Morning Call: pick of the papers

The ten must-read comment pieces from this morning's papers.

1. The truth is we are all living on Benefits Street (Guardian)

Everyone is on the take, and whole industries are on white-collar subsidies, writes Simon Jenkins. Some of us are just smarter at concealing it.

2. Dave and Nick, time to prepare your divorce papers (Times)

The coalition must run right up to the election, but there is a danger of civil war unless a strategy is put in place, writes Daniel Finkelstein. 

3. Britain is educating its children for jobs that soon won’t exist (Daily Telegraph)

The fate of the 'Neets’ is tragic, but they aren’t the only ones being failed by the system, says Mary Riddell. 

4. 5 ways to cheer up the Tories (and kill off the 'nasty party') (Guardian)

Asking Conservatives to stop sounding negative may be naive but I agree with Nicky Morgan: they need a change of tone, says Melissa Kite.

5. This evil should shame us into halting Assad (Times)

Britain can no longer avert its eyes from the brutal reality of life, and death, in Syria’s Dark Ages, says Roger Boyes. 

6. It’s time to reject crony capitalism and embrace the real thing (Daily Telegraph)

The solution is to promote competition, tear up barriers to entry, unleash consumer choice, and eliminate subsidies and soft loans, says Allister Heath. 

7. Cost of living? What about the cost of being dead? (Guardian)

The spiralling price of funerals is a symptom of the triumph of the market and the accompanying poverty of civic life, writes Zoe Williams.

8. The very model of a modern central banker (Financial Times)

Ben Bernanke, outgoing chairman, deserves credit for the Fed’s handling of the crisis, says Martin Wolf.

9. There's optimism in the global economy - but only the wealthy are feeling the effects (Independent)

In the UK, it is ‘fat cats’; here in the US, it is Wall Street versus Main Street, writes Hamish McRae. 

10. For truth on immigration, look to the Bard not politicians (Financial Times)

The debate has not been changed by new facts so much as the complexion of the government, writes John Kay. 

How Jim Murphy's mistake cost Labour - and helped make Ruth Davidson

Scottish Labour's former leader's great mistake was to run away from Labour's Scottish referendum, not on it.

The strange revival of Conservative Scotland? Another poll from north of the border, this time from the Times and YouGov, shows the Tories experiencing a revival in Scotland, up to 28 per cent of the vote, enough to net seven extra seats from the SNP.

Adding to the Nationalists’ misery, according to the same poll, they would lose East Dunbartonshire to the Liberal Democrats, reducing their strength in the Commons to a still-formidable 47 seats.

It could be worse than the polls suggest, however. In the elections to the Scottish Parliament last year, parties which backed a No vote in the referendum did better in the first-past-the-post seats than the polls would have suggested – thanks to tactical voting by No voters, who backed whichever party had the best chance of beating the SNP.

The strategic insight of Ruth Davidson, the Conservative leader in Scotland, was to to recast her party as the loudest defender of the Union between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. She has absorbed large chunks of that vote from the Liberal Democrats and Labour, but, paradoxically, at the Holyrood elections at least, the “Unionist coalition” she assembled helped those parties even though it cost the vote share.

The big thing to watch is not just where the parties of the Union make gains, but where they successfully form strong second-places against whoever the strongest pro-Union party is.

Davidson’s popularity and eye for a good photo opportunity – which came first is an interesting question – mean that the natural benefactor in most places will likely be the Tories.

But it could have been very different. The first politician to hit successfully upon the “last defender of the Union” routine was Ian Murray, the last Labour MP in Scotland, who squeezed both the  Liberal Democrat and Conservative vote in his seat of Edinburgh South.

His then-leader in Scotland, Jim Murphy, had a different idea. He fought the election in 2015 to the SNP’s left, with the slogan of “Whether you’re Yes, or No, the Tories have got to go”.  There were a couple of problems with that approach, as one  former staffer put it: “Firstly, the SNP weren’t going to put the Tories in, and everyone knew it. Secondly, no-one but us wanted to move on [from the referendum]”.

Then again under different leadership, this time under Kezia Dugdale, Scottish Labour once again fought a campaign explicitly to the left of the SNP, promising to increase taxation to blunt cuts devolved from Westminster, and an agnostic position on the referendum. Dugdale said she’d be open to voting to leave the United Kingdom if Britain left the European Union. Senior Scottish Labour figures flirted with the idea that the party might be neutral in a forthcoming election. Once again, the party tried to move on – but no-one else wanted to move on.

How different things might be if instead of running away from their referendum campaign, Jim Murphy had run towards it in 2015. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to British politics.

0800 7318496