An appreciation by Bernard Ponsonby
Prof Bill Miller: an appreciation
THERE have been two seminal elections of the post-war period which ushered irreversible change. Labour’s 1945 landslide entrenched the welfare state and Margaret Thatcher’s victory in 1979 recast economic orthodoxy.
That latter year was also the first time that David Dimbleby anchored the BBC’s overnight election results programme. He was flanked by the doyen of election studies, David Butler from Nuffield College Oxford, and Robert McKenzie, the Canadian professor with the swingometer.
In the Glasgow studio a young academic offered interpretation of the Scottish results. Professor Bill Miller, who died earlier this month at the age of 76, steered viewers through a night when the SNP lost nine seats and Labour defeated the man who would have been Mrs Thatcher’s Scottish Secretary, Teddy Taylor.
The ease, calm and authority with which Miller analysed the results should have led BBC bosses to sign him up as a resident analyst. They didn’t. Their loss was to be STV’s gain as Bill Miller went on to have a 30-year association with the commercial broadcaster.
Professor William L. Miller was educated at Aberdeen Grammar School and the Royal High School of Edinburgh. and at the universities of Edinburgh and Newcastle. After finishing a PhD on information retrieval, the mathematician took his career in a different direction and applied for a job teaching politics at the University of Strathclyde, where the driving force was a colossus among political scientists, Professor Richard Rose.
Rose, like Miller, was a pioneer in a field now dominated by Professor Sir John Curtice. Former STV producer Henry Eagles remarks: “It is remarkable how three great analysts, Rose, Miller and Curtice have come out of Glasgow’s universities. They sound like a '70s band. They had enormous influence.”
The former Labour minister Brian Wilson said Miller played a major part “in establishing Strathclyde University’s reputation as a centre for psephology at the highest levels” and he paid tribute to the “clarity of his communication”.
James Mitchell, professor of public policy at Edinburgh University says Miller was the best psephologist in Scotland in his time, adding: “His combined strengths in mathematics and politics were evident in his highly innovative approach to the study of political opinion,”
During the Hillhead by-election of 1982, Miller oversaw a telephone opinion poll, taking STV viewers through the results. The “by-election of the century”, as it was dubbed, propelled the anglicised Welshman Roy Jenkins to Westminster as the then SDP leader started a love affair with Glasgow’s west end.
Miller remained at Strathclyde until 1985, when he crossed the city to become the Edward Caird Professor of Politics at the University of Glasgow. His study areas included elections and the democratic process and he published widely throughout his career as well as spearheading numerous research projects.
He belonged to that school of academic who was more interested in the university as a powerhouse to enrich the mind than a business pitching for an eye-catching line in the financial section of the annual report.
In common with a lot of academics, he was never in danger of becoming a style icon, and tweed, corduroy, gingham and wool ties were never far away. He had a slight air of trying to invent shabby as chic but it didn’t matter, for the crispness and authority of his broadcasting cut through any temptation to pass sartorial comment.
Colin MacKay, STV political editor from 1973-1992, shared many an election studio with Bill Miller. He said: “His presence at pre-election planning meetings at STV lent reassurance. Calm, considered, thoughtful yet incisive, he explored with us the Scottish and British party strengths and weaknesses, surveyed the general trends in voting intention polls and mapped out the likely battlegrounds.”
The first three hours of election night programmes are an exercise in turning padding and waffle into something watchable. Bill Miller’s command of his subject helped build a sense of anticipation before the inevitable deluge of results.
He spoke softly but quickly and if there was something substantial to report, he became animated to convey that the contribution was significant in terms of the story of the night.
The question, ‘Professor Miller, what does it mean?’, was a cue to have the tablets of stone handed down from the master as Bill identified trends, corrected politicians intent on spin, offered wider context and provided a bedrock for solid public service broadcasting.
STV’s long-standing politics and current affairs producer Stephen Townsend said: “Bill was a total joy to work with. On election nights, he commanded the screen with his fresh insights and warm personality.”
My first-ever interview for STV was with Professor Miller. For 20 years I worked regularly with him and became acutely aware that working in broadcasting affords the privilege of meeting people who are simply the best in their field.
Bill Miller was, quite simply, peerless. His combination of huge intellect and unassuming manner drew an undiminished affection from students, colleagues and journalists and won the respect of politicians even when his judgements unnerved their desire to tell it as they saw it.
Bill Miller died within two weeks of the passing of his wife, Fiona Miller, to whom he was married for more than 50 years. He is survived by sons Iain and Andrew and daughter Shona as well as six grandsons. Those grandsons did not know their grandfather in his prime.
Recently, a compilation of his STV broadcasts was sent to the family. Now, those grandchildren too can appreciate the mind of a lovely man who will be remembered with gratitude and affection by everyone he taught and worked with.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here