Bill Jamieson: The first chapter in book of Ruth?

Ruth Davidsons Scottish Tories overtook Labour in one poll. It could be start of a trend. Picture: John Devlin

Of all the stories you never thought you would read in Scotland, here’s one this week you had to read twice because you couldn’t believe it the first time: “Polls show Tories ahead of Labour in Scotland.”

Have we travelled back in a time-warp? Is Anthony Eden still prime minister?

But here it is: the Conservatives have pulled ahead of Labour in Scotland. A YouGov survey puts the Conservatives on 20 per cent, Labour on 19 per cent with the Liberal Democrats on 9 per cent and “others” (and boy, some “others”) including the Scottish National Party on 41 per cent.

If the Conservative vote in Scotland overtakes Labour in the Westminster election next year, it will be the first time since the 1950s: a halcyon era when steam trains pulled into Waverley, Morris Minors tootled along uncluttered roads and the White Heather Club reigned supreme.

Every sinew of our disbelief kicks in early on a story like this. It’s a rogue poll with a tiny sample. It was held in a pub. It’s confined to Scottish Field readers in Dumfries and Galloway. Clients of Savills got multiple votes.

Even with all this, 20 per cent barely signifies as a “revival” of Conservative fortunes. It’s barely a beginning. Even if all these caveats hold good, is this really a story of Conservative renaissance, or another sign of a collapsing Scottish Labour vote? Support for the Scottish Tories needs only to mark time for the gap between it and slumping Labour support to narrow dramatically.

Johann Lamont’s problem is far more to do with Labour’s haemorrhaging of support to the SNP. But this may be to repeat the error of some of the polls during the independence referendum campaign: an under-estimation of the voting intentions of No supporters.

Indeed, it may be evidence of a growing apprehension as to where the clamour for “more powers” is leading us, who is likely to emerge the victors – and who the losers.

Scotland has no lack of left-of-centre parties. The SNP proclaims itself left-of-centre. Labour was long the dominant left-of-centre party. In response to the dramatic decline in its support, shadow Scottish secretary Margaret Curran wants to take it more to the Left.

The Liberal Democrats are a left-of-centre party, keen on a mansion tax and income redistribution. So, too, are the Greens, whose MSP Patrick Harvie never tires of proclaiming “those with the broadest shoulders should bear more of the burden”.

And then there are far-left shavings and slivers and loose chippings: the Scottish Socialist Party, Common Weal, the George Galloways and Tommy Sheridans: Left as Left can be. Little wonder that “those with the broadest shoulders” and those aspiring to broader shoulders as retirement approaches may be increasingly apprehensive as to where the clamour for “more powers” may take us.

Bear in mind that the number of taxpayers qualifying to pay the 50p top rate in 2010 was just 13,000 and that, according to the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Scotland, “another 10 per cent on the top rate might raise about £240 million or less than 0.4 per cent of public spending”. Given this, any shoulder fractionally larger than average will be “broad”.

These apprehensions have been sharpened by the proposed new land and buildings transactions tax under which middle-income households will face swingeing increases in the cost of house purchase. Anyone buying an average family house in Edinburgh costing around £363,000 will be paying £13,600 in tax under the new system – 25 per cent more than they would have paid in stamp duty. The estimated collections are £558m in 2015-16, compared with the total collections of £472m for stamp duty in the 2013 Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland report.

All this suggests a worrying direction of travel by an administration now demanding powers over inheritance tax, capital gains tax and, note well, “other taxes on income and wealth”.

According to consultants BDO, “it is the first political salvo in the taxation battle between Holyrood and Westminster and sends a clear signal that future devolved Scottish tax powers will be used to help those in the lower income bracket at the expense of the more affluent”.

Now comes a fall in the price of oil, which figured so prominently in the SNP’s budget and spending plans. According to Fiscal Affairs Scotland this week, a big gap has opened up between projected Scottish Government oil revenues and reality, with Scotland under fiscal autonomy facing a £5 billion shortfall.

And who might be called upon to make up this gap? Those “with the broadest shoulders” tend in the main to be older voters – those building pension savings for retirement. Figures on “wealth inequality” do not make adjustment for those seeking to amass capital for a post-working life period which now extends to 20 years and more.

How telling that some 73 per cent of over-65s are reckoned to have voted against independence. They seldom featured in those raucous TV debates or featured much in “vox pop” TV interviews in the course of the campaign.

There is a widespread belief among independence supporters that victory will in time be theirs once this older cohort has died off. If this is the grand strategy of the devo-max advocates, a shock lies in store. In Scotland, those 55 and over already represent 36 per cent of the voting population. And the population is getting older. According to the National Register Office for Scotland the number of people aged 65 and over will rise by 59 per cent, from 0.93 million to 1.47 million by 2037. And it is the most elderly age groups that are projected to increase most dramatically.

As people age, their concerns change. They become more conscious and concerned about their lifetime savings and their pensions to see them through retirement.

Many are apprehensive about leaving themselves dependent on the basic state pension. So they carefully accumulate savings. As a result, they have potentially more to lose in a radical upheaval that could affect the safety and stability of those nest eggs. Who represents them to Lord Smith’s Commission?

Never forget that the quiet, reticent and retired – semi- or otherwise – also have a vote. They have – in the lurid lexicon of policy wonks – “more skin in the game”. And – a small point perhaps – they might not quite care to back a cause that is eagerly counting on their early demise.

They certainly have reason for concern as to where the combination of “more powers” and a left-of-centre Holyrood parliament may lead. It is not fanciful to see a return of many previous Conservative voters who voted tactically SNP in 2007 and 2011 returning to the Tory fold next year.

There are votes to be gathered – those who are not part of the left-of-centre media and political nexus and anxious to avoid being caught in the tax thresher thundering towards them. They may for safety opt to lean another way. Enter right, Ruth Davidson: Harvester Girl of Forgotten Scotland?