There are many ways you might want to do it. To elect Greens or Socialists the only hope is the regional vote, but you could vote Socialist on the list and for the Labour Constituency candidate. You could vote Green on the list (they don’t stand in the constituency) and LibDem or SNP to keep out Con or Lab.

Why? In a federal system (which having a separate Parliament for Scotland is (even if the rest of the UK is not equally treated) such as Australia it is VERY hard for one party to win at the federal parliament and to win the state parliaments. Basically it’s impossible for one party to have the capital and all the states. Why?

Simple. People are cynical and like to keep politicians ‘honest’–if you are in power in one of the parliaments an awful lot of people will vote against you for the other parliament. Why? Most people are not mindless ‘my party right or wrong’–this is shown by how few people are members of political parties.

So if you are Joe McSporran it’s very easy to say – basically Labour for Westminster and to keep them honest SNP for the Scottish parliament.

It’s not an idea which has been explored much in the UK because it is only since the SNP won last time that real ‘federal’ comparative political systems are worth exploring. I think this poll suggests such an attitude as I describe.

I think it is unrealistic to expect ‘one party’ right or wrong poll support; consider the UKIP in the EU and the nil votes for Westminster.

There is a Tory right (because they have nowhere else to go) the once large centre have mostly died off but we have had MSP spokesmen to the left of NewLabour.

In the same week we had a Socialist welcoming something in the private sector, the parliament’s best known republican concerned about removing historic rights of the crown and a former Conservative minister warning about the dangers of inappropriate privatisation.

I was disappointed by the Conservatives choice of an impractical amendment supported by a weak arrgument on the Megrahi issue. They could easily have taken the line of not opposing what was effectively a judicial decision. Each session of the parliament has exihbited more bad behaviour in the PMQ manner than the last and I attribute that to the departure of almost all the MSP’s who left Westminster by choice

Significantly, I think, Malcolm Chisholm, the only Labour MSP to support MacAskill is the only one remaining from Labour, and he was very close to Donald Dewar.

The Greens are broadening their base only because the issues they relate to are becoming more important. It’s not due to their better leadership, organisation or funding though devolution has helped. They too have their dogmatists and when that was ALL they had they were nowhere.

It isn’t surprising. The oldest party is the Conservatives, as they are proud to say. They represented the interests of the landowner and indeed they were landowners. Industrialisation brought wealth to entrepreneurs but not necessarily land and the Liberals emerged to represent them and the extention of the franchise made possible the rise of the Labour party. Now the important issues are the environmental ones and in the medium term either the Green brand will grow or be taken over by a competitor.

Scotland has other divisions, Red Clydeside, Enlightenment Edinburgh and the Picts, and the SNP is till now has been strong only in the highlands.

You are right about the Braveheart tendency. They are nowhere near the top of the party. Several, if not all, ministers are working very hard to acheive as much popular change as they can, as economically as they can and as quickly as they can for they realise that if they lose momentum they may lose the chance of independence for a generation.

I’m impressed by what they have acheived, but I know from my own experience how sucess encourages you to attempt further success by working still harder.

There are also a handful of kilted romantic rightwingers who may have differences with leftish ministers, but they are happy to keep quiet about that till independence is secured. If these ministers are popular, that’s enough.

The SNP has had its internal squabbles in the past, but they are as surprised at their recent progress as anyone else and can’t believe their luck. That makes them try harder, because there is a real possibility of success for the first, and perhaps the last and only, time.

The rise in support for the SNP is not due to an increasing sense of national destiny. It is because the Westminster parliament is a failed institution in dozens of ways and an alternative is avalable if only to Scots.

Historically, failed political systems have usually had far worse outcomes than independence under a consensus-seeking pragmatic party working in a new and already available designed-for-purpose building and parliamentary culture.

I have the Ancient Mariner problem.

As I have often said on these pages, half a century ago the Father of the Nation shared with me his vision for a Home Rule Parliament and the reform of Westminster. To his disappointment, I rejected his solution ( though I did not have one of my own).

I WAS WRONG!

If you want to know about better government, you can see for yourself if you type “Scottish Parliament” into your search engine and take it from there.

If you see the breakdown of the Conservative voters, they seem the opposite of the SNP, their base – by and large – seem to constitute a minority in Scotland (doubting devolution, against any more devolution, wanted MacAskill to resign, etc). Indeed, Tory voters in Scotland seem more ‘extreme’ than the party itself (which welcomes more devolution).

I am unsure there will be any Tory ‘fightback’ in the forseeable future, I think that is hopeful thinking for some Tory thinkers, but I am sure they can paint a prettier picture.

It seems though, that unlike England, where the Tories are seen – to a certain degree – somewhat less radical. Their voters in Scotland seem to diverge from mainstream Scottish opinion – more so than any other party.