is that although banks are allowed to create debt from nothing, ultimately that debt needs to be destroyed and often the traditional way of doing that is to default - not, as most would suspect, by paying it back. The interesting thing is that rather than allowing the natural law of default to take place, the US and European governments in particular, have instead taken on much of it themselves in the form of bank bailouts, loans to failing European nations, and stimulating the economy either through increased spending or quantitative easing.

The aim of retaining 'stability' is understandable if for a short term, but keeping interest rates low either directly, or by artificially maintaining credit ratings, is not sustainable, and as the saying goes, if something is unsustainable, then it will not be sustained. There comes a point when the strain becomes too much. This point will soon be reached, and I predict that Greece will soon default, followed by Italy. The resulting chaos will be phenomenal, with banks either failing or, for a while, being bailed out again, but this is the natural order of things and nature has a habit of asserting itself in the end. There's going to be a lot of pain before this problem is sorted out, and debt fuelled growth is a mistake we will not wish to repeat and will not be able to repeat, as lenders will be more wary and charge higher rates in future.

Then there's the oil. Anyone who has watched oil prices over the recent past will notice how price fluctuations follow the stock market quite closely - when the general view of the world economy becomes more optimistic, stock markets around the world rise, but so does the price of oil, based on an anticipation of increased demand. The reverse happens when the pessimists hold sway. In the case of oil, however, the ups have generally outstripped the downs, with the price of Brent crude rising from under $80 a barrel two years ago to around $115 today, despite the economic outlook being no brighter.

And here lies the key to why the days of economic growth may be at an end. Peak oil is the point at which the taps can no longer be turned up to produce more oil to drive down the price, quite simply because there taps are already on full. True, Saudia Arabia is understood to have spare capacity, but, no-one knows how much (and the recognised overstating of reserves and capacity is another issue entirely), but doing so would stress its wells to the point where it would reduce the country's ability to recover future supplies.

So if the oil price is now dictated purely by anticipated demand, then as soon as the world starts to come out of recession, that price will rise sharply. Supply can't increase, and our lifestyles dictate that demand won't reduce, and so either the price continues to rise or global economies will be hit hard. In other words, economic growth drops to zero or becomes negative until it chokes off demand for oil, its price drops a bit and the roller coaster starts moving upwards again as the cycle repeats.

In this scenario, it's clear that the Keynesian solution for stimulating an economy out of the doldrums will not work but will result in simply more debt. Allowing market forces free reign is no solution either, except in encouraging energy efficiency and gradually reducing demand, which will take far too long. So what do we do?

It's clear to me that we need to change our lifestyles to become far less dependent on fossil fuels, not least because of the other impending crisis, that of climate change. If we are going to stimulate the economy, let's do it with this long term objective in mind. A national house insulation programme, huge investment in renewables research and development, public transport infrastructure and developing smaller scale economies. Let's use tax changes to encourage, repair and recycle rather than replace. The way "growth" itself is calculated, using GDP, is itself flawed, as a measure of consumption which encourages waste and unnecessary spending.

Why are the politicians not saying this? Well the Greens are, and have been for a long time now, but for the rest to admit that economic growth is not the desired target would demand a paradigm shift in political thinking. It would mean that the Keynesians on the left, the free marketeers on the right, and the corporate back-stage players who pull all their strings would be forced to admit that the game is finally up and they've been backing the wrong horse. Far better for them to borrow a few billion more, put it on the nose, and desperately hope their nag comes in.