This is a good moment in British politics to reaffirm my support for fixed term Parliaments.
Most countries know well in advance when their elections will be, barring extreme and very exceptional circumstances.
While quite a lot else has changed about their democracy, the United States has managed to hold presidential elections once every four years since 1792, without fail. That is not to say that, in the event of a major crisis coinciding with polling day, there should not be some flexibility.
Instead, we have had and will continue to have weeks of speculation about a decision that is the Prime Minister’s alone.
At Parliament, the weekly spectacle of Prime Minister’s Questions is increasingly fractious, as the campaigning activity gears up on all sides. At the best of times, there is not much love lost between Gordon Brown and David Cameron, but recent weeks have seen more and more personal anger in evidence at the dispatch box.
The rest of the time, MPs are going through the motions, but all too little real business is underway. There won’t be time for the nuts and bolts of real legislation to make its way, after due scrutiny, on to the statute book – so we wait for the inevitable.
I am afraid the inevitable is not just the election, which – for a whole range of reasons – will certainly see one of the biggest intakes of new MPs ever. It is the time after the election too, when difficult spending decisions which have been talked about but not taken can finally be deferred no longer.
Amidst all of this, spare a passing thought for the officials who have to run our electoral process. Just like the political parties, they are forced to play the absurd guessing game of snap polls and ‘elections that weren’t’ whenever speculation rises.
At least we now have some certainty as this long Parliament nears its obligatory conclusion. But wouldn’t everyone be better served by a fixed date of the kind which is good enough for Holyrood, councils and so many other countries, but not yet for the change-resistant corridors of Westminster?
Another rather different case of waiting for the inevitable was highlighted when I attended a meeting of Transition Black Isle in Fortrose Town Hall back in the icy days of January (although mid-February is not proving a great deal warmer at the time of writing).
Since the disappointing conclusion of December’s Copenhagen Summit, and a harsh winter in the Highlands, there has been much debate about the science of climate change.
I am very sorry the summit failed, but I welcome the debate. I am convinced by the threat which greenhouse gas pollution represents – to our communities, to our economy and to our environment as a whole – but those who share my view should have nothing to fear from public interest and scrutiny.
One cold winter in one part of the world does not debunk climate change, but nor do individual localised events serve to prove the scientific consensus. Scientists of all persuasions need to ensure complete information is available in as accessible a form as possible, so everyone can make their own minds up without being unduly influenced by individual views and selective reporting amidst a vast body of research.
In any event, the Fortrose event looked at the situation in a different relief – the economic and social impact of the point when available oil supply begins to decline, while global demand for energy keeps on growing.
Here in the Highlands, more than most places, we understand how rising oil prices affect the price of food, the costs of transport and the ability we have to heat our homes. We are also increasingly aware of the promise which alternative, clean and renewable energy holds for our local economy’s future.
Whether because of climate change, or simply through the inevitable ‘crunch’ in the oil markets, we need to make the most of that promise. I hope 2010 will be the year we see existing research expertise turn into renewed manufacturing jobs and activity, particularly north of the Cromarty Firth at Nigg.