FactCheck: Scottish independence

The analysis

The leader of the Labour party in Scotland, Wendy Alexander, caused a storm at the weekend when she appeared to wrongfoot the Scottish National Party with calls for its proposed referendum on Scottish independence to be brought forward.

Or didn't, according to Brown. So what did Alexander actually say?

Speaking on BBC Scotland, she acknowledged that any debate on independence was important for Scotland's future. It was therefore worrying, she said, "that the SNP appears to be toying with the electorate by saying, 'We want this, it's the reason we came into politics, but we are frightened to bring the matter forward'".

And then came the gung-ho quote: "I don't fear the verdict of the Scottish people - bring it on." Which suggests pretty strongly that there should, at least in the current Scottish political climate, be a referendum.

Source
BBC: 'bring on' referendum - Alexander

The analysis

This is Brown's version of what the Scottish Labour leader actually meant - but his interpretation contains a Caledonian clanger.

Scottish independence was - is - a totemic issue for the SNP during its election campaign last year. So is the party now breaking its promise to the electorate?

No. A 2010 election pledge is entirely consistent with the party's manifesto.

It's spelled out on page seven, in fact, which says that one of the priorities for the first minister is: "publication of a white paper detailing the concept of Scottish independence in the modern world as part of preparations for offering Scots the opportunity to decide on independence in a referendum, with a likely date of 2010."

Whether the SNP is hollow or just plain tactical for pushing for a referendum in 2010 - when an unpopular-in-Scotland Tory administration looks increasingly likely to be ruling Westminster - is a matter for debate. But to say that the party is now going against its manifesto just doesn't wash.

Source
SNP manifesto 2007

The analysis

Let's take these one at a time.

On a basic headcount, there are more people working than at any time since records began. But Britain's population is also much bigger, to the tune of three million since the start of the nineties.

The employment rate, a more useful way of comparing how many of the working age population is actually earning a crust, is in fact a smidgen (0.3 percentage points) below the 74.8 per cent back in 1971.

Put in this context, Brown's boast seems rather less impressive. We've looked into this in more detail here.

Job vacancies? There were 687,600 of them in the three months to March 2008, which is indeed the highest figure since comparable records began - in 2001. Not exactly the long-standing history you might expect from the claims between which this is sandwiched.

And finally, the unemployment claim is true, although strictly speaking, we should allow a thirty-year margin for error. Labour has indeed cut unemployment to 4.9 per cent of working age, the lowest it had been since 1975. But that was in 2005 - the rate has since risen to 5.5 per cent.

It's a similar picture if we look at the claimant count: a crude but handy measure of those claiming unemployment benefit.

Unemployment at its lowest level since 2005 doesn't sound quite so good, however.

Source
ONS: Labour market statistics

The analysis

A barrel of which oil? The usual benchline barrel cited in the UK is Brent crude - which yesterday broke through the $120 a barrel mark.

Source
ICE: Global Commodity Markets

The analysis

Brown kicked off today's session with the more justifiable claim to have "cut child and pensioner poverty". But later, he swings back to the dubious boast we FactChecked last week: to have taken a million children out of poverty.

It's no truer now than it was then - at least, not according to most recent official figures, which show 600,000 children have been taken out of poverty (defined as living in households living on less than 60 per cent of the median income) since Labour came to power.

Source
DWP: Households below Average Income

Your view

You've read the article, now have your say. We want to know your experiences and your views. We also want to know if there are any claims you want given the FactCheck treatment.

Email news@channel4.com

FactCheck will correct significant errors in a timely manner. Readers should direct their enquiries to the editor at the email address above.

Share this article

Send this article to a friend »

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Reddit
• Facebook
• StumbleUpon

What are these?