Christmas cheer in the chamber
Startling developments at Holyrood. Labour's Iain Gray seemed to this concerned onlooker to be suggesting there was no Santa Claus.
First Minister Alex Salmond took an entirely different tack. He appeared to think he WAS S. Claus.
Mr Salmond revealed the Christmas gift wishes of his rivals, as published in the Big Issue, then proceeded to indicate that he, personally, was in a position to meet these requests.
Mr Gray apparently had expressed a desire for new-style Ray-Ban sunglasses, as worn by Barack Obama. (OK, OK, let's get the gags about blinkered vision out of the way now.)
Done, said Santa Salmond. Lack of time no doubt prevented the FM from disclosing that his own despatch to the North Pole features a desire for a year's supply of Lucozade.
No, I don't know why either.
Most of the chat afterwards in the Garden Lobby focused on the relative rigidity, even sterility, that is now afflicting this weekly question session.
Long-winded
Labour MSPs and others blame the FM. They say he has given up any pretence of attempting to address, let alone answer, the questions.
Nationalists say the FM is entitled to answer attacks in his own way. They say it is scarcely his fault if his opponents cannot lay a glove on him.
By contrast, they say the questions from the opposition leaders are turning into long-winded statements.
One Government insider even questioned the choice of questions. The topics were: Labour, Scottish Futures Trust; Tory, policing fraud; LibDem, the quango state.
Their call, of course, but my puzzled interlocutor wondered why nothing on sentencing policy or student funding. Maybe next year.
As to timing, I think the patience of backbenchers is wearing decidedly thin.
By the time the three front benches pose their sundry questions, 20 valuable minutes have elapsed. Backbenchers have very little chance to get in.
New goalie
Perhaps the answer lies in the chair enforcing tighter questions - then inviting the first minister to respond in due measure with taut, focused replies.
On the day, Iain Gray pursued his chosen topic with vigour, asserting that the SFT is effectively dead and should be afforded a swift burial.
At one point, he delivered a notably withering glare to some shrill heckling.
Annabel Goldie was magisterial, declaring one reply from the FM to be "absolute drivel". (You have to say it in the Bella accent to get the full effect.)
Tavish Scott was witty and pointed, inviting ministers to set the pace in public spending restraint - by taking a voluntary pay cut of 10%.
Mr Salmond demurred, noting that he had appointed fewer ministers and that they saved money by cutting travel.
And that was that: the final FMQs on the final parliamentary day of 2008.
Hope Santa (the real one) is good to you all. Me, I'll settle for a new goalie to replace our current star who, it seems, is being lured west.
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Brian Happy Goalie Hunting !!
Oh And a Merry Christmas to you when it comes
Of course the New Year does bring its fair share of resolutions - Let us hope that our MSPs think long and hard what their's should be
Certainly true that very few have managed to lay a glove on the FM - maybe the few weeks break will allow them to think first - and then on their feet when they get the reply they were not expecting!
Complain about this comment
Iain Gray?
Ray-Bans?
Barack Obama?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
What a diddy....
Complain about this comment
Brain,
I think Ian Gray would be better suited to the type of glasses worn by Stevie Wonder.
His vision or lack of it on the question of replacing the the unfair Council tax is not blinkered but either blind to the facts or, deliberately burying his head in the sand, becuse he and his Labour colleagues will personally pay more, whilst those less well off and pensioners will pay less.
That's New Labour for You!
On the question of crime, whilst I totally disagree with the SNP's soft touch approach, Labour have nothing else to offer - they promised 'tough on crime' - 'tough on the causes of crime'. They talked big just like the Tory Party before them but, just like them, they were all talk as regards solving the problem. The term Pot & Kettle springs to mind on this issue.
Complain about this comment
I saw FMQ's today and thought it a non event. Iain Gray once again made a speech prior to each question before asking "Will the First Minister now drop (insert policy) ", last week it was LIT, this week it was SFT.
Laughably, Gray also sought to suggest that job cuts in the building industry would be the fault of the SNP, despite £8 billion of capital projects already committed to.
Nothing of course to do with the dreadfull state the UK economy is in under the stewardship of 'Global Gordon' (what country is he visiting now?).
Tavish Scott and Anabelle Goldie didn't set the heather on fire either, both received the bog standard responses from the FM, who also looked underwhelmed.
My gripe though is with the BBC in Scotland who have decided that Goldie's question is to form the political headlines, I suppose they couldn't use SFT again.
Is this the biggest political story in Scotland today? no really, is it?
Did it deserve the lunchtime lead from Wee Glen who made it sound as though the SNP had just announced Marshal Law !!
This is fully two weeks in a row that the First Minister has highlighted the £500 million cuts soon to be slashed from the Scottish budget by Labour yet our press seem to have overlooked it yet again.
Anyway, the real debate should be about the fiscal constraints placed upon the Scottish parliament. We need full fiscal autonomy, only then can Iain Gray criticise an SNP government if they drag their heels.
Finally, does Iain Gray have any alternatives to offer, other than the massively discredited PFI?
Complain about this comment
Brian,
A Happy Christmas and a very good New Year to you and yours!!
My personal hope for your own New Year's Resolution is that you will return as a 'non-Labour supporting through thick and thin' journalist!!
Complain about this comment
Oh, for the good old days when people would stop Christmas shopping when they ran out of money.
Merry Christmas everyone.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
I would like to take this opportunity to offer a short comment on the Santa Claus controversy.
No proof having been offered by the leader of the Labour group to show that the elderly gentleman of the long white beard and jolly countenance does not exist, I suggest that Mr Gray might as well suspend judgment on the matter and proceed on the assumption that his best course of action, and that of all the anglo-unionist political leaders, might be to write to the said Mr Claus asking not for fancy sun glasses for Christmas but for a substantial manufacturing base for the UK economy, because without that the state that they are loyal to instead of Scotland will come out of the recession, as is being predicted by informed commentators, in a very much poorer condition than it is going into it and may never fully recover.
Aside from that, Mr Gray might find that a jolly countenance, with or without a long white beard, would serve him better at First Minister's Questions than the grimly and monotonously laboured plodding that is dragging the proceedings down so.
Merry Christmas.
Complain about this comment
Oh well it is the pantomine season afterall.
Seasons greetings to all, chin up.
Complain about this comment
Here I was thinking that Brain was starting to suffer from senile dementia.
Then I realised it was in fact the Holyrood Gang that were drivveling.
Let's hope it was just end-of-term skittishness.
At the next Holyrood elections let's all vote "Brian Taylor for FM !".
Complain about this comment
Up until now Labour has never given a straight answer to any questions, but now the SNP is in charge more precise answers are required.
Away and ...... yourselfs you hypocritical .....s
Complain about this comment
Great post by greenockboy yet again. A non-event which more than missed the points indeed.
I have a wider grievance as it were. Why is PMQs given the 'laldy' of an entire programme whereas FMQs is squeezed in between programmes and dearly beloved Union-apologist Brian cuts in at the end with another Union-apologist to curtly summarise the whole affair with requisite anti-FM slant and then somehow ushers us off as though he has a more pressing presumably luncheon engagement elsewhere. Why can't BBC Scotland allow FMQs to revolve around a proper weekly political programme which covers all the issues mentioned and even those that aren't. Don't reduce Scottish political debate in such a way.
"Toodle-hoo" and seasons greetings to you as well Brian. I know this is beyond cheeky Brian but please give some thought to looking after your health a bit better in 2009.
Complain about this comment
My hope for the next year is we will see unbiased reporting of Scottish Politics by all press and media but with the same crowd doing the reporting I doubt it.I see the Grey man and his lot abstained on the lowering of the limit on drink driving what a gutless bunch they are,Broon would not let them I suppose.
Complain about this comment
FMQs to me is a comedy act: Alex Salmond plays the comedian, assisted by the straight man in the form of Mr Gray.
Maybe student funding and sentencing policy should be brought up. I for one am against giving students grants - with the exception of medical, dental and bursing students - unless they can show that is has been spent on educational needs, not socialising or the latest mobile phone. Those who wish to debate this point should discuss these issues with university management who will give you a frank summary of the truth.
Sentencing policy? I understand that jail does not always work. But then allowing repeat offenders to remain within the community doesn't help either, especially when like me you have to pay for broken car windows every few months.
But some congratulations are in order to all members of the Scottish Parliament, having agreed the policy of reducing the legal level of alcohol for drivers. Hopefully Westminister will take notice.
The Scottish Parliament needs more of the same, to prove that it is mature enough to be allowed more powers.
Complain about this comment
#13 Neil_Small147
"But some congratulations are in order to all members of the Scottish Parliament, having agreed the policy of reducing the legal level of alcohol for drivers"
You have to exclude Labour and Tory MSPs from your congratulations. Labour and the Tories abstained in the vote, saying it was a UK-wide matter.
They didn't even have the guts to formally express an opinion via a vote, since that would differ from their real bosses at UK level.
Sad people.
Complain about this comment
A Xmas present for you all.
If you haven't yet signed up for it, the Scottish Review is a free online journal, delivered to your inbox twice a week free of charge.
It often has interesting articles.
Today's deals with different Scottish and English attitudes to Community Service.
Complain about this comment
Alex Salmond should resolve in the NY to answer every question about budgets with a statement about the 500 million quid cuts ordered by Broon. He should ignore the presiding officer and ask Gray about this in response to every nulab enquiry.
Complain about this comment
Over on Mark Mardell's euroblog a Finnish poster said "if Britain would apply to Eurozone it would get in even with all past bad blood of yesteryears. Not only because of direct benefits, but because UK is a major European oil producer and it converting to trade oil with Euros would be very beneficial to Eurozone."
Funny how the message from the UK Unionists is that oil should deliver nothing for Scotland, while a Finnish Euro Unionist sees Scottish oil as really valuable for the whole EU!
Complain about this comment
A cheery New Year Message from the UK National Statistics office. on the UK economy (if that word has any meaning any more given these figures).
Complain about this comment
#13
Neil_Small 147
I worked three or four nights a week, all weekends and every Saturday (and all my holidays) till I graduated as a teacher. That was many years ago. My grand-daughter is now going through he second year at Glasgow Uni. She works three and sometimes four nights a week to allow her to do so. That is the case for most serious students and your offensive and ignorant remarks sum up the calibre of a lot of your contribution to these posts.
Complain about this comment
#15 oldnat
Thank you. On one of their pages I see they give out an award, "in memory of Arnold Kemp, the former editor of The Herald.". He is quoted in The Independent as having said that it is the journalist's job, "to reveal to the powerless that which the powerful would rather keep secret". Well, that work is not done yet! Seems like rather a good New Year's resolution. I wonder how many of today's editors agree.
Complain about this comment
Knowledge = Power its only a pity that those in power in Westminster don't have any knowledge.
Community payback jackets in their christmas stockings this year.
Complain about this comment
19. At 11:08pm on 18 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
#13
Neil_Small 147
I worked three or four nights a week, all weekends and every Saturday (and all my holidays) till I graduated as a teacher. That was many years ago. My grand-daughter is now going through he second year at Glasgow Uni. She works three and sometimes four nights a week to allow her to do so. That is the case for most serious students and your offensive and ignorant remarks sum up the calibre of a lot of your contribution to these posts.
-------------------
I am speaking from fact. I worked in graduate recruitment, counselling and careers advice in England and Scotland, with several years private and public sector experience up to 2004. I KNOW that many students and parents struggle to get the finance through university and work to get through, but many students waste their money.
I am not making ignorant remarks. At least in Scotland the authorities try to make students more responsible. My sister is studying as a mature student and receives her loan payments mothly, whereas in the past it was paid three times a year. Large sums for a young man or woman and there is a strong urge to spend it without thinking. I know, I blew my grant when I was 17 and ended up 20 years later paying for my education myself. An expensive lesson. Your granddaughter is taking the right actions, but many students do not or have the inclination to do so.
Fine. Make everything a grant, but then make the student accountable for their spending. After all, it is taxpayers money.
Either that, or make certain courses exempt from loans. Most countries around the world have student loans of some description.
Since you are a qualified teacher, I suggest you go an do some research as to the true cost - to the taxpayer - of funding the cost of putting an individual student through a four year course. Then multiply it by the number of students in Scotland.
I'm not against education. But I'd rather see it targetted correctly, more so for the benefit of the individual student.
Complain about this comment
And for those who still think UK Labour has any shred of morality left - this from Simon Jenkins in the Guardian.
And since the UK Tories happily went along with Labour's imperial adventure, they share the guilt and the venom that should be directed against all the war mongers.
Complain about this comment
eh back to topic.
all that yesterday proved was that in Scotland right now we have a minority administration who are trying to govern with one hand tied behind their back but they are doing so with a very weak and on occasion pathetic opposition.
you only get good government if you have decent ,sensible &clever opposition
at the moment we have none of the above.
FM-Q's are becoming like the pantomime that runs all year, funny at the beginning but as time goes on it gets more and more stale and more and more irrelevant.
don't know about anyone else but I don't see the point at the moment.
opposition "leaders"? ask the same
question time after time and the first minister doesn't answer the same question time after time .
so what do we gain - he haw.
getting too much like westminster 's yaboo sucks style.
seasons greetings to you all , Sid
Complain about this comment
For all the amateur bloggers out there, you may be interested in the following from Guido's site. Look out for some 'interesting' posts on blogs like this one in the future:
Tomorrow morning (today) Derek Draper is convening a "New Media Breakfast" meeting with dozens of Labour bloggers and New Media types to hear from Blue State Digital how Labour can use the internet to win the next election. Blue State Digital are the people that did Obama's online stuff - rather well.
So far Draper's online efforts haven't really got anywhere, one of the issues that Labour has is that it does not know what it wants to achieve. Blue State Digital have brought over Thomas Gensemer and Joe Rospars, Barack Obama's former new media campaign director to basically pitch their services and know-how to the Draper assembled collection of lobbyists, spin-merchants and public affairs leeches* that by and large constitute the Labour blogosphere. Blue State Digital have hired Matthew Macgregor to run a soon to be opened London office. Macgregor worked on Ken Livingstone's 2008 Mayoral campaign, for War on Want, TULO and Jon Cruddas' deputy leadership campaign.
Guido called Draper to wish him luck with the meeting, he cursed Guido's foreknowledge. Draper denied point blank that he was looking for funding for an Iain Dale style, party-supportive blog with titbits of insider news and his spin on the party line. He has been reportedly moaning that he has been working voluntarily for free for the Party and that if they want to take the fight online they will need a full time paid blogger - what he doesn't say openly is that it should be him. Sources say that the blog is to be known as the "Daily Draper".
Complain about this comment
Publics chance!
Riddoch Questions
"The Final Riddoch Questions of 2008 on December 19th will be a live phone-in.
Joining us is the leader of the Scottish Labour Party Iain Gray marking his first 100 days as successor to Wendy Alexander."
Complain about this comment
Oldnat. Many thanks for the Scottish Review, nice to see Kenneth Roy still railing.
Is the Institute of Contemporary Scotland still on the go?
Complain about this comment
#22 Is it really right to be critical of student spending? Are students really supposed to only eat dry pasta?
At the end of the day, no one is going to go to university if it is so miserable to be there and speaking as a graduate (in July) with no student loan, I know of many who required considerable sums from their loan to pay for rented accomodation. Of course there will always be frivilous spending, but is university really supposed to be considerably worse than working at the supermarket (yes I did work there while I was at university, sometimes 30 hours a week while studying).
Besides, us 'frivilous students' are going to be paying for 20 odd years the mess that your generation has made of the economy of this country, so perhaps it is time you realised the contribution that those who actually bring money into this country in the long term make, including paying your wages.
Perhaps we should require that you submit your spending reciepts to the government to see how much is really 'needed'?
Complain about this comment
4. Greenockboy, please could you provide a link to info on this #8bn spending commitment.
(Sneckedagain is a teacher and a grandfather?!)
Complain about this comment
#22
So because some students blow their grants it's okay to make sweeping insulting statements about students in general?
Complain about this comment
I love how Salmond has come to be 'blamed' for just being a cut above the rest at Holyrood and showing it at every FMQs! It really is unsporting, he should give them more hope ... what are people wanting?! Go away and find a competent Labour Party Leader, and while your at it if you find a spare share it with the Fib Dems - they are in desperate need of a change too.
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat asks:
"4. Greenockboy, please could you provide a link to info on this #8bn spending commitment."
The 8 billion spending figure is accurate.
If you disagree with the figure then you can, if you wish, tell us what you believe it to be.
We can then both seek to justify our respective figures and see who is correct.
Complain about this comment
Just as an aside, FMQ's has been the subject of a headline from the BBC, The Herald and The Scotsman.
The BBC have used Goldie's question in order to attack the SNP.
''Inexcusable delay' on fraud team'
The Herald have used Iain Gray's question in order to attack the SNP.
'Gray: Plans for schools and hospitals ‘dead in the water’'
The Scotsman has used Tavish Scott's question in order to attack the SNP.
'Salmond rules out credit-crunch pay cut for his ministerial team '
This, ladies and gentlemen, is the Scottish media in 2009. The theme is attacking the SNP, the strategy is to cover all bases by headlining all Unionist party statements.
Complain about this comment
32. Okay, I didn't think it was too difficult a question.
You wrote: "Laughably, Gray also sought to suggest that job cuts in the building industry would be the fault of the SNP, despite ?8 billion of capital projects already committed to."
Where did you get this figure of "?8 billion" from?
Complain about this comment
RE states:
"32. Okay, I didn't think it was too difficult a question."
It isn't, I have the answer, I'm just not telling you. However you are again resorting to insult.
It is up to you to put forward an alternative figure, then we will see who is correct.
So, what's your own estimate?
Complain about this comment
35. LOL. This is your new way of avoiding substantiating any of your claims, is it? "I have the proof but I'm not telling you!"?
Well, I'll play along as its quiet here.
There is that oft-announced wish-list of #21bn worth of building over the next 20 years but that is clearly not any sort of a "commitment".
South Glasgow Hospital is the closest I know to a commitment (although the scheme is still not confirmed) but that is #840m, well short of the #8bn you claim.
In the past 20 months, the SNP have not initiated any other major project that I know about, just claimed all the credit for the previous lot's schemes.
Ok, my estimate of total SNP commitments to capital projects in the past 20 months is...zero.
Complain about this comment
36. Reluctant-Expat
Perhaps you haven't realised ExPat but Greenock Boy isn't pandering to you because of the way you act on this site. You tend to be sneering, dismissive, obnoxious, insulting and generally not a nice chappie.
Greenock Boy is treating you the way you deserve to be treated. Nobody needs to answer you until you act in a way that deserves to be answered.
I had some hope for you the other day when you managed a couple of posts without acting in your normal way. however, it was short lived.
Discuss properly and you might be invited to talk with the grown-ups.
Complain about this comment
#28 Brian SH
You are going to be paying my wages?
Sorry? I work and pay taxes so what are you going on about?
And I'm not that old.
Anyway, I'm not saying students shouldn't have a social life, but the funding is not there for them to buy non-essential items.
If you think they should, then don't make any criticism about MPs expenses.
Complain about this comment
Irnbru_addict, I have long grown weary of reading countless increasingly ridiculous claims by greenockboy, patsymkirkwood, Wanshansoo et al, who all then refuse to provide any evidence to back them up when challenged.
When the nationalists stop posting such tosh on a daily basis and instead stick to claims based on fact, then maybe I won't be as impatient.
Now, at the third time of asking, will greenockboy like to tell us all where he got this figure of #8bn from?.....
Complain about this comment
just listened to some of Leslie riddoch's show on radio Scotland . i fear for her return in the new year .she had the audacity to put a bit of pressure on Mr gray who admitted labour had no alternative to pfi ppp or sft . oh and Scottish labour hadn't submitted anything to callman yet . arrogant or what!!
oh and the best bit , he denied that it was Brown that pulled the plug on Wendy's "bring it on" period.
RE- why don't you have a wee nap .
Complain about this comment
#39 Ex Pat.
Can you please show exactly where you have asked me for evidence?
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
I get the overwhelming feeling that very little is changing in political terms at the moment and Mr Gray is making absolutely no impact whatsoever.
The punters fully recognise the SNP government is under huge pressure on funding due to economic factors which they have no power to deal with so the attacks on the SNP are not hurting.
The situation South of the Border is even more inert. Five by-elections last night in England/Wales. Swing against Labour in all but one and up to 24% in a ward in Cumbria which recorded a huge vote for the BNP! But no swing to the Tories. Some swing to the LibDems which always happens when voters are a little confused and like neither of the major parties.
Last night's English results in real elections contradict the published polling figures (as did last week's by-election results). I still feel the Broon is being tickled into a General Election ambush.
Some work recently done in this constituency shows a continuing steady swing towards the SNP as have all by-elections in Scotland over the last year.
Complain about this comment
39. Reluctant-Expat
Nobody needs to justify anything to you RE. I've checked myself and have a reasonable idea of where Greenock Boys figures come from. I trust his contribution.
As for you? Well, someone who thinks that the North african oil industry is irrelevant?
See the last line of my #2.
Complain about this comment
43. The 8bn claim is just more greenockboy nonsense and you know it.
If this is his source:
"In the current economic circumstances, our £35 billion 10-year infrastructure investment plan is also delivering, with £14 billion during the current spending review period being invested in schools, hospitals and transport."
...there is not one solitary commitment of any scheme in this claim, is there.
Can you or greenockboy name a single school, hospital or transport (or anything else) scheme that has been initiated by the SNP and is definitely going ahead?
If Labour pulled this stunt, nationalists would be screaming from the rooftops.
(Don't berate anyone for being abusive and then start calling people names. Makes you look little silly.)
Complain about this comment
Next Year Let's hope the minority neds are booted out, a referendum called and all Nationalists go back to their proper jobs...
Complain about this comment
Ex Pat #39
Let me ask you for the second time, exactly where have you asked me for evidence?
Wansanshoo
Complain about this comment
46. We'll start with your claim from a while back that "Scotland has 28bn to spend but pays 45bn in taxes".
Scotland runs a 17bn surplus? You're taking exaggeration to new levels there.
Complain about this comment
#45 There have been no neds in the SNP since Dorothy Grace Elder left.
Complain about this comment
From Audit Scotland:
The Scottish Government is currently spending about £4.7 billion, or
about £1000 per person in Scotland, on projects such as roads, railways, prisons and hospitals. This figure is to rise to
£10.5 billion over the next three years.
The First Minister, in an answer to Iain Gray yesterday, confirmed that in this term the Scottish Government had announced £8 billion of capital programmes.
There is also the £394 billion committed to the edinburgh trams.
Complain about this comment
I note that a certain poster is again being allowed to post comments that seem designed, not to offer a view on a subject, but more to goad other posters.
I hope that this blog is not to become the latest blog to suffer from an increase in such inflammatory comments, being as it is the last mainstream internet blog in Scotland that is relatively free from such posts.
Complain about this comment
Edinburgh trams should be 394 million !!
Complain about this comment
And for the [lost count!] time of asking...
What are these road, railway, prison and hospital schemes?
Who were they initiated by? Labour or the SNP?
The SNP are taking credit for these schemes but which are actually down to them?
Complain about this comment
#47 Ex Pat
I have made no such claim on this or any site, may I suggest you check your facts prior to pointing your accusing finger in my direction.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
53. 4th paragraph:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2008/11/the_us_decides.html#comment46
You were saying?
(Did you think that because it wasn't in your archives that it couldn't be found? Oops!)
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat,
#54.
I see, like usual you are trying to turn spin into fact? Typical Labour. All lies, you would have thought you would have learnt better after loosing Holyrood, I hope you learn something when you eventually loose Westminister.
According to you, Scotland generates 45 billion annually, with a surplus of 17 billion pounds. I am lost, because the last I heard Scotland generated over 100 billion pounds annually, whether or not an independent Scotland would create a surplus is a different debate all together.
Complain about this comment
45. MaliceTown
"Next Year Let's hope the minority neds are booted out, a referendum called and all Nationalists go back to their proper jobs... "
Did you never watch 'A Christmas Carol'? Scrooge changed his ways.
Complain about this comment
#56 aye_write
Is the Belfast Telegraph reporting the Ghost of Xmas past?
Mandelson tipped for Strictly Come Dancing.
Complain about this comment
Stop feeding the troll...
or should that be....
stop feeding the diddy......
Complain about this comment
45. At 4:37pm on 19 Dec 2008, MaliceTown wrote:
Next Year Let's hope the minority neds are booted out, a referendum called and all Nationalists go back to their proper jobs...
---------------------
I think you are being a but unfair here. Who exactly are these "neds" you are describing?
People are fully entitled to criticise a political party, but most of the MSPs do act in a professional manner, even if some are less effective than others.
Back on topic: what is missing is someone who is able to debate effectively against Alex Salmond. I do not particularly like him, but he is a strong politician and does deserve credit for his political skills. There are times when I feel he could be a bit more serious, but no one has really managed to challenge him properly. Up against someone like Tony Blair (again I am no fan) he would certainly be under pressure.
A Parliament needs a strong opposition. This ensures that the Government of the day takes care (or should do!) in it's actions. Otherwise arrogance takes over and then that is where mistakes are made.
I know, shock, horror, I am defending the SNP here, but fair play is essential, otherwise we end up in a shouting match.
As to next year, I think Gordon Brown is going to go for the earliest possible general election, as so to limit the damage. The Tories appear to have lost momentum and the Lib Dems are a non-entity. The danger lies in some of the more extremist parties, since they seem to be offering some people the policies that deliver.
Maybe old_nat has some statistics?
As for my post #13. Apologies as I did not realise that the Labour and Tory MSPs abstained. The question is why? The drink driving bill is about saving lives, not politics.
Complain about this comment
Salmond would rip anyone a new one including Blair who was hardly distinguished and was easily rattled by Haig on numerous occaisons. Salmond's a skilled orator and has the facts and logic on his side. That's why Gray and others can only resort to snidey put-downs. They have nothing on him.
Complain about this comment
#59. Neil_Small147
"As for my post #13. Apologies as I did not realise that the Labour and Tory MSPs abstained. The question is why? The drink driving bill is about saving lives, not politics."
Because Westminster bosses said so.
NEDS
Nulabour Extreme Dictatorship Society (GB sect)
Complain about this comment
#57 oldnat #25 bloggger
From Belfast Telegraph article: He is understood to be a nifty ballroom dancer, and was once described by former colleague Derek Draper as “one of those rare people who can dance flamboyantly while looking rather cool”.
Upon reading #25 I looked up this fellow Draper. The latest offering on that Guido Fawkes site is a lovely image of him, where the online audience is asked to post an appropriate caption. A healthy proportion are derisory about his ability to avoid looking unkempt (that's being polite).
Therefore I am cheered to consider that a man entirely unable to achieve "looking rather cool" seems also entirely unable to identify "looking rather cool" (as Mandelson would require to be melted down and recreated to come close).
Which in turn boosts my optimism that he, and his web efforts to win the next election, may turn out to be equally wide of the mark. I hope so. I do not yet particulary abhor the thought of a labour victory, but do think that a pro-Labour blog could provide daily fodder for a clever pro-independence blog.
Judging by comments posted here, there are plenty of legitimate, revealingly incisive rebuttals to each unionist comment. And unionist commemts are a mainstay of Labour spin.
But back to oldnat's question, I would like to see Mandelson on the Come Dancing show, with Annabel Goldie as his partner. I would enjoy watching her, accidently on purpose, throw Mandelson around the dancefloor. :-)
Complain about this comment
#59 Neil_Small147
"Maybe old_nat has some statistics?"
Of course I do! (I seem to have taken over Browndov's role, while he's off on holiday with Browndova)
Before that, however - good post Neil.
The reason that Labour and Tory abstained from the vote on lowering the drink-driving limit is the same reason that the opposition in the Scottish Parliament is so woeful. The Unionist politicians simply don't rate Scotland as an area to develop their ambitions - consequently their best politicians go south (along with the lobby fodder that most MPs are), and they don't want to rock the boat with their UK leaders.
Imagine what the debates in an independent Scottish Parliament would be like if the party leaders were Alex Salmond, Gordon Brown, Ming Campbell and Liam Fox!
With PR (I'm glad to say) none of them could ever have an absolute majority, but whoever was FM would not get away with any fudge.
But to your request -
In the ComRes December poll the only "extremist" parties (I assume you're not meaning Green, SNP, Plaid Cymru) identified are UKIP and the BNP.
ALL UK
Group, BNP,UKIP
Male, 1%,1%
Female, 1%,1%
18-24
25-34,
35-44,
45-54,
55-64,
65+,
Complain about this comment
Neil_Small147:
#59.
"A Parliament needs a strong opposition."
I beg to differ here, the Scottish Government are a minority government, what use is strong opposition? The opposition have to be also willing to bring forward reasonable bills that could become law etc.
The problem with our current circumstances is that the opposition play opposition, but where is their involvement?
"The danger lies in some of the more extremist parties, since they seem to be offering some people the policies that deliver."
But that's democracy for you, if you support democracy at all, then does it matter if extremist parties are voted into the system or into power? If the people vote for them then thats final.
Complain about this comment
#59 Neil_Small147
Sorry, I pressed Submit by mistake - figures are
ALL UK
Group, BNP,UKIP
Male, 1%,1%
Female, 1%,1%
18-24, 0%,0%
25-34, 0%,0%
35-44, 1%,1%
45-54, 3%, 0%
55-64, 2%, 0%
65+,0%, 3%
Class
AB, 1%, 0%
C1, 0%, 1%
C2, 2%, 1%
C3, 1%, 1%
DE, 1%, 1%
"Region"
South-East, 1%, 1%
Midlands, 1%, 1%
North-England, 2%, 1%
Wales&South-West, 0%, 0%
Scotland, 1%, 0%
Ireally don't think you need to worry about the extremists.
Complain about this comment
60. At 9:38pm on 19 Dec 2008, bluelaw wrote:
"Salmond would rip anyone a new one including Blair who was hardly distinguished and was easily rattled by Haig on numerous occaisons. Salmond's a skilled orator and has the facts and logic on his side. That's why Gray and others can only resort to snidey put-downs. They have nothing on him."
I disagree. It is down to the questions. Remember I'm talking about questions put to Alex, not the other way around. I didn't say he would buckle, but at least we might get some proper questions. Against William Hague Alex might be in trouble, but that's not going to happen.
----
#61 cynicalHighlander
Re a strong opposition. You need the ability to question policies to ensure that they are fair and effective. Chances are the SNP will be in the majority come the next parliament anyway.
Re extremist parties. Yes, I agree that is the beauty of a democracy. Could make PMQs at Westminister a bit more interesting!
Good stats oldnat. Interesting with the age and class range that shows the higher percentages.
I'm watching Braveheart on DVD at the moment; perhaps I will be converted! Although I can't see Alex Salmond charging in battle with a claymore against Gordon Brown in full plate mail armour!
Complain about this comment
#66 Neil_Small147
"Although I can't see Alex Salmond charging in battle with a claymore against Gordon Brown in full plate mail armour!"
Remember that the Scots tactic was to dive under the knight's horse and gralloch it.
Bring the knight in armour down to the ground, and he's very vulnerable.
Complain about this comment
#66. Neil_Small147
"I'm watching Braveheart on DVD at the moment; perhaps I will be converted! Although I can't see Alex Salmond charging in battle with a claymore against Gordon Brown in full plate mail armour!"
Alex doesn't need armour just a one way ticket for super GB to Here he might even get a 1p fare offer from our Irish friends.
Complain about this comment
66. Neil_Small147
Obviously you think about things, so is it just the human failings of people in general that is putting you off (independence)?
In other words, the knowledge that any new project involving people will be let down by the people organisng it. Are you looking for someone who has come up with a better formed and better explained plan? Someone you can put your trust in? (More likeable therefore?)
Clearly the former is inescapable and the latter unlikely (even rare), so I apologise for being nosey, but I ask only because sometimes your stance is so diametrically opposed to my own.
(Of course this is not your problem so ignore at will. I promise I will not dive into a long pro-independence blurb.)
Complain about this comment
oldnat
Don't worry, your Euroblog usually gives me a sore head - there was just some low-brow points made on it tonight and I thought I would experiment. (I'm too ill-disciplined to be an online stalker!!)
I was copying the habit of posting on several blogs (I assume while waiting for comments to be moderated), and got carried away. I was quite pleased though to beat you to a posting, albeit inadvertently!
Complain about this comment
#68 cynicalHighlander
What a fabulous link!
You've made my night.
Complain about this comment
This has to be the ultimate in ludicrous Unionism!
Foulkes says SNP are losing friends.
As has often been said - For Foulkes sake!
Complain about this comment
Has anyone noticed that since the SNP formed the Scottish Government, the proposals of the Scottish fishing fleet have been implemented?
Political catch of the year saves Scots fishermen
Rather like the Labour/Tory abstention over drink driving - they don't have the balls to push the Scottish case.
Sad people.
Complain about this comment
Looked at both the links immediately above and the contrast is again stark. The Scottish press are abysmal, truly abysmal, I often wonder what the editor's think when they print stories such as this Christmas card one.
The Herald though is worth a glance these days. Not for any great insight into anything but just to see the incredibly soft coverage it is giving Gordon Brown these days.
It is headlining his every utterance without scrutiny. Here is the latest headline:
"PM: UK can rise to meet challenges of recession"
What's so incredible about The Herald these days isn't the fact that it is now openly promoting Brown and lately Murphy, but rather it is doing it at a time when the UK economy is in serious meltdown, much of the trouble in the UK caused by Global Gordon.
How bad does he have to be before the Scottish media start to give him a hard time?
Complain about this comment
Nationalists often make the mistake of assuming that all of UK Labour is an anti democratic, power hungry clique intent on power at all costs - just because the UK leadership and its supplicants in Scotland conform to that.
English Labour politicians can sometimes be quite sensible.
Complain about this comment
#54 Ex Pat.
The line should read ......4-5 b surplus to the uk coffers, a simple oversight, however as it is wrong I apologise to you and all and sundry who may have been misled.
As for the archives remark, simply not true, again this is only your personal opinion, I have nothing or no one to hide from.
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Government sells stake in Trident
"The government has sold its last remaining shares in the Aldermaston Atomic Weapons Establishment in Berkshire to an American company."
Lets hope that they come and take them away in the not too distant future.
#oldnat
We could always put some on No 10's doorstep as a damage limitation exercise.
Complain about this comment
OK, will the mods please explain why the last comment has been referred?
Has it actually been referred by a third party or have the mods referred it themselves?
The comment is lengthy and basically calls for vigilance on the part of the mods lest the continued personalised attacks on individual posters leads to the blogs disintegration.
Complain about this comment
Look, I actually like and respect your posts oldnat but is that the same Michael Meacher who held up the Scottish subsidy junkie myth on BBC's Question Time some years ago.
Scottish Nationalists are entirely right to right to regard all English-based Parliamentarians as part of an Establishment that is by definition anti-Scottish and should therefore act accordingly.
Complain about this comment
Team GB:
Jim Murphy says:
"I am pleased that FIFA have given a green light to a 2012 GB team with no consequences for the individual nations' teams."
The Herald headline:
"Green light for British Olympic football team"
The Herald should cut out the middleman and simply use Labour press releases as headlines - wait a minute, they already do!!
Complain about this comment
#81.
That's good though really, greenockboy - we know Scots don't want the team, so for all their 'clever' propoganda, the Labour machine is actually backfiring.
This is good fodder for the nationalists - that's as long as the nationalists use it to their best advantge i.e. it's a threat to Scottishness / attempt to wipe out Scottish identity.
Complain about this comment
#greenockboy
Parliament petition
Complain about this comment
Let us all hope that expat comes back with some Christmas cheer in the New Year! Not to mention less of the punch-drunk, inexplicable vitriol coupled with unsubstantiated drivel being presented as 'facts' (as he tends to shout loudest and longest)!
Complain about this comment
Gray on the radio yesterday saying Salmond "bottled" Bendy's 'Bring it on' referendum challenge - but that this "ship had sailed" and was no longer on offer. He's treating Scottish democracy like a political football. It's disgusting, absolutely disgusting.
Talking of football; Jim Murphy is an utter disgrace. For him to say he's a keen defender of Scottish footballing interests takes the biscuit. This man really sticks in my festively-inclined craw! The man's an uber-creep. His nefarious influence must be dampened down in 09.
If we were independent we wouldn't have to worry about our status with Uefa or Fifa and this trivial TeamGB nonsense. Is this the union dividend at work again I suppose. Do the arc of propsperity countries have to worry about their status as independents in the footballing world. No, thought not...
Complain about this comment
The following taken from UEFA Statutes
Rules of Procedure of Congress
Regulations governing
the Implementation of the Statutes
Edition June 2007
"Objectives
Article 2
1 The objectives of UEFA shall be to: Objectives
a) deal with all questions relating to European football;
b) promote football in Europe in a spirit of peace, understanding
and fair play, without any discrimination on account of politics,
gender, religion, race or any other reason;"
Ireland, Scotland and Wales are all against it the only ones in favour are the control freaks of NuLab.
Complain about this comment
Slightly of topic but I am sure that some of you might find this interesting Taking Liberties
Complain about this comment
This might not be reported in the Scottish press.
'Michael Martin blocks investigation into Green arrest.'
[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/3867599/Speaker-Michael-Martin-blocks-inquiry-into-his-handling-of-Damian-Green-arrest.html]Click Here[/url]
Complain about this comment
East Lothian and now West Dunbartonshire.
What a lovely organisation the Labour Party seems to be.
Complain about this comment
I think the bottom line is that the Labour Party has made a mess of the UK. They have caused more division in the UK - not only Scotland but Wales as well - than I think any other party in history.
Bringing football into it is getting a bit silly. While popular it's not everyone's favourite. (Let's see how many people I upset here!) Anyway, what the hell is it doing in the Olympics? Might as well have darts next.
Tonight's film is 300. Perhaps another comparison? Alex Salmond as Leonidas and Gordon Brown as Xerxes. Mmm, perhaps not. Neither really has a six pack!
Complain about this comment
#84. At 8:03pm on 20 Dec 2008, pattymkirkwood
I think just about everyone has gone away for Christmas! Perhaps I will now get rid of the rest.
I take the opportunity to wish you all, our bard Brian and the moderators (sounds like 'The Invaders'!) a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year.
Who knows what 2009 will turn up?
What an opener for a bedtime story. If I were to pick someone to read it, I would choose Clive James. His radio voice has a lovely mix of a comforting lull and an amusing overtone, that allows the troubles of those who cannot halt their own thoughts and let sleep follow, to drift away.
As he reads he sometimes sounds quite happy to be perplexed, a skill I have also tried to learn. (But then managing to conquer it only partially, I remember that there are so many things to be perplexed about, that the resultant worry of covering them all becomes altogether too perplexing.)
Clive I think has the ability to ease our despair that there's nothing on the radio and absolutely nothing on the TV – we still think, but it is a process which now relaxes us.
As my narration skills and Clive James's present wrapping skills would apparently reach the same level of perfection, it is perhaps just as well that these thoughts have only been tapped out on a keyboard and that Clive James has no idea whatsoever who I am!
So to my predictions for next year: As it is usually the slip-ups of outgoing leaders and not the achievements of their waiting replacements that lead to the end of the reign of the former, I predict that our Labour leaders will fall foul of their own magnificent worldly planning prowess and be squarely shown to be the fools that they are. Then in the election that I suspect is looming the electorate will respond appropriately.
Next, after an initial glorious start, the Tories will be seen to be altogether too calculating in their dealings with Scotland. If the nationalist PR machine does its job and successfully shows the reality of both these scenarios to Scots, then it pushes Scotland towards choosing an alternative.
Scotland won’t of course unless there is a painful reason not to remain within the status quo, and that painful reason I predict could be the effects of the credit crunch. If the fallout is to be as bad as forecast, Scottish voters might feel as though independence couldn’t make things any worse than they already are.
It has long been my suspicion that Britain would have to go through a hard economic downturn before Scots would feel compelled to choose something as seemingly drastic as constitutional change as a way to improve their lives. Might even those who are sceptical of the risks they think independence may bring, get so disillusioned with the situation as it is that they pause, or give up, trying to defend it?
But those who will never give up trying to defend it are the ruling Westminster politicians of the day. It has also long been my opinion that the reason they so vehemently seek to protect the Union, is because the real truth of the state of the British Treasury from the end of WWII on would be an enormous and shocking scandal if it were ever to be revealed. I’d contend that the mismanagement and reckless decisions taken by successive Westminster governments would make economists and other financiers (plus ordinary business people), cringe and weep.
The poignancy of this for Scotland of course is that a great lot of that mismanaged money Scotland contributed. Now there is no point crying over spilled milk, and I don’t grudge England some of the oil or whiskey money like I don’t grudge my neighbour some coffee, deicer or petrol etc., but if they kept on taking, well, you get my drift.
Defence of the Union is indeed also a power thing, but I don’t think England needs to hold Scotland’s hand before its flawed politicians would go off on a mighty demonstration of their nation’s international clout. England equals Britain in best friend America’s eyes anyway. No, there must be a reason why they defend the Union so, and it’s not because they’ve got Scotland’s best interests at heart.
Lastly, I do not post here to prove how clever I am, rather to fix how stupid I’ve become. Thank you for accommodating my posting experiment. I apologise if it’s been rather like listening to a yapping dog.
I’ve found your posts interesting. I speculate that humans learn best by listening to knowledgeable humans talk about their knowledge – I know if I wanted to learn something quickly I would just have to speak to someone like my husband or my Dad to be sure to digest and remember it. Books are good, but after a while I tend to feel like a lonely person providing both sides of the conversation!
And there I'll end it, with:
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night. ;-)
Complain about this comment
Let’s try this link again.
Speaker Martin Blocks Inquiry
Complain about this comment
Here’s another interesting piece based on comments from Charlie Whelan.
Snap election imminent?
Too many pieces of this nature making it into the media now, a momentum is gathering for an early 2009 election and Brown cannot afford to bottle it a second time.
The article though suggests that Brown is trusted more than Cameron with the economy, my belief is that this weekends Yougov poll put them both on 31%, more strikingly was the fact that a massive 60% are dissatisfied with Brown.
Complain about this comment
Is Portillo waking up to the truth?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5375770.ece
I might agree with the usually super Michael Portillo here, but then I'd say to him, was Britain's shameful performance as he describes it, not in fact because Britain CAN'T be that big world power he is nostalgically longing for, anymore? (A big opinion of itself, needs to be matched by an equally big purse?)
I think a great many (great) people need to accept that. It will ultimately lead to their greater happiness!
Complain about this comment
#94 aye_write
Funny how the most vocal English imperialists seem to be trying hard to fit in to a society they don't understand (even if it existed).
Spanish Republican father, Scots mother (still a Lib-Dem) who has never known a Britain rich enough to fight any war, Portillo seems an odd guy for an English Tory.
Complain about this comment
Labour marginals hit hardest by rising unemployment
Could be quite interesting to see which companies and where get bail outs funded by taxpayers. Jaguar are for looking for aid even though they are owned by Tata
Complain about this comment
#95. oldnat
Well, there's only his wife to blame then! (Women... Only joking) ;-)
I had a quick look and apparently "she is a powerful businesswoman with a salary riddled with zeros"?
PS Wasn't it funny that A'phone kept referring to nationalist aspirations as hubristic?
#96. cynicalHighlander
Good, hope my prophecies of earlier come true then...
Complain about this comment
#97 aye_write
Well from what you've said, your salary is "riddled with zeros" - the problem is that there are no other numbers in it!
Complain about this comment
#98. oldnat
Correct! (And I'm overpaid.)
I didn't spot that - I'll use it, thanks!
I do intend to go back and earn some money in the future :-P
Meanwhile, this is a dream come true:
http://www.accuradio.com/holidays/
Complain about this comment
98. oldnat
PS You didn't think I was knocking anyone with a big salary?! (How else can I afford to not earn...)
That's not my position (past posts), though I do think too many Scots can tend to take that line.
Comment was mainly meant to be interesting.
Complain about this comment
97. At 6:19pm on 21 Dec 2008, aye_write wrote:
Well, there's only his wife to blame then! (Women... Only joking) ;-)
I had a quick look and apparently "she is a powerful businesswoman with a salary riddled with zeros"?
---------
I hope we are not getting into the criticism of people who earn high salaries. One thing the SNP dare not do is alienate the business community.
While it is right to question the size of some bonuses (ie the City), trying to cap upper salaries of blitzing high levels of tax is guaranteed to make business people stay out of Scotland.
The Tories are likely to win the next General Election, and that means they will most likely be in power if a referendum is held. The Tories will want to attract high level business should Scotland go independent, and good business professionals will be critical to the success of Scotland.
Please don't let the left wing of the SNP dictate policy.
Since it's Xmas, and still on the films (I do go back to work tomorrow!), how about some political comparisons for The Good, The Bad and The Ugly?
Complain about this comment
#101. Neil_Small147
No, not at all. I thought it was quite interesting though that someone else had chosen to descibe her like that...
Complain about this comment
101. Neil_Small147
PS I'm not particularly left wing - very sceptical of in fact...
My link (obviously unlike my post!) is very calming. :-)
Complain about this comment
#101 Neil_Small147
The Good : Nicola Sturgeon (done a great job)
The Bad : Little Ms Moffat (I have to agree with Labour on something!)
The Ugly (Personality) : George FFoulkes
Complain about this comment
104. oldnat
"The Ugly (Personality) : George FFoulkes "
I didn't know he had a middle name. That's quite fitting.
Complain about this comment
aye -write@94 - still to be convinced about Mr Portillo "wakening up " but the rest of your post hits the nail on the head as they say!
aye -write @ 105- George's parents did it on purpose you know!
ho ,ho, ho
all the best ladies and gents.
sid.
Complain about this comment
#106. sidthesceptic
Re your replies, lets celebrate with some cheesy Chtistmas music!
Complain about this comment
#aye_write
I this one cheesy enough Cheddar Song
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Is this what they think we get up to?!
(From ‘How to have a Traditional Scottish Christmas’)
“First the Decorations. Scotland tended to hang evergreens, the holly particularly. But My Scottish Tree is decorated with bows made from many different tartans. A strip of cloth is all you need. from 1" to 8" widths and around 18" to 4' long. Then I select plain enamelled baubles in different sizes to compliment to colours of the tartans, from black (yes they do work!) to rich greens, reds, deep gold, and blues. For the tree top I put a teddy bear with a tartan beret! But you could use a large tartan bow, or a simple star.
Next the music. The most traditional one is Hogmanay Party by Jimmy MacLeod and his band. Rousing and foot-tapping, you can sing , dance or just turn this one down for background music. A must for a Scottish Christmas party!
You must have a Scottish Shortbread on your table. You can make it, or buy the real McCoy.
And a Venison Stew would set the right feel at the table. Serve with buttered mashed potatoes and buttered mashed swedes or turnips - if you can get them.
SCOTTISH BLACK BUN
This cake in a crust is the traditional New Year cake in Scotland. Every housewife has her own variations.
DUNDEE CAKE
This cake is popular throughout Britain as an alternative to Christmas Cake. It is less rich, and not so indigestible. But it is originally a Scottish Christmas cake from Dundee.
SCOTTISH SHORTBREAD
This biscuit type cake is a modern version of a very ancient cake or Bannock, which was baked in honour of the Sun. Nowadays, we make marks which divide the biscuit into slices or wedges, but these marks originally were symbolic of the rays of the sun.
Serve with coffee, or as the Scots do, with a wee dram of whisky!"
Has a twinkley-eyed Scottish friend of the author been having a little fun?
Unsure if this is a case in favour or against Christmas being banned ‘til the ‘50s. ;-)
#108 cynicalHighlander
What is it you are trying to sell me here? Targetting the rich and gullible... Is that the Highlands of Nigeria you are from?! - Joke! :->
Have texted for it but no joy yet...
Complain about this comment
#109
I believe my comments about Lord Foulkes huge expenses from the House of Lords are perfectly legitimate comment so I have no idea why that post has been referred.
Complain about this comment
#aye_write
"What is it you are trying to sell me here? Targetting the rich and gullible... Is that the Highlands of Nigeria you are from?! - Joke! :->"
No we only siphon the water of life not oil pipelines!
Have you tried this recipe enjoy.
Complain about this comment
This comment has been referred to the moderators. Explain.
#111. sneckedagain
They don't like "foulkesism" who claimed 45 grand to stay in his own flat at taxpayers expense. (see if this goes through)
Complain about this comment
#112 cynicalHighlander
"Have you tried this recipe enjoy."
Thanks. I can imagine the phonecall to the insurance company! "Hello, I ruined my bath, my cellar, my oven...well, my whole house..."!
Complain about this comment
East Lothian constituency ban is lifted
All is sweetness and light, no disciplinary action, Labour marches forward united - aye right!
Complain about this comment
Brian
re Lucozade
I hope the FM's doctor reads this blog. An excessive thirst for sweetened drinks is often an early sign of diabetes. That would not be a nice Christmas present.
#91 aye_write
Oh, no you've not!
Complain about this comment
115. At 00:11am on 22 Dec 2008, aye_write wrote:
#112 cynicalHighlander
"Have you tried this recipe enjoy."
Thanks. I can imagine the phonecall to the insurance company! "Hello, I ruined my bath, my cellar, my oven...well, my whole house..."!
--------------------
Your house? More like the entire street!
Watch out, some neds might try and apply the recipe to their own brand of Buckfast!
Complain about this comment
#111
Having read the little message about why my remarks about Lord Foulkes's appx £1000 per week from the House of Lords in expenses was referred I am none the wiser. The figure was published openly in yesterday's Sunday Herald.
Complain about this comment
Lord Foulkes’s questions cost taxpayer £1,000 a week
example: "His questions have included how many times Alex Salmond has met the pop singer Sandi Thom, which race courses has he visited, how much his cabinet has spent on dry cleaning and whether ministers have employed a stylist."
Just shows the contempt he has for the electorate.
Complain about this comment
OK, I'm going to have a bit of fun and predict The Herald's headline tomorrow:
Brown: I'll create extra 100,000 jobs
OR
Brown anger over bank collapse
Anyone else up for a prediction?
Complain about this comment
#121 greenockboy
How about "Little Ms Moffat admits falling down and bruising herself -spiders and East Lothian scum are vindicated"
Complain about this comment
test
Complain about this comment
In 'Waiting game' thread:
#80. InMyKip
"#75 went down like a Led Zepplin....oh well."
Oh, no! If you need a laugh, I didn't get it! I think that's quite funny. Imagine reading it seriously! (I thought it sounded a bit different...) After reading handclapping's #104 in 'Talking Iraq' I looked back and now appreciate your skill! I counted 5 song titles? (Not my era(s)?!)
There was a guy on Danny Baker's radio show who sang Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody entirely using footballer's names (found it accidentally on YouTube). I hadn't heard of any of them but it was highly entertaining. He had put a lot of effort into it and they were all cracking up in the studio, really impressed.
So by comparison, you're not at all sad! ;-)
In contrast, I am:
I notice the SNP have jazzed up their website a bit. It's definitely improved. Still says 'Arc of Prosperity' though - definite opportunity for a new catchphrase. I think they need to balloon their 'reasons for independence' section. Silly thing is, it's already been written! It would be a mighty force if someone compiled all the arguments for independence (not only politicians' ones) and carefully set them against all the ones used against it, in an excellent website. (I see SIC has 'myths and truths' which is good, but it could even be deconstructed further to identify with a more mass market. No harm in maintaining it and other sites like it though, as their being there confers the message with increased integrity.) Then it ought to go on YouTube, perhaps bit by bit throughout an independence referendum (set those e-mails forwarding!). There are no doubt websites that've attempted it. Maybe you all already know them? I've only found news articles or sites that either don't engage or even don't work! (The latter of these of course have the opposite effect - back to ''at aul' yaldie carivaan' again!) My poor research is time-limited. Hence all this is mere musing.
Plus, I know its nuts - the whole of politics is nuts! Like fame through the music business or acting, it will eat you up, chew you down and spit you out! The desire to get known anyway in these cases, in my view, is down to a flaw in one's personality. When it feels as though something is missing, the irresistible draw of the shortcut to happiness, that is fame and recognition, so deceptively enticing for some, rears its head. Resisting this immense allure is a trial. But the wise know it for what it is and correctly seek out normalcy to repair and tend to their troubled souls. (There are a great many wise people who surpass politicians' in their abilities, who do not enter politics precisely because they are wise!) Obviously, for those who survive it, fame can be a useful, and not least, humbling, way to learn many of life's lessons, but this leaves me wondering, how stubborn (for want of a less flattering word) must one be to need such a vivid and obvious set of experiences to learn what some others take for granted?
So I'd say conquering that deep desire to be known first, and using the knowledge of how to get known it imparted, as an instrument to further noble aims, and not the other way around, is a better recipe for success. Someone who plays the game and does not care whether s/he plays it or not, would have a greater advantage over a lot of other politicians driven by less than rational means.
Lastly, this may seem boringly obvious to those who think (!), and boringly foolish to those not so inclined, etc. But "Exultations!", the boreathon hath ended!
#117. handclapping
"Oh, no you've not!"
I assume that is a criticism. :-)
Unlucky, I'm more comfortable with them than compliments - !
However, there is hope, if I can't find the middle ground, I will shortly stop posting on here! ;-)
Complain about this comment
#124 aye_write
"I notice the SNP have jazzed up their website a bit".
I hadn't noticed that - it still looks like a site designed by someone of my generation - ie crap!
When I see Unionist nonsense on a blog, I would hope to see an instant rebuttal posted through their website.
The UK Tories have done pretty well in capturing the blogosphere through Iain Dale, ConservativeHome etc. The SNP needs to be much more professional here.
Complain about this comment
Your response is receiving due deserved attention...
As I was wording it I came accross this, from
http://snptacticalvoting.blogspot.com/
looks to be the same sight Iain Dale seems to have his blog with. He has a link to his blog from there anyway.
"Scotland gets ready for Hogmanay Euro Party
From today's Jakarta Post:
Scotland will celebrate its switch to the euro on New Year's Eve as the last step in its full integration in the European Union.
After joining the EU, the country of 5.4 million went through bold economic reforms carried out by the former pro-market Government which attracted foreign investment and fuelled the economic boom.
Looks quite nice doesn't it? Rather exciting even? Good old Scotland making international waves. Reading such words about our wee patch of the world would get the adrenalin pumping and the heart racing a little bit, no?
I have, of course, taken an artistic license here. But all I have changed from the original Jakarta Post article is the name "Slovakia" to "Scotland".
Yes, the country of 5.4million people, (a remarkably similar population size to that of Scotland's), is on the brink of joining the Euro currency, having only just joined the EU four years ago.
Furthermore, the highly favourable article has the following quote for Slovakia:
"The country has so far resisted the global crisis"
Shame the same can't be said for good old Blighty as our pound plummets and unemployment hits the roof. So much for smaller countries being more vulnerable in these troubling times.
No, with each passing day here, trading the Pound for less and less local currency, being incorrectly called English more and more and increasingly feeling less and less a part of the European Community, I have to admit I find myself longing for the day when the text above is for Scotland and not Slovakia, or any of the other young, ambitious EU nations.
Furthermore, naysayers may well say that the above aspiration is a gamble. Well, some US pessimists labelled electing Barack Obama a gamble and back then the now-President Elect urged Americans to roll those dice. Basically, we don't need to spend our 60 or 70 years shaking like shitting dogs at the thought of doing something a little bit scary. Slovakia and America took their gamble and it is quite clearly paying off big time for both countries.
So let's hope that a New Year's Eve in the not-so-distant future will see Scotland celebrating not just Hogmanay but also joining Slovakia at Europe's top table as an equal member.
And may many Indonesians read about it in their Jakarta Posts."
Posted by blogger simply known as 'Jeff' who does not allow access to his profile. Interesting. It feels like I am in Spooks. ;-)
Now returning to my answer to your #124.
Complain about this comment
#126
Oops, figured it out: Link to Iain's blog is because it's a blog that Jeff reads, on his bloglist.
Complain about this comment
#125. oldnat
Hello, oldnat. How generous you are (only a blunt statement).
"The UK Tories have done pretty well in capturing the blogosphere through Iain Dale, ConservativeHome etc. The SNP needs to be much more professional here."
Just before bed (early start in the morn.), I've looked at said site.
So you mean get someone to man a blog, with an obvious link from the SNP site, where appropriate responses to other negative blog posts (on here for example) are timely rebutted to the best possible effect?
If so, I'd add that after the point has been made in each response, it should be obvious that the arguments on the blog echo the same arguments on the relevant paragraph or section from the 'reasons for independence' bit of the SNP site (and/or another site separately dealing with the reasons for independence only - latter might be useful as doesn't lose credibility by making blog seem artificial and overtly biased.)
This would in my view also reinforce the obviousness of supporting independence, subliminally. Also have prominent links to aforesaid sites somewhere on the blog screen page (not in the blog) so that readers decide to click these for themselves and then connect the arguments themselves.
I know you are clever, so you will have thought this through. I'm not guessing, I'll ramble. (Enjoyed reading the way you dealt with those recent posts on the other blogs!)
Who would you propose to author this blog? Doubtless that you would excel at it. A team effort (other posters here make excellent points) has pros and cons? I wonder that many authors is too risky, as a uniform tone is better and any rogue less-than-tactful comments are weeded out.
I suspect it is best to mix both and have one legitimate blogger taking advantage of their own knowledge and skills, and bolstering them to superior effect by taking advantage of other posters' insightful comments, then presenting the powerful and well-expressed results on the blog. I would be terribly surprised if you hadn't thought of this.
The SNP ought to at least have someone tasked with keeping a keen eye on all the web blog activity (not least Brian's blog). Do you think that they do?
Oh, and I think there would need to be a mechanism up and running whereby as many readers of this new pro-independence blog as possible were introduced to it and got connected with it - via the old social networking?
Are there not good blogs of this type already around? Perhaps there are others who know a great deal more about this than me?
And would it be good to be able to contact the blogger by way of an anonymous e-mail account e.g. independence.blogger@live.co.uk, even perhaps instead of having comments?
"I hadn't noticed that - it still looks like a site designed by someone of my generation - ie crap!"
Well, yes, I'd thought it was quite pants before and now I think it's a little bit better! Some major flaws I noticed:
1. Clicking on the ‘Welcome to new website’ link shows, underneath the welcome blurb, several posts going on about how they can’t sign in or something else that doesn’t work with their account – not a good introduction! In fact posts like that litter lots of the site. ‘New website about to launch’ says it took four months to produce the changes.
2. Site does not have a slot for donations promoted on the home page. (Maybe that’s illegal!)
I forget where else I thought it could improve.
Anyway, it doesn’t worry me that posting tactical suggestions on here may mean losing part of the initiative. If unionists do an Obama-style web campaign, the nationalists can still copy. The bad publicity of anti-independence arguments taken from their campaign could all be good publicity if used to showcase a pro-independence argument, especially as these arguments seem to only get a real time national airing via Blether with Brian? I think nationalist arguments have stood the test of an overwhelming amount of unionist misinformation. So, if they were widely circulated they should be effective at diminishing unionist arguments.
I do not seek to enlighten you! Just to reply.
I found a site where you can start and publish your own journal by the way. I found another where you can start your own online community! It’s almost a shame I haven’t broken both my legs! Sad git.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#124 thank you for reading it aye_right I'm glad you enjoyed it, you're a few song titles short maybe someone else will get the right answer.
Complain about this comment
The SNP should use Facebook much more as well.
I hope the SNP start more sharply rebutting Unionist lies next year. They're right to remain positive. They're right that it's emboldened Scots confidence that will take us to independence but they must nullify Nuliebour's poison. They have to get their hands dirty in this regard.
Complain about this comment
#130 InMyKip,
Thirteen. What's my prize?
Complain about this comment
My dear people,
You will be wondering why I have taken to addressing you in this unexpectedly imperious manner. Yes, I have indeed been down the pub, getting into the spirit of Christmas, or whatever you call it, but that is beside the point. It is quite simple, really, fortunately.
It's like this. Well, actually, it is this. Let us not beat about the bushes, as you say. To cut a long story short, and, given the attention spans that some of you have been given, this may be just as well . . . As I was saying, cutting straight to the chase and telling it like it is . . . After all, what interest would I have in telling it like it isn't? I am, after all, not a politician.
Anyway, . . . coming straight to the point, without meandering all over the shop . . . How has the shopping been going, by the way? I went into a place called Woolworths the other day but, frankly, could not find a single ball of wool . . . or much else either. Is this part of the Great Depression that you are currently reprising? Depressing.
England has been crushed, never to rise again, and those down there who are waking up to the fact are getting pretty cross about it. It is all the fault of that Scottish prime minister, many are saying openly. No, the other one, the superhero who thinks he is saving the planet. Not very far into the new year the blame game, as you call it, will really get going, as the pillars of the UK economy, such as they are, come tumbling down. The political parties will be at each other's throats. Middle England will be up in arms against the Scots, who will not be long in taking umbrage, of course, and all hell will break loose, basically. But why am I telling you what you already know?
Be that as it may, full of the Christmas spirit, having myself, in the spirit of inquiry, imbibed a mulled wine or two or some such thing at a nearby hostelry, the patrons of which seemed suddenly to remember upon my arrival that they had urgent business elsewhere, I proceeded on my merry way. Some swore that they would never touch another drop when they noticed me propping up the bar, as you say. Some just swore. So honoured to be assisting the authorities in their anti-drink drive. Don't drink and drive, by the way. You know it makes sense.
This actually brings me, although not as directly as I had originally intended, to the point, such as it is. Having observed and indeed measured the quality of the existing overlord authorities' administrative prowess - pardon me while I snigger - and the utter economic shambles, not to put too fine a point on it, that is in the process of enveloping the planet and consuming its wealth, such as it is, I have concluded, in my transcendent wisdom, that there can be little doubt that you would all be much better off under an extra-planetary regime, warts and all, and it would have them. This would, of course, at least have the merit of offering you the protection of a greater power, which would be, needless to say, disinterestedly benign, as all overlordships claim to be, not wishing to alienate the subject people, as you know. Even the regime that was installed in 1940 in the land called France claimed to be benign, and some people there believed it.
What, you think on reflection that you would prefer not to be ruled by unscrupulous and duplicitously self-serving extra-territorial overlords who are unaccountable to the Scottish electorate? Well, vote for the autonomist party, then, and secede from the UK before it gets even deeper into debt. Don't beat about the bushes when you can come straight to the point instead.
Season's greetings, Earthlings.
Toodloo.
Complain about this comment
This had entirely passed me by:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_/ai_n19032101
"An online television station will be launched .... on behalf of the Scottish National Party."
Sounds like a party political broadcast that wouldn't stop?
It's good they tried, and a try is a start.
Complain about this comment
#132 we have a winner! well done Richard, alas due to the current credit crunch I've had to downsize the prize to just a hearty congratulations plus you get too bask in the glory of being the winner!!!! woohoo.
Complain about this comment
"When there’s more Malice shown than Matter:
On the Writer falls the satyr."
(Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1747)
As we approach the holy time at the end of the old year, let those to whom the above applies resolve to mend their ways at the beginning of the new year.
"Observe the Mean, the Motive and the End;
Mending our selves, or striving still to mend.
Our Souls sincere, our Purpose fair and free,
Without Vain Glory or Hypocrisy:
Thankful if well; if ill, we kiss the Rod;
Resign with Hope, and put our Trust in GOD."
(idem, 1746)
A blessed Christmas to you all.
Complain about this comment
#136. Poor_Richard
Politics AND religion. My, what a dinner party!
So, I've got to ask, is God a nationalist?
;-)
I liked your post 'til the last bit you see, with the former being rational and the last line 'Resign etc." well, not seeming so. Does it refer to putting your trust in God that others will resolve to reform themselves, or trusting in him/her/it that we as readers will reform ourselves, or both? It’s a bit baffling.
I hope, but I've never found 'God' had much to do with it. I think it's up to humans to deliver the needed improvements to the world - they can do it.
It is possible to believe unwaveringly that an action or an outcome is correctly interpreted the you see it. But to use religious faith as a tool to facilitate that level if conviction means it is also your weakness.
I point you in the direction of Tony Blair. His, ugly I'd say, conviction that his actions of war in Iraq were beyond criticism because he had squared them off against his religious beliefs, so therefore they were morally sound, was his major conceited flaw - quite sickening and disgusting.
It is possible to assert that if he hadn't been religious, power would not have corrupted him this way. Perhaps all he needed to have done, while he was being the strong leader, was to remember to be more humble - you can be assertive and humble.
Actually, Obama's recognized black roots perhaps automatically gave him this edge with the American voting public....
Complain about this comment
Thanks to you all for a thoroughly enjoyable last 6 months of blogging.
Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year to all of you (including my Unionist friends - without whom it would have been very boring!).
Complain about this comment
A merry , safe and happy time to all!
Complain about this comment
#137
aye-write
Pragmatic intent! I'd rather we didn,t try to measure intelligence.
May the spirit of good will shine your way.
Merry christmas to all.
Complain about this comment
#137 aye_write
"The Sting of a Reproach, is the Truth of it."
(Ben Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1746)
Sorry. Ben, God and I don't take questions. I am gratified by your response, however, while feeling somewhat sorry for the donkey that you have just talked the hind legs off.
You are quite right, of course: mixing politics and religion is questionable . . . even at Christmas. I don't know what came over me. The spirit of Christmas, perhaps.
Merry Christmas.
Complain about this comment
# 141. Poor_Richard
"while feeling somewhat sorry for the donkey that you have just talked the hind legs off."
Yes, that is one of my many 'sins'. (Maybe politics will be my doom.) What I did forget to say to you
was "Merry Christmas"!
Merry Christmas! :-)
#140 derekbarker
Hello,
I am was a little sleepy, but I don't get your answer :-)
But may the spirit of good will shine your way too.
I'm not sure if any explanation would be good manners or not:
Achieving a better understanding, for me, is a higher priority than being liked or respected. The latter can also be achieved of course, but in this society at any rate, it often gets in the way of the former - unless two people are such good friends, where then I would argue niceties and the like aren't necessary anyway. Being in that permanent position myself of never bearing a grudge, I want to expect others won't either.
In relation to the majority of things that go on in our daily lives i.e. not the tiny amount that is really important, I like to remember, in a literal way, these lyrics from Queen (!), "Nothing really matters..." etc. You may shake your head (it's a good tune!).
From what I can gather, if it's of any interest, most if not all people on here seem very kind. That's refreshing. It's only a forum for airing views after all.
#138 oldnat
If I can disobey (yes, again) the message in derekbarker's sentiments "I'd rather we didn't try to measure intelligence.", I couldn't help over the while but to measure yours! Let there be no doubt in your mind that your posts have been the best example of how communication on online blogs should be done - for many reasons (you haven't asked for an essay, so I won't give it!!).
You have been an inspiration I'm sure all of us would agree. It's good for all your fellow countrymen and women to know there are switched on intelligent people out there in this day and age where most 'well knowns' are quite bland or worse. (The time when life's lessons were passed on from family elders to youngsters seems to have gone...) You are a reason for Scotland to be independent! :-)
I will easily criticise many things, but I believe strongly in showing appreciation where it is due, even if some find it easier to not do so (and would disapprove if then I did), because skills like your seem relatively rare, and like most rare things, they are therefore valuable.
So thank you oldnat. In the words of another song (Bob Dylan this time!), "May God bless and keep you always; May your wishes all come true" and "May you stay... forever young".
Complain about this comment
#142 aye_write
Thanks. That's probably the nicest Xmas present I'll get!
Complain about this comment
Just like to say a Merry Xmas to all.
It's been an eventful year on this blog, and reglardless of everyone's views it's good to see that at least some of us are interested in politics.
I've always said the BBC should arrange some sort of debate in a conference hall with this lot on here. Would be interesting to put some faces to names!
Complain about this comment
#144 Neil_Small147
You have got to be joking. Imagine The Whale from Dore's "Jonah and ..."; now add spectacles. You think I am going to let myself be televised?!
Bah! Humbug! to you all. 8-)
Signing off to complete building a green racing car suitable for an 18 month old.
Complain about this comment
Merry Xmas to you all, even the Unionists whose vision of Scotland I so bitterly oppose. But a healthy and happy festive season to you all...
Complain about this comment
At least the UK is celebrating Xmas
"Government departments have spent £137,000 on Christmas cards, parties and decorations in the past year. The most lavish Whitehall department was one of the smallest, the Northern Ireland Office, which spent £40,000 on festivities, including £33,000 on receptions and parties alone"
according to the Tories.
They don't say how much the Scotland Office spent.
Complain about this comment
#147 oldnat
Surely that's just the UK government practising what it preaches: spending money to stimulate the economy. It is obviously doing its level best to save the Christmas card industry and so forth.
In any case, it's not easy to spend all that amount of money on nothing very much. Have you tried it? It takes expertise, experience and the accumulated skill of generations of public servants who are only spending our money as if it grew on trees because they think it grows on trees.
Merry Christmas.
Complain about this comment
A Merry Christmas to all our readers
And to the New Year...................
I go in to 2009 confident that most of those in Scotland who can think for themselves are now doing so and those who have been perhaps too busy doing other things will get round to doing so by 2100.
I am confident that the huge media conspiracy against the SNP is producing diminishing return and that some of those involved in it, perhaps unenthusiastically and unwillingly, will find a backbone in 2009.
I await and fully expect in 2009 a first few members of our unionist parties to see the writing on the wall and recognise - even if only in self-interest - that they should be in a different place.
I wish my other home, Nigeria, the strength and the good sense to continue its troubled struggle to exist as a democracy despite the flawed and floundering nature of its effort to date. One in four of the world's black people live in this African giant of 150 million people and if Nigeria gets fixed everything is possible in that continent.
I do not expect Gordon Brown and many other guilty fools to admit that the invasion of Iraq was illegal, stupid and essentially very wicked and that the deaths of 750,000 Iraqis in an invasion and the aftermath of it will be paid for in innocent blood all round the world for all of the next generation....., but I would think a little better of them if they did.
Awrra best
Complain about this comment
#149: What a great laugh on my Boxing Day return! No cartoonist could capture the forced pleasantness, the paranoia, the bile and the unconscious humour in this splendid caricature of a stereotypical SNP supporter.
Let's start with the fun. By 2100 (okay, I know it's a mistake) nobody will be thinking for himself. We'll have machines to do it. And the political debate will be among computers about whether they should finally sterilise the last of the human race because of their sheer inefficiency.
Now this "huge media conspiracy." Do people actualy believe that the bitter, nasty rivalry between newspapers of all types and the electronic media is suspended while they come up with agreed plans to rubbish the tragic wee SNP?
Or could it be that, like 75 per cent of the Scottish population (and its growing in my unscientific estimation) who want nothing to do with Independence, they have looked at the situation, thought hard about it, and decided it's not a viable project?
No festive greeting would be complete without a gratuitous swipe at poor old Gordon Brown. I don't like him either, but, hey! - it's Christmas.
Is this a preview of the New Year? It will be bad enough, I fear, without the irrelevance of Nationalist politics.
But, all the best for it anyway. Maybe Alex will pick up a cheap policy at the sales?
Complain about this comment
#150 brigadierjohn
"Is this a preview of the New Year? It will be bad enough, I fear, without the irrelevance of Nationalist politics."
One gathers that your New Year resolution is to drop your unconvincing pretence of sitting on the fence. Just as well, I doubt whether anyone was taken in. If you are sitting there with an open mind, waiting to be persuaded by an advocate of Scottish independence, I'll eat my hat.
As the UK economy bites the dust and sinks beneath monumental piles of UK government and consumer debt, never to recover, the perception in Scotland that the UK is a liability may be expected to grow. Discuss . . . with an open mind, of course, if you can.
Complain about this comment
#150: Thankfully free thinking Scots are not stuck in your unionist time warp with a UK economy going downhill fast, last estimates shrinking by 3-10% next year. When you do eventually get the strength to lift yourself out of that comfortable armchair you will see the rest of mankind working to feed your pension with a very distant outlook of one of their own.
No time for a novice
Complain about this comment
#150 a somewhat stereotypical reply by yourself brig.
Complain about this comment
#150 "No festive greeting would be complete without a gratuitous swipe at poor old Gordon Brown."
Interesting use of the word gratuitous in that sentence of yours Brigadierjohn, gratuitous a word that means "without apparent reason, cause, or justification."
But you are correct it is the season of good will to all men, even Gordon Brown, unionist and independence supporters alike. Merry Xmas.
Complain about this comment
Quite interesting. #151 and #152 talk about the sinking UK economy, rather than a bright new Scottish version. This is wise. The best chance for the SNP right now is that things will get so bad that people may say: "Well, the other lot can't be worse."
A terribly depressing basis for a new start, surely? A last throw of the dice? I suspect they'll find that "the other lot" can be a lot worse.
When people start rubbishing their opponents - and the SNP started a long while ago - rather than promoting their own qualities, it's a sure sign of self-doubt, if not a concession that their own ideas have failed.
Maybe it's a hopeful sign that the SNP will try to be a good Scottish-interest party, working for the people rather than chasing glory and rainbows?
#153: Probably, but #151 thinks I've changed my stance (I haven't) so it can't appear to be too stereotypical.
I think the sad truth for all of us, of whatever persuasion or none, is that we'll be anxious onlookers as the world see-saws on the brink. Our tuppenceworth (devalued again I suppose) won't change anything.
Complain about this comment
#151 sensible_chap
"As the UK economy bites the dust and sinks beneath monumental piles of UK government and consumer debt, never to recover, the perception in Scotland that the UK is a liability may be expected to grow. Discuss . . ."
This is a discussion worth having, I venture to suggest. If Scotland is to continue to be governed largely by the country to the south of it in important respects, its people will need to be convinced that this makes sense for the foreseeable future, not that the future in economic terms appears now to be foreseeable beyond a consideration of various known and rather grim facts concerning the UK's lack of a substantial manufacturing base, its "disturbing" level of government and consumer debt (and I am quoting Dominique Strauss-Kahn of the International Monetary Fund) together with its relative flimsiness vis-a-vis eurozone economies which have retained greater diversity and a more substantial manufacturing base thanks to superior government economic stewardship there.
In the historically exceptionally grave economic circumstances which are embracing the United Kingdom at an apparently accelerating pace, the adherence of oil-rich Scotland is at risk and for sound reasons. The failure to command the loyalty of Scotland, which England manifestly cannot count on - hence the risibly intemperate outbursts that independentists are subjected to (e.g., #150) - is hardly surprising. England takes Scotland's wealth and squanders it. It treats the people of Scotland like inherently dependent second-class citizens of inferior culture. Essentially, the UK fails to provide the just and meritocratic state to which the subject people of that subordinate territory aspire.
The risk of losing Scotland may be expected to grow as the economic crisis grows, for the inequalities inherent in the UK will become more evident and more intolerable to the disadvantaged territories as economic damage is inflicted, particularly as they are going into this major recession represented by their own governments and in the case of Scotland, of course, by a government which is dedicated to achieving independence.
The risk of losing Scotland is a measure of the inequitable nature of the British state as it has been constituted. The economic and political imbalances of that chronically ill-governed state are difficult to defend. Therefore, their existence is glossed over by those who have a vested interest in ignoring them. Unfortunately, they cannot but exist in the hopelessly lopsided constitutional aberration that is the United Kingdom of Insolvency, nevertheless, and the UK state has hopelessly failed to resolve them, although it has had plenty of opportunity to do so. Therefore, the economic non-viability of the UK state, which the economic crisis will demonstrate to Scotland, combined with the constitutional imperfections which are well known there, will make its survival in its present form problematic, to say the least.
Try telling the Irish that the economic crisis shows that they should rejoin the United Kingdom. They would laugh at you, of course, and you would deserve to be laughed at.
Complain about this comment
#156: I fear you are monumentally and dangerously wrong, to the extent that I'm glad few people see this blog. This is emphatically not a crisis that can be seen in any sense as a Scotland v. England thing. The perceived imbalances in the conomies is an irrelevance in UK and world terms. Highlanders, Lowlanders, Yorkshiremen, Cornishmen and Cockneys are all afflicted with the same problems, and the solutions are the same for all.
You are using your talent for language in, I regret to say, an immoral way, by attempting to divide people for narrow political gain.
Scotland is not a "subordinate territory" of the UK. We run the bloody place! Outside Government, virtually everyone who is head of anything speaks with a Scottish accent. Do you never watch TV news interviews?
You choose to drag in Ireland. Did you not read that the leases of all the top shops in Grafton Street are up for sale and their government is pumping more money into shoring up the economy. Do you know any Irishmen? Their reasons for being well out of the UK have nothing to do with economics.
You really need a strong dose of reality pills.
Complain about this comment
#157:
"The perceived imbalances in the conomies is an irrelevance in UK and world terms. Highlanders, Lowlanders, Yorkshiremen, Cornishmen and Cockneys are all afflicted with the same problems, and the solutions are the same for all."
I would love to see your reasoning on one size fits all because if thats what you think then it shows how insulated from reality you obviously are. I presume your "conomies" was a post in haste! By the way Grafton street comprises predominately of leisure and luxury items not really required in a global recession.
Complain about this comment
#157 brigadierjohn
I am afraid that I find your response to be as flimsy as the UK economy, an objective analysis of which rabid anglo-unionists will not be able to prevent the people from examining as the walls come tumbling down.
I assure you that you have more to consider dangerous than my two-centimes' worth of observations. The people of Scotland will see for themselves the economic realities that are pressing in upon the so-called United Kingdom despite the efforts of flagrantly partisan supporters of English domination such as yourself.
The age of the East is dawning, and it is to the East that we must now look, for it is the East to which the UK is plunging headlong into deeper and deeper debt. The UK, as we know, has been living beyond its means for some time now. That is what has been truly dangerous. Payback time is approaching, and no one can predict with certainty what the political fall-out from that will be. However, it is a safe working hypothesis that in this unprecedented situation entrenched economic disadvantage, such as Scotland suffers from, will tend to exert pressure on the constitutional weaknesses of which we are aware, particularly as Scotland has viable alternative constitutional frameworks to consider.
It is understandable that this seems to be a prospect worth dismissing out of hand if it does not suit your purpose. That, however, is dangerous too. I advise you to be more respectful of what independentists are saying. They represent too large a proportion of the electorate to be disrespected. To disrespect them is to disrespect their right to dissent from your view of Scotland, to which you are, of course, entitled, as they are entitled to theirs.
I think it is you who need the reality pills, my dear chap, together with some lessons in civility. The UK has been living in a fool's paradise. Reality is casting it out of that paradise, whether it wants to leave it or not.
Complain about this comment
Excellent post franco.
The Irish would never wish to rejoin the UK for the same reasons Scotland should be out of it. All their interests would be subservient to London's and they'd very quickly find themselves no longer 40% per head richer. But any complaints would see them chastised as ungrateful subsidy junkies living off of London's largesse and all the quasi-racist anti-Celtic guff that goes with that. It's amazing that Westminster and their apologists, wherever they are from, have gotten away with this so long.
The idea that we are all in this together united by class or locale or through a shared history is utterly laughable. London as the Imperial centre will always ensure the colonial peripheral suits its needs and interests. That's why it doesn't matter how many Scots fill the front benches at Westminster or how many Scots accents you hear at the BBC. Even if these quite obviously vetted Unionist careerists wanted to further Scottish interests they wouldn't be allowed to or able to because the entire weight of the system and populus is in opposition to the peripheral's interests. That's why logically we must withdraw and become independent. No nonsensical halfway house under devolution or federalism because the centre will still dominate. Independence now so we're not fooled again - but this time shame on us.
Complain about this comment
Glad to see the Brig striding towards the New Year spouting unreasoned bile and exposing the increasingly threadbare unionist coat he wears.
One prediction I will make for the New Year is that the preposterous, self seeking and totally false construct that is Gordon Brown will be increasingly recognised as the most destructive Chancellor the UK ever has suffered and just about the worst PM and this realisation will start to gather pace this year.
The " Brown Bounce" means he is only 6% behind a Tory Party presently sitting on its hands doing nothing. Some bounce!
As the Who (and Bluelaw) say "Don't get fooled again"
Complain about this comment
Have your break, Brian. We're carrying on your blog without you meantime.
Complain about this comment
Wow, go away for a few days and what happens? The brigadier, after months of protest fence sitting picks a side with a vengeance, coming out with such bile and vitriol I wouldn't be surprised if Expat had hijacked his account! For all we all suspected you were a closet Unionist, brigadier, it's sad to have it confirmed that you are of the same unthinking ilk as the likes of Expat. You accuse of the SNP down putting their opposition, claiming it shoes they are a lost cause. How then do the Unionist parties compare? Since 99% of the arguments against independence are in negative terms, does that mean the Union is a lost cause?
As to others on this blog; to see optimism and hope is still alive is heartening in these dark times. Lets hope it's not just a symptom of the festive season and this optimism and hope will be taken forward in 2009.
Yes, Scots are naturally conservative (small c) and yes, perhaps the fact that there is nothing left to loose will remove that final barrier to independence but does that really mean that more Scots opting fo rindependence now means that it would be a poor start to the rebirth of a nation? I don't think so. Don't get me wrong, I would rather people choose independence as a matter of course rather than in circumstances that could be viewed as a last resort but while Scots can blame someone else for their problems with reasonable conviction (after all, the English used to alternate between the Frence and the Germans for all THEIR problems but not convincingly), this country will never know its potential.
With the economic downturn expected to last at least another 3 or 4 years (almost the entire term of both this and the next Westminster government), we are in for some interesting times. With support for the tories falling, Gordie looks more and more like a shoe-in for the next election so the battle still looks like being between the negative tactics of NuLab and the message of hope from the SNP. Are Scots ready to put their Calvanistic pessimism to one side embrace hope? The next 3 years should tell.
Complain about this comment
#155 brigadierjohn
Closer examination of my post and, indeed, of all previous posts of mine, were you minded to take a look at them, would reveal that I am not so much interested in making a political case on either side of the constitutional divide as in considering issues.
I am aware, however, that it is highly arguable that fate has presented the SNP with an ideal opportunity to present its case positively and powerfully, and I expect that it will take every available opportunity to do so.
The proposition that Scotland should consider going independent within the European Union and the eurozone so that it may harness its various and substantial resources to construct a more diverse economy will arguably be better received within the context of a sinking and badly weakened UK economy. Whether or not this turns out to be the case remains to be seen. It may be that we shall not have to wait very long to find out, as the rate of UK economic decline is proving to be alarmingly faster than expected by those who claim to know about such things.
The fact is that it is now being suggested by quite a few informed commentators that the present economic situation, given its particular characteristics and in view of the nature of the causes that have been ascribed to it, is producing a growing distrust of UK government and of the financial and economic systems that it has failed to regulate adequately. One can hardly expect the people of Scotland not to take account of this in their deliberations on the subject of the constitutional future of the country.
As for my own position, I am open to persuasion by those who know how to persuade. I am bound to say that I find both your manner and the content of your posts to be unpersuasive.
As for your assertion that you have not changed your stance, how one is to take that depends on which stance you are referring to. The perching-on-the-fence one that you have claimed for yourself in the past or the committed unionist that you reveal yourself to be and as you are seen to be, as is apparent.
Complain about this comment
#156 & #159 Franco
Interesting posts and I'm in general sympathy but I think you're open to criticism in some ways.
1. Scotland would be expected to inherit a percentage of the UK debt on going its own way. Until recently, that would have been manageable and indeed the recent events perhaps make it much more desirable, urgent even, but Brown is calculating that the increased indebtedness, in conjunction with the 'centralisation' of the banks, ties Scotland to Westminster 'for all eternity'. It will be argued more crudely than ever that Scotland cannot afford to go its own way, ironically enough, because of the mismanagement of the UK by Scots. What is more the slightly larger proportion of the Scottish population who work in the public sector will (as ever) require some convincing to overcome their small-c conservative tendencies in an economic downturn where the public sector may be a relatively safe environment.
2. Factually speaking, its not really true that '...England takes Scotland's wealth and squanders it'. At the moment the UK remains notionally at least a something between a Union-State and a Unitary State. At any rate, its possible to argue that England, as such, is unrepresented in it.
Complain about this comment
Why should Scotland take on a debt not of its making? Are you hinting that Scotland should take on debt out of proportion to its size and would be forced to as part of any independence settlement? Smacks of scaremongering AFAIC. What Scots cannot afford to ignore is that Scotland's revenues which have up to now been squandered by successive UK Chancellors on tax cuts for Middle England will now go to paying off England's debts for a generation or more. We simply can't afford to remain within this Union. That's the reality here.
The Scottish dependence on the state sector for employment is overstated in that the % of public sector workers has been calculated against an inaccurate representation of the Scottish contribution to the Exchequer. Against what is regarded as a true reflection of Scottish GDP the % is about 3% above the EU average. Again of course the union dividend at work once again but nothing that can't be fixed with independence and full receipt of our not insubstantial revenues.
Complain about this comment
#166 Bluelaw
- no, not 'out of proportion to its size' and def not scaremongering but that 'proportion' has suddenly got much larger and you can see how the scaremongering would develop.
I agree that a Scottish government would never have spent its revenues in the way that Westminster has: Trident, Iraq, etc would have received very sharp criticism from a purely Scottish electorate (2 reasons also - by the way - why Lib-Dem Federalism may not work, given that responsibility for defence spending would have to be agreed between Federal governments, and neither of these would have achieved a spending consensus).
Complain about this comment
#165 7leagueboots
As I have only just noticed your post, I have time merely for a relatively brief response on this occasion.
I am aware of the points that you make in your first numbered paragraph. I am certain that no one who has been following the constitutional debate is under the impression that secession from the UK would be without complications such as you refer to. The question of liability for share of national debt is, of course, one of the many items that will necessarily become a subject of negotiations if independence is chosen. This matter has been well and truly covered by posters here, I believe. The outcome of independence-settlement negotiations cannot be predicted in detail. In practice an accommodation can be expected to be reached which meets the various and numerous requirements of both parties to negotiations of this type. There would appear to be plenty of scope for quid-pro-quo bargaining. Reference to previous instances of this type of thing may be helpful, for example transition arrangements agreed in connection with the emergence of the Irish Free State.
One wonders how the Scottish electorate will respond to being told that UK government profligacy means that they are tied to the UK "for all eternity" and thus are not free to choose independence.
As for the large public sector, which is arguably symptomatic of Scotland's economic and social malaise within the UK, I would not presume to predict how employees within it will respond to the economic and political developments that they will see around them. It appears to be the case that this symptom of Scotland's ill health has the potential to militate against the application of an effective constitutional remedy and perhaps already does so.
As for the points you make in your second numbered paragraph, the use of the word England that one is accustomed to in a purely Scottish context should not blind one to the fact that more widely it is generally used to refer to the UK, not least in England itself. Whatever terminological exactitude or inexactitude one may care to indulge in, the UK is effectively, regardless of the precise nature of current constitutional definitions and demarcations, predominantly England, as the rest of the world acknowledges by calling it that more often than not.
As the central tax-raising administration in the UK is currently the government in England which provides both the government of England as well as the government of the rest of the UK in reserved areas and as Scotland as a part of the UK has and has had no power to derive revenue from its own resources (excluding consideration of the questionable minor devolved income-tax-varying power), not least its sub-sea oil and gas reserves, unlike a US state or a Canadian province (or even Greenland from next July), it is reasonable, I think, to argue that Scotland's wealth has been taken from it and is still being taken from it by the England-dominated UK, or England, as most people will persist in calling it for so long as the UK exists. That that wealth has been and continues to be squandered is arguable especially with reference to the plans that the SNP has had for it since the 1970s and has for it today in comparison with the use which the UK government has made of it and continues to make of it.
Of course one realizes that the current constitutional position is complex. Nonetheless, those of us who are interested in it manage to be quite well acquainted with it, I think, which is more than can be said for almost the entire population of the small country to the south of Scotland, who seem to profess indifference towards it as if that were something to be proud of.
I take the point that in the deepening economic crisis anglo-unionists can be expected to argue along the lines to which you have referred. It is advisable for independentists to be aware of this and to be prepared for it. No doubt many of them, including the SNP itself, are indeed aware of it and are prepared to deal with it.
Complain about this comment
#168 Franco
Thank you for your measured response. I suppose it is true enough what you say - externally considered, the UK is England. I have often called it that myself that when abroad because to call it something else is problematic and leads to protracted & somewhat tedious explanation.
It is unarguable that the UK has squandered a great deal of revenue that derives from Scotland - the monetarist revolution was financed by North Sea oil, for example, which is ironic given that we are reaping the consequences of that financial revolution in the present catastrophic explosion of debt.
My brief allusion to 'all eternity', was an (albeit very faint and ironic) allusion to the comment by Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun: the Scot Gordon Brown considers that the debt trap has trapped Scotland within his (rather neurotic) 'British' parameters for 'all eternity', where Saltoun considered that the original Treaty of Union achieved the same for England.
It remains the case that there is a democratic deficit of sorts, and a lack of development for the possibilities of a progressive English identity in the British Union as it is presently constituted. This might be remedied by Federalism, but as I have already stated, there are reasons why Federalism would be very difficult to sustain.
Complain about this comment
Merry Xmas folks ... it seems my last post broke house rules .... all i said was that aye_writes #128 independence blog address should have ended in .scot as opposed to .uk .... how this breaks house rules i dont know.
Complain about this comment
With the greatest of respect I don't think we need concern ourselves with English identity or the future of England. England is a great country that can find its own way. I would hope they become a more pro-European country much more at ease with themselves but that's up to them. But it's not within our gift to keep them solvent or somehow 'contained' by a pan-British identity. What we need to concern ourselves with is making Scotland as prosperous and as confident a place as Norway or Sweden. We should be aiming extremely high in this regard. We should aim to become THE most desirable country in the world to live in. Now this really is within our gift and if your reaction to my saying that is to recoil in disbelief or dare I say to scoff at such a notion then ask yourself why? Why can't we become one of the envies of the world? It's well within our grasp.
Complain about this comment
#171 'why cant we become one of the envies of the world? Its well within our grasp' ...as Alex said why should we have been 'The best small country in the world' when you could be just 'The best country in the world' instead.
Complain about this comment
BBC Alba (freeview page 168)transmitted a rivetting programme last night ( with English sub-titles)detailing the lies, the deceits and the dirty tricks used by the state to frustrate Scottish ambitions of independence since John MacCormick's National Covenant in 1950.
I wonder why it has not been transmitted on BBC 1 or BBC2
Complain about this comment
#173 sneckedagain
Diomhair
Its on again tomorrow 28th at 22.00pm.
Complain about this comment
Sorry I wasn't around last night to respond to various posters. One of the weaknesses of blogs it that they often lack the immediacy of comment and response, and effectiveness is lost.
However, what a load of overblown, flowery floss from francophone. Rarely can so little have been said in so many words. And so unconvincingly.
The other SNP apologists turn again to the carefully-rehearsed stock responses and a blatant unwillingness to address issues.
One constant theme however, is that anyone not fully committed to the SNP is not a proper Scot, a "wrong-thinker," lacking intelligence, a unionist placeman, a forelock-tugging serf to the English.
Grow up, people! Your party has done well cashing in on Labour's failings to form a minority government. But regarding the Great Leader's vision of a Golden Age, nobody wants to know.
Live with it: The independence movement, as presently put forward, is a minority sect.
You have to ask yourselves why, with a desperate Labour Government, support for independence is probably now about 20 per cent. These are hard times for the UK. And the SNP is losing ground. Why?
Does signing an SNP membership card imbue the incomer with superior intelligence? How can you be so arrogant about unfounded assumptions?
Sheer weight of propaganda on the blogs is not a sign of strength. It is a sign of fear that the arguments are being lost on the streets.
And playing the victim card, claiming everyone, especiallly media conspirators, is against you, realy just cheapens your case.
Myself? Despite efforts to tar me with various brushes, I just don't care anymore about who might win in the end. We are but a speck of dust on a huge planet. Tell Alex, someone.
Complain about this comment
"Why can't we become one of the envies of the world?"
Because nationalism is incapable of providing a worthwhile environment for human beings to live and prosper. Russians are the most miserable people on Earth, and theirs is a society where nationalism rules supreme.
Complain about this comment
#175 brigadierjohn
Picking random low numbers out of the hat I see! About 20% in your opinion the actual figure is nearer 40% TNS System Three Poll the difference between the SNP and unionists is truthful facts.
Complain about this comment
#177 cynicalHighlander: You know as well as I do that current polls, however the question is contrived, are a comment on the Labour Government. And that there is only one real poll - the one that counts votes. My use of the word "probably" might suggest that this was my view of the true situation.
Anaxim, in #176, is very harsh. But I would worry about some of the more extreme people here signing up for any future Scottish Defence Force. I certainly wouldn't post here.
Complain about this comment
I read many of the comments on this blog and would acknowledge that it is more informative than many other online forums.
However an element of bitterness has crept in lately and, whilst probably exorsising the frustration of the poster, it does nothing for the thread.
The following phrases, from one post from 'brigadierjohn', are not at all helpfull and could lead to a disintegration of the thread:
"SNP apologists ", "carefully-rehearsed stock responses ", "blatant unwillingness to address issues ", "anyone not fully committed to the SNP is not a proper Scot ", "Grow up, people", "a minority sect ", "Does signing an SNP membership card imbue the incomer with superior intelligence?", "Sheer weight of propaganda on the blogs ", "playing the victim card "
This poster finishes with "Despite efforts to tar me with various brushes", thus taking on the role of the victimised poster.
The irony is that his post makes every stereotypical attack on those posters to this blog who might be sympathetic to independence. I have yet to see anyone trying to metaphorically tar this poster with any brush, save for suggestions that he is a unionist who hitherto had portrayed himself as a fence sitter.
In a later comment brigadierjohn makes an altogether more sinister attack on the motives of other posters by saying:
"But I would worry about some of the more extreme people here.... "
This kind of comment is quite unacceptable and should have been automatically referred by the moderator. Who exactly are these 'more extreme people' that the poster is worried about and why is he worried?
The suggestion of course is that a desire for Scottish independence is evidence of some kind of deviance or intollerance. The comment is actually no more than a slur on individuals who have a different political opinion to that of brigadierjohn.
It is unfortunate that comments like these make it through and are publicised.
Complain about this comment
brigadierjohn says:
"My use of the word "probably" might suggest that this was my view of the true situation."
No, the use of the word 'probably' is there in order to suggest that your opinion is likely to be accurate.
The truth is that no-one knows for sure what the support or otherwise is for independence. Polls can almost certainly be discounted in such a case as the shear magnitude of the subject renders them inaccurate.
The reason for this is that there are around 15% of people who never take part in elections but who WOULD take part in a referendum on independence.
So, the only honest statement that can be made with regards to independence is that we do not know what the result would be.
Stating that somehow your opinion is probably accurate is nothing more than provocative, but empty, rhetoric.
Complain about this comment
I don't regard it as Nationalism. I regard it as Scotland becoming a NORMAL country the way Sweden or Norway are. I don't think they are miserable because they are sovereign countries. And they certainly don't want or need or miss being part of a larger unit as Scotland is.
Complain about this comment
#178 brigadierjohn
"probably" or "opinion" as a past maths teacher would say to me "show your workings, boy" as one might have the right answer but the method needs to be shown.
Complain about this comment
#171 Bluelaw.
Unquestionably it must be the aim of every country to maximise the quality of life and opportunity of its citizens to the fullest extent possible within its legal powers, and doubtless this has not always been the case under the present constitution of the UK. The Iraq war was a UK failure on several levels - moral, constitutional, democratic, not forgetting financial. A slightly less spectacular failure has been the ideological addiction to social & economic policies that have divided and now impoverished UK society, and would, as you say, probably not have been the natural choice of a Scottish parliament represented independently in Europe.
Certainly the identity of England will not be a Scottish problem per se. But if a eurosceptic Westminster is faced with a situation where it has sufficient power (because it is in charge of the legal processes) to limit Scottish ambitions to either a federal system or to some kind of enhanced regional autonomy then it will do so, and dissipate any Scottish push to European integration by dividing the support for those who will (even if only temporarily) accept a limited settlement against those that wish to achieve independence. It means that Scottish political ambitions may perhaps only progress at the pace of English adaption to the concept of European integration (which may possibly be never) and therefore in that sense the role of English, or Anglo-British, identity remains a problem for those European-minded Scots whose aim is to emulate the achievements of the most successful social democratic states.
Also, the implementation of devolution has always been one of maximum delay, then very minimal concessions from the centre. Therefore it is most likely that some partial form of fiscal autonomy will be the only offer on the table from a weakened David Cameron at Westminster after 2010. That weak offer will be supported by Labour, Tory, and Lib Dem politicians at Holyrood (and by the media) because they see the alternative as Independence (even though there are supporters of Independence within their own ranks). For that reason, the Independence referendum which is supposed to happen in 2010 will not be fought on the basis of whether Scots want Independence or not, but ultimately on whether they want a minimum concession from Westminster. In other words, the Referendum will be finessed as part of the process of Westminster management of Scottish concerns, with acquiescence from Scottish politicians at Holyrood and Westminster. The challenge for the SNP will be to run the referendum in the first place (and it is only an advisory referendum), and then retain control over it. It appears that they will not be permitted to run it unless there is an option for further devolution and as the major division will be between devolution and Independence it is inevitable that the choice of the former will merely ratify the choice that Cameron will have before him in any case, and allow him to implement minor devolutionary concessions to Scotland and Wales as a patriotic Anglo-British leader. If the choice is for Independence he will do the same.
Complain about this comment
#175 - brigadier:
You take umbrage at what you perceive as arrogance from some quarters of the Nationalist's support, claiming that Unionists are far from lacking in intelligence, nor are they wrong thinkers. You gripe about propaganda while filling every post with the lie that support for independence is below 20% and dropping like a stone. You assert that resorting to propaganda is a sign of weakness and fear, that rubbishing your opponents rather than promoting their own qualities is a concession that their own ideas have failed.
How, then, do you view NuLab's latest attack on LIT? It's the last thing Scotland needs right now according to Scottish Labour. They criticise is because it'll cost £18 million p.a. to administer and collect, compared with over £60 million for Council Tax. Yes, the last thing Scots need right now is to save over £40 million in local government administration. Yet, there are many Unionists who'll be swayed by this argument. Scottish Labour don't offer an alternative (they don't have one) but LIT is bad, while Council Tax is less bad, or at least it is according to Scottish Labour. And there will be Unionists who will be swayed by this argument.
Is it any wonder that some can get exasperated by some of cling to the Union through fear of because they have fallen for Unionist propaganda?
Complain about this comment
So much for the season of goodwill!!
It appears that one or two may have been at the sherry :p
We are back to the same arguments it seems: both sides completely unwilling to accept some of the other side's arguments.
A few holes to pick on: only 20% in favour of independence from one poster, responded to with a 40%. But while that is more likely it is still a long way off. I would expect an independence vote to require a minimum of 70% turnout with a 70% in favour. The reason is that it is such a monumental change.
Scotland independent is not like Norway and Sweden, at least initially. The economy is too tied up between the home nations. Many businesses are spread across the UK. You cannot simply switch overnight, and my argument has always been that we must be presented with a solid plan - albeit at high level - which allows a smooth transition without any major problems.
But now is not the time. Look at the number of businesses going under. Look at the number of jobs disappearing. These are not going to be magically restored, unless the SNP has some Communist-type plan to have everyone in work.
Anyway, I'm going back to the Wii, if I can get my kids off it!!
Complain about this comment
#179 greenockboy: Aye, you can take the boy out of Greenock.......
I think what you are saying to me is: "Shut your mouth."
I appreciate that SNP posters don't like to see their own attitudes thrown back in their faces. But that's all I am doing. So, please, leave the moral high ground to those who can defend it. And save your attempts at censorship for when you achieve power. Did I say "when......?"
And please don't attribute motives to my choice of language. You don't know what I meant.
#182 cynicalHighlander: That's probably why I was hopeless - no, worse than that - in the maths class. If someone forms an opinion, it may well indicate a flawed ability to reason. But not necessarily that the opinion is wrong. Maths and opinion don't mix, not even in semantics.
#184 ForteanJo: You may dispute my judgement or opinion, but I never knowingly lie. Nor do I take umbrage. Life's too short.
As for The Labour Party (please stop the silly names) collectively they are corrupted by too long in power, chiefly locally, and feed poor, gullible people the myth of socialist solidarity. They somehow get away with deceiving people over generations.
But I also see major flaws in the SNP's LIT ideas.
Do you still believe anything that any politician says?
Complain about this comment
#185 Neil_Small 147: Of course there's a plan! First, we'll repatriate the dust in Marie Stuart's coffin, then we'll build a spaceport to encourage like-minded visitors, then we'll ban tractors, trains and lorries.
We'll have a wonderful horse-drawn economy with the fields filled with workers again.
Honestly Neil, do try to pay attention!
Complain about this comment
7leagueboots
Interesting analysis. Westminster won't give up its Scottish oil cow easily I agree. The SNP will have to manouvere with great skill to get the result so many of us desire and which some will seek to thwart by any means they see fit. But lets hope events supercede these snivelling treacherous reprobates who would carve us up. Lets hope that enough pressure is brought to bear by the Scottish people that come 2010 at the very least we are fiscally autonomous. From there on in full independence is but a shoo-in.
Neil Small
You can switch overnight. Scotland will still trade with rump UK as an important market but beyond that as an independent we can emulate any society that we choose. I think Sweden and Norway would be excellent starting points in that regard.
Complain about this comment
BrigadierJohn
Your anti-Greenock comment is despicable. You really are detestable.
Complain about this comment
#189 bluelaw: If making a light-hearted play on a guy's unsername is the most detestable and despicable thing I've done, my place in (atheist) heaven is assured. Lighten up, laddie.
Complain about this comment
#190, maybe the Brigadier has the moral high ground of living in Bridge of Weir or Kilmacolm?
Complain about this comment
#191 InMyKip: Wrong again! I have no wannabee middle-class pretentions. I'm a proud cooncil hoose boy, now elevated to a humble semi-bungalow. If I stood on the moral high ground, the earth would tremble and throw me off. Posh hooses rarely stand on moral high ground.
Complain about this comment
Lighten up nothing. Casual disregard like that is the root of many Scots ills.
Complain about this comment
#192 you want to watch it Brigadier with that man of the people speech you are in danger of sounding like Gordon Brown, now you wouldn't want that would you?
Complain about this comment
Re #178
Oh dear, I see the brigadier is finally out of the closet; a fully paid-up, flag waving unionist.
It's a pity you spend so much time lying on this blog about your position by pretending to be an undecided.
The problem now of course, is that you have no credibility. Even the more rabid posters on both sides of the eternal argument on this blog are happy to be honest about their position, and so while they may be mindlessly entrenched and play fast and loose with the facts, at least they are not disingenuous about their allegiance, and so what they say can be put into context.
But then pretending you are a neutral when all along you have an allegiance to one side is not uncommon in Scottish journalists (both current and ex)
Complain about this comment
#187 brig:
You need to stop the sarcasm. All it does is wind up the SNP diehards - and I'm being serious here.
#188 bluelaw
No you cannot just switch over. Perhaps you do not understand change in both business and public sector - I do, and have and am currently involved in such projects.
I think both posts show just why no one can really take any independence debate seriously. Neither of you appears to be willing to make concessions. You will both turn off people sitting in the middle, and they may lose interest. Any independence vote will have to carry a minimum turnout to be ratified.
Staying with the union is perhaps not the best option. But on the other hand independence is not the utopia some people seem to think it will be.
And to be honest, what's the point anyway? We're all tied into Europe anyway. This ain't Dubai.
And finally: with the news that Moray is being considered as a spaceport (this is genuine by the way), is Alex hoping to be the first Scot in space? :p
Complain about this comment
185. Neil_Small147
"I would expect an independence vote to require a minimum of 70% turnout with a 70% in favour."
Why? Westminster makes laws etc with only a 23 - 30% of the voting public behind them and that's for 4 Nations not much about democracy rather dictatorship by a few.
What happened about the green car you were building or was that someone else!
Just read your last post.
When ripples turn into waves
"It is also worth remembering that each real estate market in the region is quite different to Dubai and, indeed, one another. The major distinction between hydrocarbon rich Abu Dhabi and real estate pioneer Dubai is each emirate's ability to access cash quickly. The UAE capital enjoys a 25 per cent surplus of GDP, while Dubai's government and state owned enterprises owe $80bn or 148 per cent of GDP."
Lossiemouth is the only airport in all of the UK which is open nearly 365 days of the year and large enough for jumbo's.
Complain about this comment
Re #196 Neil_Small147
I would disagree with your contention that no-one can take an debate on independence seriously. With such a significant topic, there will always be groups with highly polarised views, but that is not to say the debate is fatally wounded because of it.
I am also curious as to your view that there is a requirement for a minimum turnout to ratify any vote on independence - why do you wish to alter the accepted practice of democratic voting which is enough to establish a government which will then use the same process to pass laws etc. by saying there has to be a minimum turn-out?
One point I do agree with you on is that an independent Scotland would not be a utopia. There will always be those who want to think that change will solve all the problems, but the reality is that all change can do is provide new opportunities - how we deal with these opportunities, and whether we benefit is down to us.
My viewpoint is that I would rather have our elected representatives (with all the levers of power) focused on maximising the opportunities to deliver the priorities of the Scottish people rather than those of the people of the UK, of which Scotland is less than 10%.
Complain about this comment
#(any!) brigadierjohn
Well, hello again, brigadier. I hope you had an enjoyable Christmas and your holidays are turning out the way you’d like.
I’d rather not have to post this (the posts on here haven’t changed). Sigh.
You can have your opinion, but remember it is yours to have. I want you to look my boys in the eye and tell them that their nation and matters to do with it are an irrelevance. You explain to them they aren’t worthy of political independence. You tell them why they must rely on another nation to take decisions for them. You make them understand why this is ‘right’ and make sure they aren’t feeling less valued and less confident when you’re done.
PS I took my reality pills some long while ago:-)
(Points to note:
1. The eldest 3 have absorbed their Scottish national identity by now - ages are 7,6, nearly 4 and 2 in May. Not as a result of any deliberate efforts on my part - they weren't required. I'm afraid it's unavoidable. Children seem particularly concerned with belonging, I'd assume it's out of their need to feel secure. But over to you...
2. They have figured out that there is more than one nation in Britain, and which one they live in etc. long before they ever contemplate economics.)
Complain about this comment
Neil Small
Why would any switch be difficult? Sounds like scaremongering yet again. Business is one area that will remain largely unaffected by independence. England will still be a large market for Scottish goods but at long last Scotland will have a level playing field in terms of controlling what is sold, taxation etc.
Re. referendum on independence. I don't think Unionists are in a position to dictate terms regarding a referendum and the terms you propose are laughable in that they betray just how desperate you fear the Unionist position is. However, it's this Centralised Imperilialistic arrogance of yours that will end the Union.
Complain about this comment
200. At 9:02pm on 27 Dec 2008, bluelaw wrote:
Neil Small
Why would any switch be difficult? Sounds like scaremongering yet again. Business is one area that will remain largely unaffected by independence. England will still be a large market for Scottish goods but at long last Scotland will have a level playing field in terms of controlling what is sold, taxation etc.
Re. referendum on independence. I don't think Unionists are in a position to dictate terms regarding a referendum and the terms you propose are laughable in that they betray just how desperate you fear the Unionist position is. However, it's this Centralised Imperilialistic arrogance of yours that will end the Union.
---------------
You are the SNP version of RE I'm afraid to say. You do not concede a single point. Everything will be perfect according to your posts.
As for the numbers for a referendum. You then tell me what you think is suitable. If I recall there was a minium requirement for devolution. This is not your bog standard general election. This is a massive change that will huge effects if it all goes wrong.
Complain about this comment
I've read the comment from brigadierjohn at 186 onwards and have decided that I won't be participating in any tit for tat insults.
There are a great many informative comments here and such a disintegration of the thread only serves to bury them.
On the subject of the media:
Today we had two political headlines in Scotland. One was a 'fresh' attack on LIT whilst the other was a scare story based around the concordat and a fear that there will be 'cuts' in the education budget's of councils.
These two stories were the lead in The Herald, The Scotsman and the BBC in Scotland - yes, all three. The Herald at least carried a story pushed by the SNP based on data files lost by Westminster.
Now, is another LIT press release by Labour really worthy of being a lead item? Surely after having headlined such an attack on LIT for the 20th or 30th time editors must start asking Labour to either provide figures justifying their claims or at least offer their own alternatives.
One example of todays LIT story is the charge by Labour that it will render Scotland the highest taxed part of the UK. Is this statement accurate? Has Labour provided figures to back up this claim?
I ask these questions because I have yet to see this specific accusations qualified. LIT will replace the council tax, the SNP have already acknowledged that there will be a shortfall when comparing funds raised against council tax, I believe the shortfall to be 300 million.
The SNP have stated that the Scottish government will make up this shortfall. Now, here is the point, Labour also accept there will be a shortfall (leaving aside the council tax rebate). So, if they accept that there is a shortfall how then can they say that Scotland will be the most taxed part of the UK?
This seems a very simple contradiction from Labour, so why haven't any journalists picked it up?
The education 'cuts' story is another case in point. The EIS are attacking the concordat by claiming it may lead to cuts. However, the education budgets of councils in Scotland has increased by around 5% average, more in Glasgow.
Why are these Unions attacking a government who provided our councils with a better settlement then they themselves received from Westminster, why?
I have yet to see one headline from a Union attacking the tight settlement or indeed the half billion in cuts that are about to be imposed on Scotland.
I have now got into the habit of reading The Times, Telegraph, Guardian and Independent online in order to get news on the economy, UK politics and a general feel for world opinion.
Many stories appear to stop at the border, I don't know why they do, they just do.
One of the biggest stories today is the suggested 100 MP rebellion against the selling off of part of the Royal Mail.
There is also the proposal being considered by Labour that council tax bills be set higher if the house is in a 'nice' area, a kind of tax on good citizenry. One would have though this a good angle on the rehashed 'LIT attack' story.
Thank goodness we at least have Iain Macwhirter ...
Complain about this comment
I'm not saying things will be perfect. I am saying they'll be better and we will have the basis upon which to make Scotland an absolutely fantastic place to live. I see solutions not problems.
Referendum: simple 51+% majority either yes or no wins it. Don't vote, don't complain.
Complain about this comment
#150 brigadierjohn
"#149
Now this "huge media conspiracy." Do people actualy believe that the bitter, nasty rivalry between newspapers of all types and the electronic media is suspended while they come up with agreed plans to rubbish the tragic wee SNP?"
It is conceivable that they are mostly unionist. How many newspapers are there? It only takes a handful of people (editors) to make a majority of unionists so that the papers are disproportionately unionist.
Didn't you once say you were an ex-journalist? I suspect you are playing at winding up the nationalists... :-)
"Or could it be that, like 75 per cent of the Scottish population (and its growing in my unscientific estimation) who want nothing to do with Independence, they have looked at the situation, thought hard about it, and decided it's not a viable project?"
Well, it depends how you ask the question. There has been quite a wide range of results.
"Is this a preview of the New Year? It will be bad enough, I fear, without the irrelevance of Nationalist politics."
See my post #199 then dismiss Nationalist politics. Prostituting my children's right to national self-determination for some alleged monetary gain for them is not allowed as an answer.
#155 brigadierjohn
"The best chance for the SNP right now is that things will get so bad that people may say: "Well, the other lot can't be worse."
A terribly depressing basis for a new start, surely? A last throw of the dice? I suspect they'll find that "the other lot" can be a lot worse."
'The other lot' is the people of Scotland and their votes electing their representatives. By definition I do not see that this means things will be 'a lot worse'. (No one is clever enough on here or wherever to say for sure if they will or won't be.) To say so of Scots is a slur and an insult.
"When people start rubbishing their opponents - and the SNP started a long while ago - rather than promoting their own qualities, it's a sure sign of self-doubt, if not a concession that their own ideas have failed."
See my previous response.
The SNP on the other hand are far and away the most pro-Scottish party and this positive approach, in contrast to Labour, overshadows any criticising of their opponents they do (incidentally they criticise in Scotland's interests, because their opponents' stance is bad for Scots).
"Maybe it's a hopeful sign that the SNP will try to be a good Scottish-interest party, working for the people rather than chasing glory and rainbows?"
Why is independence for Scotland 'glory and rainbows' but not for other similar sized independent nations? Or maybe you believe they should all join Britain?
"#153: Probably, but #151 thinks I've changed my stance (I haven't) so it can't appear to be too stereotypical."
I thought you were a friendly sort, older and wiser!
"I think the sad truth for all of us, of whatever persuasion or none, is that we'll be anxious onlookers as the world see-saws on the brink. Our tuppenceworth (devalued again I suppose) won't change anything."
Brigadier, it is easy to feel like that, very easy in fact. But a large amount of pounds is merely a larger amount of tuppences.
I'd guess that's how big changes happen - in conducive circumstances (requires luck?), a charismatic character can come along and take advantage of those circumstances to convert all the tuppences into his/her supporters, then gather up those tuppences until s/he is unstoppable and implements change. To me it seems to be a pattern anyway. So I wonder (hope) it's only a matter of time before this occurs for Scotland.
Complain about this comment
aye_write
Had to read your first "points to note" twice to correct a maligned judgement, I initially read on my part, of yourself.
The problem that unionist have is that they are of the opinion that why "rock the boat" when its sinking into the depths of insolvency through it's imperialistic notions of world supremacy. As long as they can trundle down to get their Sunday tabloid, after removing the remote control from the back pocket and settle down to reflect how good their world is with no thought about what comes in their wake. Tues sees a visit to a PO, if ones still open locally, to collect their pension and they can pontificate how they won the war and life is wonderful for evermore without a care in the world other than the local crime rate, which they can't understand why these people are allowed to be free as it wouldn't of happened in their youth. What the brigadier doesn't understand is how near to the truth his #187 is not just for the Uk but to a large part of so the so called civilized world that is if we haven't irradiated ourselves in the meantime. My generation have exploited the easy natural resources of the world and from now on in life will increasingly become more difficult but as long as one is willing to take this onboard life could become far more fullfilling.
needed a rant hope it's decipherable.
Complain about this comment
201. Neil_Small147
"As for the numbers for a referendum. You then tell me what you think is suitable. If I recall there was a minium requirement for devolution. This is not your bog standard general election. This is a massive change that will huge effects if it all goes wrong."
How many were allowed to vote for the Union 300 years ago?
Complain about this comment
Think I've double posted!
Complain about this comment
Neil_Small147
What'syour price if any?
Complain about this comment
#201 - I find my self in agreement with Neil here, there should be minimum turnout and a minimum vote in favour parameters for any referendum on independence, although 70% of 70% is perhaps a little extreme. My reasoning behind this is the position Scotland would need to be in during any post referendum negatiations (assumming a successful vote, of course).
If we had a straight vote alone the lines of a general election, there is every possibility that Scotland could be going forward with only 25% of the electorate having voted for independence. It would difficult to argue that independence was the settled will of the people and I think this would weaken the SNP at the negotation table.
However, if we had a minimum turnout of, say 60% and a minimum vote in favour of 50% of the turnout, Labour (or whatever flavour of government sat at Westminster at the time) would be in the uncomfortable position of appearing to be trying to balk the will of the Scottish people should talks breaks down and stall.
Complain about this comment
Just as an addendum to my previous post:
The SOS are running another anti LIT story in this Sundays edition. They also lead with an attack on the SNP's running of the Homecoming event by Jim Murphy.
Complain about this comment
#157 brigadierjohn
"#156: I fear you are monumentally and dangerously wrong, to the extent that I'm glad few people see this blog. This is emphatically not a crisis that can be seen in any sense as a Scotland v. England thing. The perceived imbalances in the conomies is an irrelevance in UK and world terms. Highlanders, Lowlanders, Yorkshiremen, Cornishmen and Cockneys are all afflicted with the same problems, and the solutions are the same for all."
I'm afraid not brigadier, it is your post that could not be more wrong. Surely you don't believe it and are waiting to see how pleasing the ripples are from your flung stones? (I'm not saying this is bad.)
It is unavoidable that the issues are an England / Scotland thing. They are both nations and that is the crux of this problem. The other areas you mention were never established nations for hundreds of years. Yes, they have their own identities, as Scotland does, but part of their identities is not an examination of whether to regain the national sovereignty they once had - it does not feature in their proposed answers to these problems.
Perhaps not all Scots see independence as their preferred option either, but as long as there are parts of Britain with nation status, even if only in name, this question shall never disappear. (I can't see English voters going for Britain only and no England.)
It is unavoidable that in absorbing our identities we query our status. Even if you believe this to be irrational, you are incorrect to dismiss it as wrong.
"You are using your talent for language in, I regret to say, an immoral way, by attempting to divide people for narrow political gain."
'The place' is already divided. It is called the national border and has been in that area for hundreds of years. (For at least three generations after 1707, Scots in the British Empire considered themselves Scots - and the English and the Welsh considered the Scots as Scots!)
"Scotland is not a "subordinate territory" of the UK."
Yes, of course, it is. From 646 MPs I think it is, Scotland has I think 59, but the exact numbers aren't important. That, if all Scottish MPs happened to all vote one way, it only takes a small portion of English MPs (i.e. 59 +1) to vote the other way to render Scotland's decision meaningless, is the point.
It doesn't matter that Scottish MPs' votes reflect a range of views. There is no guarantee that the majority Scottish view will be the majority Westminster one. And the reserved issues are the most important ones.
"We run the bloody place! Outside Government, virtually everyone who is head of anything speaks with a Scottish accent. Do you never watch TV news interviews?"
Those Scots you feel are running the place, are they then in some conspiracy to infiltrate and penetrate to the highest office? Why? For what gain? If not, why do you feel it necessary then to point out they are Scottish? Are you not against 'attempting to divide people for narrow political gain', as you are against any 'huge...conspiracy'?
"You choose to drag in Ireland. Did you not read that the leases of all the top shops in Grafton Street are up for sale and their government is pumping more money into shoring up the economy. Do you know any Irishmen? Their reasons for being well out of the UK have nothing to do with economics."
And therefore Scotland's reasons for getting out of the UK need not be based solely on economics. I'm back at my #199. :-)
Complain about this comment
#170. rabbiehippo
".... all i said was that aye_writes #128 independence blog address should have ended in .scot as opposed to .uk .... "
Good point! Maybe having both working in a search engine would be best. :-)
Complain about this comment
Approaching New Year and not a lot has changed. Just noticed Anaxim and post 176. Just about the silliest post I've read in years.
Neil Small on post 185 runs it close. Seems to have missed the fact that we're all in the EU and thereare no borders for businesses inside this union.
The Brigadier and RE rely almost entirely on perjorative bluster and invented "facts".
The risible nature of most of the unionist arguements against independence is very heartening indeed.
As a matter of interest as a young teacher I decided against joining the EIS and joined a union called the SSA instead. I had worked out that the EIS was just the educational wing of the Labour Party. Nothing appears to have changed and the EIS attack on the SNP inspired concordat with Scotland's local government is described today by COSLA as "pure pantomime". That quote doesn't get any headlines however in Scotland's unionist media.
Complain about this comment
Britain faces 2.9-5% projected "negative growth" in the next year - depending on which major financial body you listen to. The US is not facing predictions as stark as that. Is this Gordon Brown's 'prudent' and 'economically well-placed' country?
The games up, Gordon needs another terror attack or similar to shore up his position.
Complain about this comment
206. At 10:14pm on 27 Dec 2008, cynicalHighlander wrote:
201. Neil_Small147
"As for the numbers for a referendum. You then tell me what you think is suitable. If I recall there was a minium requirement for devolution. This is not your bog standard general election. This is a massive change that will huge effects if it all goes wrong."
How many were allowed to vote for the Union 300 years ago?
------------------
For goodness sakes! The "300 years ago" is in the same vein as the blooming England football team of '66!
Most people don't care! They want to know what will happen tomorrow.
Or is there a conspiracy theory that Labour somehow "fixed" things then? :p
Complain about this comment
213. At 11:45pm on 27 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
Seems to have missed the fact that we're all in the EU and thereare no borders for businesses inside this union.
--------------------------
In that case, what the hell is the point of independence?
Business runs the world these days, not politicians.
Complain about this comment
I completely disagree that there should be some a pre-established minimum for voter turnout. Why should those who voted yes be held to ransom by the no vote in such a way? Why should apathy be interpretted as support for the status quo if a yes vote carries it? There's simply no depths to which Unionists won't sink in order to stifle independence.
It does matter that 300 years ago no such vote was held. It shows the hypocritical basis upon which Unionists and Unionism resides especially in relation to this referendum.
The point of independence within the EU is to assert Scottish interests in a way in which Westminster and Union have categorically failed to do. In fact quite the opposite. Scotland has been used as a expendable bargaining chip in these regards.
Complain about this comment
I must apologise to others not wishing to be involved in the threads where I post some long posts!
It's not funny for any posters who wish to continue raising their points against mine, to have to read my long post in order to do so, either!
But I sometimes see that as all fair. :-)
Complain about this comment
#175 brigadierjohn
"I just don't care anymore about who might win in the end. We are but a speck of dust on a huge planet. Tell Alex, someone."
As an arguably even smaller speck of dust, how can I expect you will listen to me?
I have no credentials that would permit me to post on political blogs, or anywhere. (I am no ex-teacher, ex-journalist or ex-'any-other-respectable-thing'.) ALL I have is the guts to comment.
But, groovy as your dust analogy is (this is after all merely a forum for airing views), it does not negate my, nor your, responsibilities to the next generation.
To quote Freddie Mercury, "Nothing really matters...". It's true probably over 99% of things don't really matter, but I'd guess the purpose of that therefore is to by contrast, highlight the little things that do really matter, and allow us to distinguish them from everything else.
One thing that matters is how you treat your children and their future, their quality of life. Of course I do consider that, as a parent, I am bound to fail. But I must try. I cannot give up. Just look into their faces.
It is bad for them as developing individuals to live in a non-sovereign nation. It's damaging to little minds, as children take in the situation around them all the time - they cannot be shielded from it.
I owe them nothing less than my best efforts to fix that.
You may correctly say this response is emotional. You may well be able to say it is valueless because it is irrational. I could post research data to back up my assertions and you could post research data to invalidate them and back up yours etc. To get to the truth via research experiments would traditionally take years, or even decades.
But you can take any argument and deconstruct it so that it is proved irrational e.g. we should not give to charity, as there is no logical reason why we should feel empathy towards suffering people we've never met, and to give is merely to make ourselves, not those we give to, feel better etc.
Those who do this and are smug about it, forget that they are denying the very nature of what it is to be human. They at the same time forget their own inevitable irrational decisions in their day to day lives, whether it be over which chair to sit in or what present to buy etc.
We do not need to excuse emotional decisions. They are not naturally a human weakness but can be an asset. Imagine life without them. (Are we to be totally without morals?)
This argument above all for me, is why Scotland should be independent - for the emotional wellbeing of her next generation.
To redress a subtle, possibly even ignored, effect of the Union, perhaps, but the equally subtle removal of it could, potentially, unlock Scotland's potential. I hope you can imagine what I'm getting at.
I do post long posts without a worry, to those who post unionist posts without a worry! It might irritate, but then...well, you catch my drift. ;-)
Complain about this comment
If 'nothing really matters' then let Scotland have fiscal autonomy tomorrow ;-)
Who cares what anyone's background is. Comment away...
Complain about this comment
#216
Very poor
You'll have to do better than that.
Are you suggesting that Germany and Italy and France are not sovereign, independent states because they all belong to a trading union? (and from which, as sovereign independent states, they can all freely negotiate their way out).
As has been brought rather abruptly to our notice recently business does not run the world.
Complain about this comment
#205 cynicalHighlander
"aye_write
Had to read your first "points to note" twice to correct a maligned judgement, I initially read on my part, of yourself."
I had to read the above twice! I can only guess you weren't aware I am merely a 34 year old housewife with a bee in her bonnet?
Well, no deceit intended. I assume, no doubt unfairly and for no real reason that a lot of posters on here are probably retired gents! But who knows! ;-)
"needed a rant hope it's decipherable."
I agree as we get older we become more allergic to change and there are many who like to perpetuate their own personal romance that, like back in their day, Britain is 'still Great' etc. etc. To be completely heartless about it, they will at least, in the short to medium term, all die!
#214 pattymkirkwood
"The games up, Gordon needs another terror attack or similar to shore up his position."
Admiration for your train of thought patty!
:-)
#220 bluelaw
"If 'nothing really matters' then let Scotland have fiscal autonomy tomorrow ;-)"
Obviously I agree. :-)
You would seem to demonstrate the guts and optimism I once expected all Scots would have, in their (also assumed) enthusiasm for independence. So, it's jolly good you exist!
Of course Scotland has to take a bit of a punt when it comes to independence - without a crystal ball there is no way to avoid it.
However, practically every single one of us has had to tackle life this way, and usually more than once. How else would we learn to ride a bike, drive a car, swim or even get on a plane?
Independence for nations like ours is not similarly untried. One example, where we have less in common than with our neighbours, is my #126.
#221 sneckedagain
Of course you are right to point out that in Europe, like international relations generally, it's usually power politics at play i.e. sovereign states trying to get or hold on to as much power as possible.
This is why, as I put to Neil_Small147 in my #27 from ‘Waiting game’, Scotland needs to be independent so to get a voice and take part in these negotiations.
Complain about this comment
#174 cynicalHighlander
"Diomhair
Its on again tomorrow 28th at 22.00pm."
Billed as: 'The story of how successive Labour and Conservative governments up until the 1970s worked behind the scenes to discredit the Home Rule movement and the SNP - as revealed through once secret papers now available from official archives.'
Seems to substantiate my earlier prophecy about the Westminster unionists desperation to protect the union, and therefore, the treasury's big dirty misspending secrets. Wouldn't it be interesting to see that info. from the 70s, 80s, 90s and now? I see headlines galore...
Complain about this comment
Brian:
A merry christmas to all of you at bbc in scotland...and everyone else in scotland....
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
I see that Jim Murphy has has an article in Scotland on Sunday.
Strip out the usual silly party politics such as "the SNP are narrower. They seek to mimic our values because Labour's social democratic values are Scotland's" We all know that there is little separating the social and economic policies of the Scottish parties. None of them uniquely can claim to represent Scotland's values.
His defence of the Union is limited to "Because there is very little patriotic about walking out on the most successful, and longest-lasting, union of nations on Earth. Quite simply Britain makes Scotland bigger, while Scotland makes Britain broader." which is both historically and politically inaccurate.
Historically, the Spanish union of nations is much older than the UK. Indeed the Scottish nation itself is a successful union of much older "nations" (Picts, Scots, Britons, Norse, Amgles etc). The UK, on the other hand, is characterised by never being a complete union, but rather a marriage of convenience, which has become somewhat limiting.
Politically, Murphy misrepresents the Nationalist position - the union with the other parts of the UK will continue within the wider European Union.
He has the limited Labour vision which allows him to say "This Union which we helped build allows us to maintain our identity and be part of a larger whole." and not see that as a nation within the EU we will be part of a much larger union. It is the UK Unionist position that is narrow and limiting - not the Nationalist one.
Of course, Murphy reveals the true focus of Unionism in this - "We are game-changing players in the UN, EU and G8" The UK Unionists want to pretend that they are "big players". In reality, it can't be afforded and we are all suffering the effects of Labour trying to "keep up with the Americans". He's a sad little man.
Complain about this comment
I don't see the point of being pessimistic. I do admit though that if a No vote wins in 2010 and it seems as if independence will be delayed for at least a decade or so then very reluctantly I'll be leaving Scotland for good (and probably bound for Sweden as being a Gers fan in Ireland doesn't really appeal ;-) A relief to Unionists I'm sure but I'm afraid my optimism has its limits and I couldn't bear to hear people complaining about the state of Scotland yet they had passed up such an opportunity for real and substantive change. But the optimist in me is confident my fellow Scots won't disappoint, they won't be put off by the lies and scaremongering and they will take their courage and return Scotland to her rightful place amongst nations.
oldnat
It gives me heart to read the pasting Murphy gets on the comments section afterwards. He deserves nothing less than contempt.
To borrow from one commentator. Is this the progressive inclusive Murphy who voted for ID cards, student top up fees, Trident, Iraq, Anti-terrorism laws etc ad nauseum...
Hmmmmmmmmm as some would say....
Complain about this comment
220. At 00:56am on 28 Dec 2008, bluelaw wrote:
If 'nothing really matters' then let Scotland have fiscal autonomy tomorrow ;-)
------------
It might surprise you but I agree with this. However, this is the next step if you wish to go for full independence. If the SNP - or whoever is in power - can prove they can run the economy properly, then I would suggest that most people would go for full independence.
This will never happen under a Labour administration in Westminster, but it might under a Conservative one.
--------------
221. At 01:10am on 28 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
#216
Very poor
You'll have to do better than that.
Are you suggesting that Germany and Italy and France are not sovereign, independent states because they all belong to a trading union? (and from which, as sovereign independent states, they can all freely negotiate their way out).
As has been brought rather abruptly to our notice recently business does not run the world.
You are one of the most insulting individuals on this board. You approach any argument or criticism of independence as though you are marking homework.
Business DOES control politics. if not, then why did the SNP accept a substantial donation? An lo and behold public transport remains unregulated. Sheer coincendence of course. Most large donations to political parties are from companies.
It boils down to revenue. No tax revenue and as a politician you are sunk. Businesses these days can operate anywhere. Look at Dyson. Therefore a business has a significant influence on politics.
And please try and accept that criticism of independence proposals is essential. There are dangers in full independence that must be examined. Patriotism and emotion cannot deal with most of these.
Complain about this comment
Re Murphy .... i always thought he looked like the tall 'gentleman' in Men in Black. Can Greetings_Earthling confirm if he passed him at some point at the Intergalactic Imigration Station ?
Complain about this comment
Britain plunges down world economic table
"Worse is to come, according to the Oxford Economics projections, because of the recession and the sliding pound. “UK GDP per capita in 2009 will be 24% lower than in America and will be over 15% lower than in Japan, Germany and France,” said Adrian Cooper, managing director of Oxford Economics.
“It will even be 7% lower than GDP per capita in Italy, where economic performance has been very poor over the past decade."
Is this what the "Wisnae us party" meant in being stronger together!
Complain about this comment
Neil_Small147 states:
"And please try and accept that criticism of independence proposals is essential. There are dangers in full independence that must be examined. Patriotism and emotion cannot deal with most of these."
Ah, but that's the beauty of nationalism. Patriotism and emotion can deal with these. Anyone who says there's a problem can be derided as being unpatriotic or emotionally damaged.
A society so orientated can stagger onwards in the face of reality for quite some time, especially if there's oil wealth to paper over the economic cracks.
Complain about this comment
#221
I note that you (not very cleverly) avoid addressing the actual point I made.
Continuing very poor.
Presumably the problems that independence brings are faced on a daily basis by all the 150 plus independent countries in the world.
Is it just that you believe we are a uniquely incapable and stupid people that you think we couldn't deal with them?
Complain about this comment
#230 Anaxim
Desire for a superior economy is not the one and only, 'greedy' as you see it, reason why there are is a lot of support for independence.
Emotion is of course also a valid basis for making a decision. To deny that is to deny that you are human. Perhaps that is true of you?
To sneer at anyone who criticises you for lacking an emotial connection to your own nation is also to seek to be less than human. Futile, of course, as the sneering already affirms it through your very human failings.
Maybe it is something to aspire to be non-patriotic and non-emotional, but how attractive is someone then?
It's merely an attempt at ugly superiority for self-satisfaction which backfires, pro-robot and anti-human.
So, I will give you your contrast.
Complain about this comment
Aye_write (ad infinitum!): I'm deeply moved by your close attention. Are you perhaps trying to convert me? Even so, I'm an admirer - your passion and belief are clearly heartfelt and therefore valuable.
Please understand, I did not say (and if what I said was misunderstood let me correct it) that I would deny your children any of the things you list. That is your interpretation, based on your prejudices. We all have them.
But to be opposed to Independence on any terms so far mooted, is not to deny anyone their future, their liberty or right to self-determination. When there's a plan, we'll all vote on it. Simple.
Meanwhile, I'll continue to make fun of the preposterous people here, whose over-the-top ravings are actually holding nationalism back. They make me look like a moderate!
Allow me to be facetious. The Gettysburg Address has already been done. Mel Gibson didn't even come close. Your try was better.
Perhaps you have political or literary ambitions? I wouldn't dismiss your chances, but, if you'll permit me to say it, you need a harder, sharper edge and a more economical style. Short sentences really work. If you want to communicate. See what I mean?
To my other admirers, too many to mention, thank you for giving the extra oxygen of publicity to my views by quoting them so extensively. I'd never be this famous without you all. And to my mother, (sob), no, I can't go on. Too many tears....
Festive greetings to Comical Ali, Walter Smith (it's my team, too, bluelaw) and all the other deniers of the blindingly obvious.
:-) :-)
Complain about this comment
#233: When I said "short sentences really work" I was not in any sense endorsing the views of Kenny McAskill.
Complain about this comment
231. At 1:31pm on 28 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
#221
I note that you (not very cleverly) avoid addressing the actual point I made.
Continuing very poor.
Presumably the problems that independence brings are faced on a daily basis by all the 150 plus independent countries in the world.
Is it just that you believe we are a uniquely incapable and stupid people that you think we couldn't deal with them?
-------------
Germany and France, especially Germany, are different cases to Scotland.
As for not addressing points, I am still awaiting your research findings when I challenged you to the true cost of university education to the taxpayer in a previous topic.
I have never, ever stated that the people of Scotland are too stupid to deal with the issues of independence.
What I want answers to are the consequences of independence. Many people, starting with Alex Salmond, points to other countries. That is, until things go pear shaped for them.
Scotland has a wealth of talent, as does much of the UK. Unfortunately, successive governments have failed many times to capitalise on this.
But once again you are back in classroom mode. This attitude of "look at everyone else we will be the same" is flawed. Sure, it is important to look at the success of other nations, but also to look at the failures. Iceland is a prime example.
You must accept there are many issues which will arise come independence. Have you actually considered any?
Complain about this comment
#234. brigadierjohn
I knew you weren't horrible! ;-)
Guests are coming, so I'll reply (KISS - keeping it short and simple, right?) later.
:-)
Complain about this comment
#225 read the article Oldnat, it's just another bland piece of Brownism, I doubt if Murphy even wrote it.
#227 Neil makes some valid points; independence should not come about from one giant leap, but through a number of measured incremental steps, fiscal autonomy being one of them. as each step is implemented, tested and proven Scotland can progress towards full independence (if so desired). Already some of those steps are in place, who would have thought 20 years ago we would actually have a Scottish Parliament? 10 years ago who would have thought we would have an SNP government?
Over the next 10 years I think what we will see is the transference of more powers (including fiscal autonomy) from Westminster to Edinburgh. Global Gordon will not be around in the next 2 or 3 years. Governments will change in Westminster and at that point the relationship between Westminster and Edinburgh will change, how for example sake would a Scottish Labour government handle a Tory Westminster government.... I can hear the cries for fiscal autonomy coming from it already.
The proposed vote in 2010 I think will not produce an independence vote, but it should not be viewed as a shattering earthquake of failure, think of it more as the bridge being built across the great gorge to independence has been damaged but the movement of the tectonic plates is making that gorge become narrower and narrower.
I think the key words are patience, perseverance and realism.
Complain about this comment
230. Anaxim
-Ah, but that's the beauty of nationalism. Patriotism and emotion can deal with these. Anyone who says there's a problem can be derided as being unpatriotic or emotionally damaged.
A society so orientated can stagger onwards in the face of reality for quite some time, especially if there's oil wealth to paper over the economic cracks.-
Why did Gordon Brown's Britain spring to mind and his insistence on a British football team in the London Olympics?
Complain about this comment
#150 brigadierjohn
Bravo! That sparked the blog to life after all the Christmas torpor.
Or was it that you realised that what GB has done to the GB pound means you can't afford to retire to Cyprus if/when it all goes SNP-shaped here?
"A weak currency is a sign of a weak economy is a sign of poor government" to paraphrase the aforementioned GB.
I don't like him either and he is my MP.
Complain about this comment
#239 handclapping. Of course I can afford to retire to Cyprus! If you knew how much the Unionist parties paid me to come on here..... Oops! :-)
Complain about this comment
#235
As I have been 50 years in the independence movement I think you can take it that I have looked at all the issues .....and you are still avoiding answering my point.
"Germany and France, especially Germany, are different cases to Scotland"
How exactly ? Why? What's that got to do with the issue of independence or anything we are discussing? Unsupported assertions don't cut it.
I have no idea about the real cost of university education and as every country in the world - big or small, rich or poor - runs and funds its own universities according to its means I really don't know what it has to do with any of the issues about Independence here either.
Let me put some questions to you in simple terms.
If you can deal with them without going off sideways to avoid giving answers it would be very useful.
Q1. You implied that Scotland becoming independent would somehow disadvantage Scottish business because trade links presently with the rest of the UK would become problematic.
How, exactly?
Q2. You suggest that an independent Scotland might have some problems.
Do you think any sensible person believes otherwise?
Do you think all the other independent countries don't have problems?
Do you think the bankrupt UK has fewer problems than an independent Scotland might have?
Do you think Scots are inherently less able to deal with problems than anybody else? Do you think, as a general rule, that it is laudable and sensible to look after yourself, take decisions based on your own needs and sort out your own problems?
How would our good friends the English react if you came at them with the sort of scaremongering rubbish you are using (pretty ineffectually it has to be said) to undermine the potentials of independence for Scotland.
Would the English react to problems by agreeing that they should be ruled by France or Germany?
There are probably a number of good reasons for maintaining the Union. Nobody has told me any of them yet and I certainly have got none from the resident unionists on this blog.
Complain about this comment
237. At 2:42pm on 28 Dec 2008, InMyKip
"I think the key words are patience, perseverance and realism."
Excellent post. This is the sort of attitude that needs to be adopted by ALL sides. Slinging mud and insults at each other simply because they do not share the same political views is both immature and potentially dangerous.
You win arguments with persuasion, diplomacy and most important of all, honesty.
Complain about this comment
241. At 4:05pm on 28 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
#235
"As I have been 50 years in the independence movement I think you can take it that I have looked at all the issues .....and you are still avoiding answering my point.
Unsupported assertions don't cut it."
Then explain your comment about not knowing about student funding? You have made an assertion there.
As for your time as a supporter for independence, certainly respectful, but I want to ask you two questions:
1. Are you fundamentalist or gradualist?
2. Who's better; Jim Sillars or Alex Salmond?
I know a little of the SNP's history (and no not by scanning Wiki or Google). Correct me if I am wrong, but is the SNP not the product of two separate parties joining together?
And for all those who are in denial about Alex Salmond talking about Iceland:
http://www.alexsalmond.org/podcasts/
(I don't know HTML but I'm sure you can suss it out)
To be fair, I'll try and dig out some of Labour's as well.
Complain about this comment
who is dennisjunior1 and why did he add a post to vitually every one of Brian's blogs last night, was someone on the BBC nightshift short of something to do last night?
Complain about this comment
#232 aye_write
Swing a sack of false dilemmas and impugning someone's humanity are precisely the sort of debating tactics that do so much to destroy productive discussion, and with it, any chance of improvement.
Complain about this comment
#243 I admit it would have been nice to join the 'arc of prosperity' as Alex described it, but it looks like we will just have to make do with Global Gordon's relocated "Bermuda Triangle" New York, Reykjavik, London.....you know the one where vast sums of money fly into and mysteriously disappear.
Complain about this comment
Can someone explain to my why Labour loves the council tax so much and is so much against LIT ??
Me and Mrs Rabbiehippo are paying a 1000 quid a year in council tax. We have no streetlights (not that we want them), no pavement outside our front gate,no pavement up to the school, we have to pay our kids bus fares,we have to pay their school dinners despite the fact its too dangerous for them to come home for dinner due to the lack of pavements. People who live in the town have maybe 4 earners in the house yet they are only paying half of what we do yet they have all the amenities they could want. Also the council has reduced bin collection, to once every 2 weeks . So we are supposed to recycle bottles,cans etc. Does the council come and collect these items .... no ! This has to be done at our time and expense. Im basically paying a small fortune for the bin men ..about 20quid a time . Does Labour not see that by having the money collected by the taxman will save a fortune every year. LIT ... bring it on. It would certainly be a lot fairer to me.
Complain about this comment
#245 Anaxim by continually in your postings attempting to link support for Scottish independence with some extreme negative nationalistic movement akin to something like for example the BNP you are as guilty negative debating tactics as those you accuse, sort yourself out then you might find people willing to debate with you.
Complain about this comment
#245 Anaxim
I honestly didn't know you were bothered about 'productive discussion'.
Maybe slagging off the nationalists, nationalism and associated notions of an independent Scotland is productive for you?
(It produces results for nationalists as it makes opposing them seem more cock-eyed.)
So can you then look my boys in the eye and explain to them they and their nation aren't worthy of political independence? You tell them why they must rely on another nation to take decisions for them. You make them understand why this is 'right' and make sure they aren't feeling less valued and less confident when you're done.
If you think the above is a 'false dilemma', I say for the next generation of Scots growing up, it is impossible for it to be. Would you not have to obliterate Scottish national identity first?
Complain about this comment
#243 Neil_Small147
"1. Are you fundamentalist or gradualist?
2. Who's better; Jim Sillars or Alex Salmond?"
Neil, you always take pains to sound so rational, but I suspect you are a bit of a secret stirrer! ;-)
Complain about this comment
#247 rabbiehippo
- Can someone explain to my why Labour loves the council tax so much and is so much against LIT ?? -
Council Tax comes with Benefits and if you are getting benefits from that nice Labour man at the Council you're going to vote for him. ( They think they will return to power! )
Those that can, pay and unfortunately the salaries of MPs, MSPs, Union Secretaries, etc. are such that they will pay, whereas the Council Tax can be claimed as part of the expense of running your constituency office from your back bedroom. ( When you are as poor as an MP, MSP, etc. money counts! )
Complain about this comment
#250. aye_write
I suspect Neil_Small147 wishes for a blueprint with every "i" dotted and every "t" crossed before he will commit, I have looked for independent countries where this has happened but have drawn a complete blank, maybe he could find one. I actually wonder how he ever committed to buying his house before insisting that the kitchen was changed to suit his partner's wishes and all that extra insulation in the loft was not preinstalled and all other modifications likewise before signing up.
All a country needs is a functioning government an ability to feed, house and supply energy for the populations needs. Bingo a self sustaining basic no frills country where the extras come with time, commitment from the willingness of its occupants and its inbuilt natural resources.
If thats not enough it shows how mollycoddled society has become and there is no hope for anyone with the world's dwindling resources.
Complain about this comment
#243
Sideways - as expected. No answers to the actual questions.
Information section.
Questions from the past
Jim Sillars is a member of the SNP who has sought no position in the party for over ten years so that question is meaningless. He is much respected, however.
I support whoever leads the SNP.
The "fundamentalist" and "gradualist" positions in the party are basically invention of the febrile minds of anti independence journalists.
We all know our progress will be gradual but that is not a strategy.
The SNP was founded in 1934 by the merging of the rather aristocratic Scottish Party and the National Party of Scotland. A founder member and first chairman was Robert Bontine Cunningham-Graham who left the Labour Party to help found the national movement. Other founders included John MacCormick, novelist Sir Compton MacKenzie, the then Marquis of Montrose, E Roland Muirhead and my grand-father who was just an ordinary if enthusiastic member.
Complain about this comment
#247 - rabbie, the reason is very simple. Lit is a SNP idea, so is obviously bad, while Council tax is less bad because NuLab can't think of an alternative that doesn't sound like LIT or son of poll tax.
As the latest Scottish Lab press release (carried almost verbatim on this very web site) states, the last thing Scotland needs right now is to spend 18 million a year administering LIT. The fact Council Tax cost over 60 million a year is irrelevant. Saving over 40 million a year in admin costs is the last thing Scotland needs right now.
Complain about this comment
#252 cynicalHighlander
I feel slightly like apologising to Neil_Small147 as I did laugh a lot at your post!
No doubt though he will have an answer. Neil?
Complain about this comment
#244 InMyKip wrote:
"Who is dennisjunior1 and why did he add a post to vitually every one of Brian's blogs last night, was someone on the BBC nightshift short of something to do last night?"
He's at it again...! Go on, reply! ;-)
Complain about this comment
250. At 6:02pm on 28 Dec 2008, aye_write wrote:
#243 Neil_Small147
"1. Are you fundamentalist or gradualist?
2. Who's better; Jim Sillars or Alex Salmond?"
Neil, you always take pains to sound so rational, but I suspect you are a bit of a secret stirrer! ;-)
------
Damn, found out!
I do like to stir things occasionally. But I am serious about most things. I don't have any specifics when moving house. I did all the insultation myself btw, albeit to specifications of maximum 1mm gap between rows.
The kitchen had to have nine standard 13 amp sockets, each recessed 5mm into the wall :p
#253 sneckedagain. You need to lighten up. I'm not against independence in general, but if we must go there it has to be gradual. I put the question re Jim Sillars in there deliberately. He is far more fundamentalist - and that is not a term used by "anti-nationalist media" - than Alex is. I don't make my decisions from reading tabloid junk (or broadsheet either these days). Hence the reason for the link to Alex's blog from May. He really should have closed that one off.
Complain about this comment
Just watched that BBCAlba programme. Wake up Scotland! Look at what has been done to us!
Complain about this comment
#257
I'll lighten up when you answer some of the very simple questions I asked you.
Complain about this comment
Just finished watching Diomhair on BBC Alba, what can I say, who would have thought that those honourable gentlemen in Westminster and in Whitehall over 30 odd years ago would have abused their office and powers and conspired to derail any notion of Scottish devolution or independence.......but the information in the released cabinet papers highlighted by this programme show that they did just that. Whether you support independence or not their obfuscation of the truth, their downright lies and deceit is a shocking abuse of their duties. What do I think of these people.....it's unprintable but the last word in the sentence would be scum.
Looking at todays scene, some of the conspiracy theories I've seen on here no longer look silly or unrealistic, I've no doubt that Gordon Brown given the type of flawed personality he has would not be particuarly honourable when it comes to getting his own way.
Complain about this comment
inmykip
I agree which is why we can't trust these people for another minute. We must become independent now. We can't afford another generation of these people promulgating this disgusting nonsense on us. No more cover-ups or arguments or documentaries in thirty years revealing just how misled and ripped off we have been. Independence now.
Saor Alba!
Complain about this comment
I have never had any doubt about the scale of our task or the depths the unionist establishment will stoop to to frustrate us. If you think the Edinburgh polis setting up naive young nationalists with explosives as Diomhair detailed, or the years of lies, or the strange death of Willie MacCrae were despicable and deeply worrying you must be very aware of what we are likely to get from now on.
Christine Graham MSP established last year that all the police forces in Scotland carry files on SNP activists and operate informers inside the SNP.
I have had honest policeman confirm this to me.
It has been going on for years and will continue. Even as Ireland was starting to rise for independence there were thousands of Irishmen in the pay of the British operating inside the Fenian and Irish trade union organisations. There will be persons of ability in SNP branches and constituency organisations who are there to damage and destroy.
I have been at demonstrations and have had pointed out to me by nat policemen serving police and special branch persons mingling among us and trying to encourage misbehaviour.
A long time ago I was in an SNP Branch in which a young enthusiastic zealot had us drawing up plans to set fire to this and bomb that. By accident we found out that he was member of the RAF military police and we never saw him again.
We are facing interesting times. Spot the plant will be the game we are all soon playing.
Complain about this comment
#262
Take on board that an effective "plant" has to be trusted, efficient and elected into office by others who trust him/her.
They will do great work for the party 90% of the time and then cock-up completely and get away with it because of the good work they have done. They will do this once or perhaps twice and then slip away.
A really successful plant will be on the party's executive.
Complain about this comment
#233 brigadierjohn
Thank you for your comments.
I didn't suppose there was ever any chance of my converting you! So in trying there was nothing for me to loose.
It's the same with advocating independence. If I am already 'disappointed and ignoring it' then I cannot be disappointed (because I am already disappointed and ignoring it!). So it is easy to just carry on.
I’m not sure I was being prejudiced against you. It’s not that I believe you would set out to deny any future generation anything. But does your opposing what (I think) has to occur, to avoid their being so denied, not have potentially the same effect?
Even though you may play down your own personal significance, dissuading voices matter. As you say, on our own we can all be relatively meaningless. Most are ignored. But the force behind change comes from many together. And what is ‘many’ but a collection of individuals. I don’t dismiss your potential influence. You are right, our votes will count. If yours is against independence it would cancel out mine.
On examination of the past, present and resulting projections for the future, I conclude that the Union is having a negative effect on each new generation of Scots. I concede that these effects are not easily detectable. You can disagree of course but not because like everyone I am prejudiced, nor because my views cannot yet be proved. I could be in fact be wrong, or it could be no one else has noticed, publically at least.
I’m guessing you are disinclined to take the chance that is independence because it appears too much like taking a chance? I don’t know. You will see how frustrating that stance appears to supporters. I wonder what you made of cynicalHighlander’s response #252 to the posts of Neil_Small147. I have imagined you may have an affinity with the latter.
Anyway, apologies for the long replies. They were intended for you, more like a letter, plus I figured you might have time to read them and not require simplified points. But I agree with your advice. Thank you. I’d guess I’m lucky to get it. I wasn’t familiar with The Gettysburg Address, but I now get your rather piercing point! Nobody likes an overly sincere proclaimer.
As for aspirations, how would I fit them in? Even if I had the knowledge, education, intelligence, past experience, personality (and not just the brass etc.)... If it was politics, I’d at least have to pay for extensive tutoring from oldnat! As for writing, even with the same from you, again I don’t think I could cut it. I can put a cross in a box.
I'm glad you read my posts.
Complain about this comment
#262 sneckedagain
I like your posts because they are very sobering. I have always thought there have been such attempts as was described in Diomhair. I just thought nobody would be inclined to trust such information when it was mentioned to them. I'd expect them only to hear a raving nationalist. Of course a good documentary is always a help.
I'm sure we will all be shocked and aghast at the scale of the cack-handling of all treasury revenues from the second half of last century 'til now. That would be one great big scandal. I wonder if that information will ever come out - or be leaked.
Complain about this comment
There follows a New Year message to the commonwealth of Scotland. As Her Majesty and the President of Iran are both unavailable, you will have to make do with me instead. I am, after all, as dangerous as one of them, or thereabouts, according to the anglo-unionist brigade or, at least, the anglo-unionist brigadier.
Sombre times give rise to sombre thoughts, as we sit by the fire contemplating the ashes of the old year, which, unfortunately for so many unfortunates, has ended in a bonfire of the vanities. Despair not and be ye of good cheer: recessions eventually recede. Well, they have done so far. But what do they leave in their wake? The current recession - or "the Crisis", as it is simply now frequently called in the francophone world - is threatening to prove to be more serious than any since the 1940s, the decade of conflict and oppression that followed the Great Depression. Will there be conflict, then, or merely oppression? The thought occurs that, on the assumption that that phenomenon could turn up after the downturn or even during it, it may be as well to define what we should understand by oppression, a rather vague and seemingly alien term, so that we are at least somewhat prepared for it.
Clearly, we are venturing here into the fairly insalubrious neighbourhood of deprivation of liberty and suppression of human rights, which we all value, naturally, which is why we have read - have we not? - the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, which, as you will be aware, I presume, was issued and adopted by the Constituent Assemby of France in August of 1789. In case, by some unaccountable mischance, you are in fact not intimately familiar with this seminal historic document, allow me to translate for you the essence of the preamble and the first three articles of it:
"(...) the National Assembly acknowledges and declares, in the presence and under the auspices of the Supreme Being, the following rights of man and of the citizen:
Article 1 - Human beings are born free and equal by right and remain so. Social distinctions can be founded only upon communal utility.
Article 2 - The purpose of every political association is the conservation of the natural and indefeasible rights of man. These rights consist of liberty, property, security and resistance to oppression.
Article 3 - The principle of all sovereignty resides in the nation. No body and no individual may exercise authority which is not expressly derived from it."
In reverse order, let us examine closely what we have just read. Yes, this is where it begins to get a little dangerous. Article 3 declares that the nation is sovereign and implies that authority may not be exercised over individuals on its territory unless the nation expressly sanctions it. It follows that such individuals may be deemed to be subject to oppression if any body attempts to exercise control over them which is not expressly authorized by that nation. Article 2 stipulates that the individual has the right to resist oppressive authority of this type.
This appears to mean that an administration which is not a government exclusively accountable to the nation on the territory of which one resides may be resisted if it attempts to exercise authority over one's nation in ways of which one's nation has not approved. Above all, actions taken by a government which is predominantly accountable to some other nation may not bind a nation in such a way as to deprive that nation of its sovereign right to determine its own fate, this right being as inalienable as an individual's right to be treated as equal and free. Nor may they deprive that nation of the right to resist efforts to do so, for anything which may be deemed to constitute suppression of its inalienable right to self-determination is by definition oppressive and, therefore, to be resisted.
Thus commitments entered into on a nation's behalf without consultation with it on the matter, and which would have the effect of removing from it its capacity to exercise its sovereign rights, may be deemed to be null and void, and the nation on whose behalf such oppressive commitments have been entered into illegitimately may choose to reject them and decline to honour them . . . or even choose to honour them, on the other hand, in point of fact, in a manner and to a degree which it itself considers to be reasonable and just, if circumstances indicate to it that such magnanimity on its part would be conducive to its essential interests.
But in what may oppression be considered to consist potentially within the context of that which the present once-in-a-century economic crisis may leave in its wake, making it more than an economic crisis and transforming it conceivably into "the Crisis" of the 21st century, a seminal event, in other words, comparable in historic significance to the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen itself?
Having referred in passing to the 1940s, as the prime minister of England is reported to be doing in his New Year message, let me cast your mind back to that period. I hope you don't mind. We are, by the way, still treading upon dangerous ground. Watch your step, and I shall watch mine. After the dark and snowy winter days of the Christmas season in 1939, when people in France sat by the fire and contemplated the ashes of the old year, which had brought military conflict hard upon the heels of the hardships of the Depression, the newspapers of no more than half a year later announced the dawning of a new European era of cooperation and progress, under the aegis of France's eastern neighbour, with which it was now announced to be reconciled, the last military forces of the global Anglo-Saxon empire having been forced off the beaches, an armistice having been signed - legitimately, it was claimed, in accordance with the constitution - and a new government of national unity having been formed. The clouds had parted and all was now well, the intense military, political and social conflicts of the previous era having been definitively resolved. People were to go about their business, abide by the laws of the land and be courteous to their guests in uniform as they passed them in the street. You doubt me? Look it up.
There was a fly in the ointment, however, as there generally is: the newspapers of the previous era were still on the coffee tables and the cafe tables, enabling the more discriminating among the citizenry to put the new one into context. Furthermore, more than one new government was formed claiming to represent the nation, each one denying the sovereignty of the other and claiming the loyalty of the people. The leader of the first one went so far as to condemn the leader of the other one to death for treason, and the leader of the other one reciprocated, of course. Which was legitimate? Which to obey and which to resist?
Difficult, very difficult. On the one hand, the venerable victor of Verdun's government claimed legitimacy as the continuing representatives of the nation, on whose behalf peace terms had been arrived at which provided for that administration's existence and for the establishment of a new constitution, which duly came into effect. On the other hand, the de Gaulle government, led by a relative unknown who had shown a clean pair of heels in the company of the English, claimed legitimacy on the basis of a refusal to accept the armistice and upon the basis of a defence of the sovereignty of the nation founded upon the terms of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, from which I quoted above. Whom to support? Whom to resist? The man waving a piece of paper from a distance while getting up Churchill's nose or the man in control of the central-government ministries and bearing the honours and apparent legitimacy of the state, with which he had long been identified?
Which to support? Which to resist? The nation or the state, the one having become dissociated from the other, according to the Resistance? Resistance or collaboration? The nation or the state? Resistance against the state on behalf of one's nation or collaboration with the state against the interests of that nation, according to the Resistance, although the state claimed to serve them? A familiar dilemma, I venture to suggest.
It is easy to choose, of course, at least in principle, if one simply puts the Declaration to one side and declares it to be irrelevant. That would solve the problem, would it not? Of course, except that Marshal Petain, embodiment of the nation though he had seemed to be, was eventually placed in the dock by the general, nonetheless, and was convicted of treason, the penalty for which was commuted, as it happens, because too many people had taken his side. You can hardly execute half the population. It would take too long. Only jesting.
As mentioned above, the current UK PM, who has taken to wartime rhetoric in the face of "the Crisis" (see Nick Robinson's blog on this subject), is endeavouring to evoke the wartime spirit of the Second World War in an effort to revive a sense of British solidarity, especially in Scotland, just as happened in the 1970s, when the last major independentist advance occurred.
Marshal Brown is inviting the electorate of Scotland to choose adherence to the state which has usurped the sovereign rights of the Scottish nation and threatens to maintain that Scotland cannot recover its statehood because the state which is overwhelmingly England has deprived it of its sovereign right to determine its own fate by committing the currently existing state to inordinately crippling debt without obtaining Scotland's consent, consent which it claims that it does not need because of the prior usurpation which took effect in 1707, when again the people of Scotland were not expressly consulted on the matters at issue.
In this case too, as in France during the Second World War, the choice is easy, at least in principle, if one simply puts the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen to one side and declares it to be irrelevant. That would solve the problem, would it not? Provided that all agree to do that, but all do not agree. Therefore, the extreme indebtedness which the predominantly English state has taken it upon itself to accumulate is predominantly England's problem, on which an independent Scotland would take its own view in accordance with its sovereign rights, and negotiations on transitional arrangements concerning national debt and other matters would doubtless be entered into upon that basis, in accordance with normal practice as governed by international law.
For myself every article of the Declaration is an article of faith and that document is entirely relevant to the constitutional debate in Scotland. Nothing dangerous about that, surely, unless the rights of man and of the citizen are dangerous and freedom of expression, which is one of them, is deemed to be a threat to the UK state. Happy new year.
Complain about this comment
The SNP should insist on UN monitors on any referendum on independence. I mean it! We're nothing but an increasingly upstart colony in Westminster's beady eyes.
Complain about this comment
We'll have to outsmart Westminster, that's for sure. Expect them to be dirty, despicable and conniving and we're halfway there.
Complain about this comment
#249 aye_write
"So can you then look my boys in the eye and explain to them they and their nation aren't worthy of political independence? You tell them why they must rely on another nation to take decisions for them. You make them understand why this is 'right' and make sure they aren't feeling less valued and less confident when you're done."
I'd say they are individuals, and that they are not bound to a nation like a genie to a lamp. It's their choice. The concept of another nation taking decisions for them is a nationalist way of looking at life. A British Muslim might make similar objections to another religion taking decisions for them.
Complain about this comment
Loved it, frankly!
Complain about this comment
#266 frankly_francophone: Self-obsessed? Self-indulgent? Petit moi?
Sneckedagain: Maybe Alex is your top-level "plant." Maybe it's one of the posters here. Lots of people are harming the SNP.
Look, who's that behind the lamp post? :-)
Complain about this comment
#264 aye_write: You protest too much. If you have aspirations, base them on your experience of being a woman and a mother, and your passion and commitment. Go for it!
No more self-deprecation, please.
Perhaps I could convert you? Start by shedding the political blinkers.
Complain about this comment
#272 brigadierjohn
To bring it back to topic, don't you mean new style Ray-Bans a la Iain Gray? Or are they too close to the blindfold of the comdemned man?
Complain about this comment
Some posters have demonstrated either total naivety, or more likely mock horror and contrived dismay, at the "news" that the UK has security services. They feign surprise that these services should watch and infiltrate "suspect" groups, who might be impatient with democracy.
Activists, journalists, anyone outspoken, would be on the list. And still are, of course.
Remember, at the time cited, post boxes were exploding, beauty spots defiled by painted slogans, postal threats delivered daily. Then the SNP grew up, I thought.
One of Alex Salmond's first jobs, if he ever becomes PM (or president for Life) of an Independent Scotland, will be to organise and direct a Secret Service to monitor and frustrate those who would harm the country or the people.
He will be open to the accusation that he is confusing "state and people" with his political interests. Par for the course.
Of course there is a thin line between vigilance and oppression. But it has to be walked. And the conspiracy-mongers would to well to learn this.
Complain about this comment
#274 well that explains who moderates these postings.....why it's GCHQ.....their watching you Brig.......be seeing you.
Complain about this comment
#274 quite right Brig the security services have their job to do and so long as they don't abuse their powers in performing it that's acceptable. Last nights Diomhair programme produced evidence that members of the Labour and Tory governments and civil servents in Whitehall and the Scottish Office did abuse their powers...not acceptable. If you think it is acceptable then you have nothing to complain about regarding any of the political parties.
Complain about this comment
#276 InMyKip: Yes, it was Tories and Labour. But is anyone kidding themselves that an SNP Government would be whiter than white? It's a power thing, not really political at all. Like inadequate men who abuse women. Just because they can.
Complain about this comment
Off meantime. may catch your abuse later!
Complain about this comment
#277 it's a fair point Brig, no government is immune from abuse of power, however the governing party of an independent Scotland would be answerable to the Scottish electorate, while with a Labour or Tory Westminster government then the best we could expect is for the offending individuals to be awarded a life peerage and moved into the House of Lords.
Complain about this comment
#278 oh dear Brig what did you put in that post, the moderators at GCHQ certainly don't seem to like it, Gordon Brown's secret police will have your number now.
Complain about this comment
266. At 02:14am on 29 Dec 2008, frankly_francophone wrote:
Interesting post, but having read it twice I have to comment.
The underlying theme is fine, but comparisons of the UK with wartime France is basically nonsense. The French had the choice of surrender or be slaughtered.
The French military was very poorly led, and the Government of the time was very unstable, changing almost weekly. The country was divided before the war. France had no chance to fight the Germans at the time. They were ill-equipped and poorly led.
I wonder what Gordon Brown is wittering on about with "wartime spirit". That doesn't put food on the table. People don't give a toss for his talk; they want decisive action, something that appears lacking.
#277 You are correct: no political party holds the moral high ground. Look at the Green Party, they are ripping themselves apart.
279. At 1:32pm on 29 Dec 2008, InMyKip:
Re the House of Lords. If Scotland becomes independent, what do we do for a higher house? The Government requires scrutiny from those who are generally more experienced. Or would people be confident enough in the leadership?
Complain about this comment
#274
Brig
There has never been any link with bombs, blown-up post boxes and threatening letters (or explosive ones) to the SNP which has an exemplary record in these areas.
There are of course those who will point out the puzzling fact that every time the SNP is doing very well strange characters crawl out of the woodwork and seem to do very silly things.
See my previous posts.
Do you imagine the Irish government would give asylum to a sender of explosive devices to political figures in UK if Britain actually asked for the gentleman to be extradited back to us.
He'd be on the next plane - except he's working for the unionists!
There is such a gentleman in Dublin and he always pops up with exploding letters which he sends around selected unionists just before UK elections.
Complain about this comment
#281 personally I wouldn't be keen on an unelected 2nd house, so it would have to be an elected 2nd house if such a thing was to be formalised.
Gordon's "wartime spirit" simply an excuse to offload the responsibilty on to us and off of him. If the recovery takes longer then we didn't show enough "wartime spirit" if the recovery goes well then good old Global Gordon does it again.
Complain about this comment
#282 sneckedagain: I was expecting your post. One or both of us is very predictable. I suppose the SNLA, Siol nan Gael (or similar name) and Settler Watch were publicly and properly disowned by the SNP. Naturally. Presumably some of the members are now mainstream. I wonder if they have security files.
Most secret service operations, like mystery deaths of scientists for example, are totally deniable and those who perpetrate them know from the outset they will be disowned if caught. Remember Greville Wynne? Make what you will of that.
Is the guy in Dublin not a failed bank robber or suchlike? My memory is hazy, but I remember the story.
Complain about this comment
#280 InMyKip: A bizarre one. All I said was I was going off for a while and would pick up on responses later. I may have made a joking reference to the type of responses expected! But no bad words, nothing personal to anyone. A mystery to me.
Complain about this comment
#281 Neil_Small147
We only need a revising house if the Government has an absolute majority in the legislative chamber. PR makes this less likely.
Would one really, really want a revising house containing the experienced political Lords Foulkes and Watson?
One of the "joys" of independence, if we end up with it, is that we don't have to do it the Westminster way. We could end up with a real Scottish Labour Party; it's almost worth voting SNP on that basis alone.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Brig
Just about everybody in the mainstream SNP believes the so-called SNLA to be an invention of the Special Branch (as was the SRA which preceeded it).
Siol nan Gaidheal is a socialist republican nationalist group which purports to represent the gaelic tradition in Scotland. It makes quite a lot of colourful noise,seems to march about here and there wearing kilts, blowing bagpipes and having fun but avoids useful political hard work like knocking doors, canvassing, contesting elections and so on.
It does however produce a pretty interesting and hard-hitting newssheet from time to time
Adam Busby pops up regularly sending dangerous packages to unionist politicians before elections (always making sure the Daily Record is well informed) but never seems to get arrested despite being regularly interviewed and appears to swan about Dublin making it impossible to catch him (ha ha). He is similar to a "Major Boothroyd" who did the same sort of stuff in the sixties whenever the SNP was growing in popularity. Both of these gents perfected the art of living in comfortable style without any obvious means of support.
None of the above have any connection to the SNP
Complain about this comment
I saw one of the 'Scottish not British' stickers on a tourist sign in a quiet village. Must have been the Special Branch.
Complain about this comment
288. At 7:36pm on 29 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
Brig
Just about everybody in the mainstream SNP believes the so-called SNLA to be an invention of the Special Branch (as was the SRA which preceeded it).
--------------
snecked, I was about to back you up against brig re the SNLA which has no real support in the SNP. The SNLA should never be compared to Northern Ireland issues. Those are deeply complex and are the result of hugely differing circumstances.
But you blew it with your comment about the Special Branch.
Why do people think there is some great conspiracy against the SNP? I'm surprised that no one has ordered the arrest of Jim Sillars for once having the temerity to start a political party call The Scottish Labour Party.
Better check under your bed tonight.......
Complain about this comment
#290 Neil, let's turn your question around a bit, just for the intellectual exercise of course.
Assuming that some great conspiracy against the SNP (or the wider nationalist movement) does indeed exist, how would this manifest itself? What signs would we see if we were to make the additional assumption that the conspiracy itself was to remain covert?
You may wonder what's the point in this playing with hypotheticals like this but then again, you may find the answer to the question you pose.
Complain about this comment
#288. sneckedagain wrote:
- He is similar to a "Major Boothroyd" who did the same sort of stuff in the sixties whenever the SNP was growing in popularity. Both of these gents perfected the art of living in comfortable style without any obvious means of support.-
There was a Major Derek Boothby who proclaimed he was "associated" with a "Scottish Liberation Army" in the 60's. His was not a comfortable lifestyle, whisky was his meals and central heating. He went down for 6 months in about 1967. Had he not been afflicted with the Scotch disease he would have made a first class terrorist leader, indoctrination, camps, armourers all thought out and told to anyone caring to listen in pubs up and down Rose Street for the appropriate lubrication.
Complain about this comment
#281 Neil_Small147
While I have not in my earlier post sought to express a personal view of any aspect of the circumstances in which the actual fall of France occurred, it may be as well to make the point that the account of events leading to it which is generally accepted in the UK is not universally subscribed to in France in all respects among the general population, as one soon discovers as soon as the question is raised, and they do raise it.
Many perfectly reasonable people there today persist in attributing it in part to the withdrawal of allied support despite the assertions which you make and they feel rather bitter about it. Indeed, this view of matters, which was current there at the time, led many people to conclude that support for collaboration was warranted. That is why I have referred to this view, not because I subscribe to it. I have, however, never argued against it in France, because it is impolitic and indeed impolite to do so, for reasons which are not far to seek.
After the fall of France, citizens were unable to avoid being confronted with the choice between loyalty to the state and loyalty to the nation in numerous and various ways on a continuing day-to-day basis. For example, the occupant of the apartment downstairs hears a knock at his door, opens it and has his throat cut by the Resistance, because he had chosen to be loyal to the state and collaborated with the authorities in ways which were considered by the said Resistance to represent an affront to the nation. What view of this do you take? You cannot possibly take any kind of view of it without taking sides, and you cannot possibly take sides without considering whether your loyalty should lie with the nation or the state. The question was unavoidable.
I merely make the point that, in the extreme wartime circumstances in which I have considered the theme of the dissociation between nation and state that can arise and which is a fundamental feature of Scotland's position in the UK, the question of where one's loyalty lies cannot be escaped and thus is more susceptible of resolution.
An external threat, in other words, has potentially transformative power, even if it is not quite what it is represented to be, which is why, arguably, Mr Brown is seeking to present the current economic crisis as an external threat comparable to a wartime one.
It is in fact, of course, not a purely external threat. But may it come to have consequences the gravity of which will be comparable to that of the consequences of the wartime threat to which he has chosen to allude? If so, will people in Scotland rally round the British flag as they did in wartime or will they be brought face to face with the underlying theme of my earlier post, as did happen in wartime France?
If so, will they choose loyalty to the state, as Mr Brown will press them to do? Or will they conclude that the existing state does not serve the best interests of the Scottish nation? The answer to the questions may depend on how serious the crisis becomes and on how badly it turns out to affect Scotland in comparison with the rest of the UK.
Personally, I would be perfectly happy to put the Second World War out of my mind and never refer to it again, but the Labour UK government appears to be intent upon keeping the electorate of Scotland in mind of it. If anglo-unionists insist upon this nonsensical tactic, which, I see, you are less than enchanted with too, they should bear in mind that, when you open a can of worms, a lot of worms come out.
PS. You read my post twice?
Complain about this comment
Unionist commentators are fond of ridiculing independence supporters who suggest a partisan approach to reporting within the Scottish media. The reaction from unionists is usually to exaggerate the claims in order to heap ridicule on it and independence supporters, whilst ignoring clear evidence that it exists.
"Why do independence suppoters believe there is a conspiracy?" they mockingly ask, the answer of course is that the evidence leads us there.
One of the benefits of having the 2007 election followed by both the Glasgow East and Glenrothes by-elections was that it compelled the unionist media to drop any facade of objectivity three times in quick succession.
There are two 'quality' daily journals in Scotland; The Scotsman and The Herald. Both of these papers are now routinely hostile to the SNP, today The Herald run's yet another Labour press release aimed at LIT. There is no examination of Labour claims, they are simply headlined.
This is also true of The Scotsman who, in the last three days has run two anti LIT stories, again Labour press releases.
In the recent Glenrothes by-election The Herald ran 21 pro-Labour campaign articles against only 10 for the SNP, a clear bias.
The Scotsman's anti SNP agenda has been clear for some considerable time, The Herald less so, although this time it has failed to make it's customary re-adjustment after this most recent by-election.
However, the biggest cause of ire amongst independence supporters must be the BBC. This is an institution we are compelled to pay for and as such it should be above partisanship.
The evidence however suggests that the BBC has a pro-Union anti independence agenda here in Scotland.
Where is the evidence you might ask?
Well, in recent time we have seen the BBC apologise for their handling of interviews, their presenting of poll's and their reporting of news.
The infamous poll used by Paxman in the midst of the 2007 Holyrood election was shocking. To remind readers, the poll purported to show that the vast majority of businesses in Scotland were against independence - in fact the poll had been fabricated by the BBC as virtually no business had responded to their question.
There was also the infamous Kirsty Wark interview with Salmond, where Wark's irritation was palpable as was her ungracious manner. Few people actually remember that Salmond's claim re: Al Megrahi was subsequently borne out and that Wark's, in putting forward Westminster's version, was wrong. Wark had introduce the item as "we didn't have long to wait for the SNP to pick a fight".
The third apology was when a BBC reporter, in an item on Holyrood, stated that the Scottish people had rejected independence in the 1997 Holyrood referedum. The Scots had been offered no such option and the BBC were again forced to issue an apology.
We then come to events that elicited no apology from the BBC, but deserve to be mentioned none the less. I'll quickly list them:
1. Glen Campbell dramatically ripping up the SNP manifesto soon after the 2007 election.
2. Mike Dailly, lawyer and Labour activist, appearing live on air minutes prior to a high profile Glasgow East by-election debate, in order to make (false) allegations against the SNP.
3. The same Mike Dailly again appearing on the BBC this time in the middle of the Glenrothes by-election campaign again attacking the SNP.
4. Glen Campbell hi-jacking John Mason in a live by-election debate with a letter and using the contents of the letter in order to aim smears at Mason.
5. The instant removal of Swinney's wife from political items when her relationship with Swinney became public.
6. The employment of a former Herald journalist who's articles were routinely pro-Labour and who infamously described anyone who criticised his writings as 'Vermin'.
The list goes on, the Macrone report, today's revelations that Callaghan blocked an independence referendum, the politically motivated and inaccurate GERS report.
The evidence that the Unionist establishment have, and continue to, conspire against Scottish independence is there for all to see.
Instead of ad-hominem attacks, it would better suit Unionist Scots to address such a subjective manipulation of news and it's presentation.
Complain about this comment
Post 293:
Very interesting and thought provoking.
It raises a question on the Calman Commission, one that has been swept under the carpet by our Scottish media.
Full fiscal autonomy was ruled out because it was deemed to be incompatible with the Union. It therefore suggests that there are Scots for whom the best interests of their fellow Scots (and indeed their nation) are secondary to a treaty with another nation.
If this is extrapolated then the ramifications do not bare thinking about.
Complain about this comment
#289 and 290 inter alia
As a matter of fact, I know someone who used to associate with officers of the Special Branch of the Metropolitan Police in the course of his official duties. Very personable chaps, he found, although it was always a good idea to remember that they were armed. So one took care to laugh at their jokes.
I am afraid that I have to tell you that their sense of humour did not extend to the independence question. Subversion of the integrity of the state is subversion of the integrity of the state even if no law is being broken, and it is their job to prevent it.
As the lift operator said to Hancock as he sought to enter the lift, "Eight persons is eight persons, and you'll have to get out." When it was discovered that he favoured Scottish independence, X was warned off in no uncertain terms. When a chap who is often to be seen at the side of the prime minister tells you he is worried about your future as he fingers the trigger of the weapon that he is carrying, you get the message, unofficially, of course. Well, one doesn't want to end up like Willie MacRae, does one?
Complain about this comment
in response to some of what is raised within this blog, instead of bemoning that everything is wrong, do something positive to make a change.
It is not just an anti SNP media, look at yesterdays reporting of the tories knife crime figures. If you seen the BBC it looked like 5 people killed every day in violent knife crime. the reality is a little different. this is an example of inacurate reporting not in favour of the government.
In Scotland we have devloped a habit of just moaning. We need to stop this and get on and change things. I am not convinced of the need for independance but am open to persuasion. However in debate here and elsewhere I see no effort from the SNP to set a positive agenda and debate the real issues preventing the majority of Scots from voting for independance.
The LIT is a perfect example. I don't believe under the current settlement it will work. I don't believe that the SNP think it will work under the current arrangements. It is a rouse to create a fight with Westminster. What it does do is lower confidence in the SNP to govern amongst those Salmond needs to convince to vote for Independance.
Alec has done little to engage in open honest debate and is every bit as guilty of spin as any labour minister ever was.
Barak Obama showed this year that a grass roots campaign can be fought and won. this should have shown that with some effort the battle for independance can be won. So the SNP need to focus on a positive agenda for 2009, ditch the petty nature of the current debate and move on.
In short we need to stop moaning and get of our backsides and do something positive. Even looking at Alec's arc of prosperity those economies he looks up to so much changed because a consensus for change was built and worked on. Hard work is the only way to change Scotland.
Complain about this comment
293. At 01:13am on 30 Dec 2008, frankly_francophone wrote:
I read the original post twice as after the first time I thought you had joined Gordon Brown in getting the sandbags out!
I understand the situation with French people and their loyalties. But bringing loyalty into the independence question is potentially very, very dangerous.
You only have to look at some of the more extreme posts on here by both the Unionist and Nationalist supporters: ie if you are not with us you are against us. You are the enemy.
Now I know this is not 1930s Germany, but the approach used by some people will alienate supporters. That is why you will never see a political leader use those terms. Alex Salmond avoids this, but some of his less experienced bunch of MSPs do make the wrong statement. This puts people off and makes them question the ability of the SNP to govern and independent Scotland.
Likewise, Labour MPs who dismiss independence without recourse to a serious argument alientate those who sit undecided.
Complain about this comment
Neil Small
I suggest you talk to a few honest policemen.
Perhaps you missed Diomhair on the telly the other night. Great pity. Chapter and verse about unlawful covert police activity against the nationalist movement.
Waken up.
It was "Major Boothby" I was talking about . Easy to wind up and set off.
Apologies.
Complain about this comment
#298
You're at it again
Unsubstantiated assertions.
Instance a few of the "wrong statements" and we'll know what you're talking about.
I don't expect you will.
After all I'm still waiting for the simple answers to the handful of simple questions I asked you over the weekend.
Complain about this comment
#269 Anaxim
"The concept of another nation taking decisions for them is a nationalist way of looking at life."
Thank you for responding. It's always interesting how there are people who accept this point.
I'd like it to be true (smile) and not false. Then I could blow away those nationalist thoughts and my boys would have the choice you say they have.
Firstly, they don't have a choice over absorbing a Scottish identity. It's in the culture that surrounds them. I couldn't make it hold back. Would they not have to live in a box?
Secondly that identity includes living in a nation that was once a sovereign nation. For me, this is key.
Thirdly, given that we cannot avoid or deny that national identity, it is relevant that the majority view of Scots can easily be nullified through force of numbers at Westminster. On reserved issues, Scottish voters cannot vote as 'Scots'. This is inevitably a comment on the status of the Scottish nation.
As for Muslims (and I don't tar Muslims as anything), it's a question of identity. I won't try to qualify Muslim identity! But a Scottish Muslim's identity does involve belonging to a nation that once had, and has lost, its sovereignty.
And that's kinda my point. Had Scotland lost its nation status as well as its sovereignty, I'm not sure Scots would feel quite the need to query the Union, or my point on Westminster, so much.
I've assumed you are in favour of the Union and I assume you see the above views as incorrect and perhaps strange, annoying or even silly? I admit that nationalism can be seen as petty, irksome or ego-centric. But why on earth do you suppose that some Scots will still advocate it? :-)
Complain about this comment
I think the SNP are the only party in Scotland who offer a positive agenda. Unionists do nothing but talk Scotland down. The only 'talking up' they do is when trying to excuse areas when Union has clearly made a hash of things. And I should add the Unionists are also good at talking down to Scots as well if you look at the handling of the GB team issue and the Treasury's cursory dismissals of Scottish govt claims on Scottish money earmarked for nobody and left dormant in a London bank account.
The SNP have responded to grass roots requirements. For decades seemingly the call was for them to prove their competence which they have worked hard to do and indeed going by their popularity in govt appeared to have done so. From the National Conversation and the Cabinet going on Summer tours to free prescriptions, a committment to universal education, LIT and other issues they have very much appealed to grass roots concerns.
It isn't hard work that Scotland needs to change. It needs for the penny to drop and for a majority of Scots to see the absurdity of Scotland's current position in the 21st century. From then on it's all relatively easy.
Complain about this comment
Been doing a bit of research!
The Green Ribbon1
The Green Ribbon2
If that doesn't change a staunge unionist opinion on the union then nothing will, be it a new school or whatever.
Complain about this comment
#294 greenockboy: Most newspapers would change their stance at the drop of a hat if the economics were right. All of them constantly do readership surveys, attitude surveys, social class surveys, etc., for internal consumption.
The question is repeatedly asked (with variations of course): Would you prefer, or would you buy, a paper that strongly supported Scottish National Party values and the Independence Movement? The options are listed in 1-5 degrees of attractiveness the idea holds.
I think you may work out for yourself what the answer has consistently been?
Interestingly, the SNP was offered the chance to call the political shots in a Scottish newspaper, the ill-fated Daily News, set up by redundant Daily Express staff in Glasgow in 1974-75. Willie Wolfe was closely involved. It would have cost the SNP a 150,000-pound investment.
Remember, this was amid the euphoria of Hamilton and Winnie. The Nats looked at it, did their own homework, and decided it wouldn't sell. Plus ca change.
I know it's galling for you, but there does seem to be a universal consensus (at the moment) among the various and widely-differing media, that - just as you can't sell coals to Newcastle - you can't sell Nationalist politics to the newspaper-buying and TV-watching public.
My own tuppenceworth would be that the media are following public opinion, rather than trying to manipulate or change it.
Try to relate it to football. Fans of Aberdeen, for example, are constantly outraged by poor Press coverage while the Old Firm are boosted every day. The media aren't biased against Aberdeen. It's just that 90 per cent of their readers are not interested. It's economics, pure and simple.
I do accept that it's easy to look at many relatively minor instances, collect and collate them, and come up with a conspiracy.
I've worked with hundreds of journalists and only two expressed political opinions to me, both SNP! Most are content to be impartial, almost all are honest to a fault, and none that I know would be party to a conspiracy.
But you'll believe what suits your argument, I suppose.
Complain about this comment
#269, 301 "The concept of another nation taking decisions for them is a nationalist way of looking at life"
in that case in the real world the vast majority of people are nationalist, few if any nation states would willingly give up their sovereignty to another and that situation isn't going to dissappear in the near or distant future. Scotland seeking its own sovereignty is no worse or better than any other nation or people.
Complain about this comment
edit "staunch"
Complain about this comment
edit: "staunch" oops!
Complain about this comment
#303 cynicalHighlander
Thanks for the links. While I had assumed much of this to be the case, I'd never seen the documentary evidence.
Complain about this comment
#178. You are full of opinions , but you don't half write some dross at times. Its cringing apologists liek you that Scotland could do without. We must be the only country on the planet where we want to be ruled by someonelse, told what we can and cannot do and tossed the scraps that they consider we deserve. Until we get a backbone and vote to decide our own destiny Scotland will remain a dump and its down to the likes of you that it remains so.
Complain about this comment
#272 brigadierjohn
OK, thank you and apologies - I'm allergic to anything approaching compliments! But never mind, December silliness will soon be passed.
But before then, a last drop. Maybe it’s true political content can only succeed in sullying any good writing (and in ruining oral conversation), and anyway neither it, nor the political experience it draws from, can ever bring happiness. That I’d guess would echo my Dad. He seems allergic to political conversation now.
But back to politics! :-P
About 'political blinkers', I assume you're saying supporting nationalism is being blinkered? That leaves me quizzical. I'm baffled; it's not purely political for me. I watched how past political events affected others and have puzzled over it. I have decided it would be better for Scots if they experienced living in a sovereign nation.
I don’t think it is a ‘supercure’ for all society’s problems however! But I do think we would have a better chance of tackling them. We’re on a hiding to nothing as things stand.
Perhaps you say the ‘hiding’ would be identical afterwards. I’d say to you, it needn’t be – apart from everything else, I wonder if we need a change to get the change we need. (Don’t we?). If not, then how else?
I’m cutting back my posting on here. Reading the endless circling is making me dizzy and following the straight lines has become a bit too important! Thank goodness for January’s impending sobering breeze.
Complain about this comment
#304 brigadierjohn
I don't know why the SNP worry about the media being "against" them. They've got where they are with everybody out to get them bar that funny wee paper out of Stirling whose name I can't remember.
It only seems contrary because of the democratic way the nats go about their business; democracy = boring, whereas the cliques and cabals in Labour always make good news. We hardly hear about Westminster, it's all about the cabinet and Ministry leaks
I think also that the senior journos have grown up with 50 years of Labour as the only game in town and so don't have any "ins" to the machinations of the SNP. And there must be some, Alex can seem to be sailing along like some white swan on the water but we don't know but he might be peddaling like blazes underneath.
If the journos got off their backsides and did some proper journalism so we got these reports then they would be entitled to some respect as a "Fourth Estate" but as they peddle rehashed Labour PR under their own names they shouldn't be surprised to see their readership falling like a stone.
Complain about this comment
#304, I only buy a newspaper now if it comes with fish n chips in it.
Complain about this comment
#310 aye_write: No, no no! I didn't say supporting Nationalism was being blinkered. Many Nationalist have excellent wide vision. It's seeing ONLY Nationalism that suggest blinkers.
Complain about this comment
Re 302
I don't really agree with you, I think you have fallen into the pre glenrothes thinking form the SNP. THe battle is far from won, the "penny" as you put it will only drop when the argument is made well enough to gain overall consensus. We are a long way from this point.
To get there requires hard work devloping and sustaining a positive agenda.
Like most governments the SNP has done some good things, I can't agree your list is all good, free prescriptions for all isn't a good policy as many can and are happy to pay for them. This doesn't make good use of scarce resources. As the recession bites harder this will be an even more difficult policy to sustain.
It has also done some pretty woeful things. The recent transport announcement was one of the worst pieces of spin I have seen, a lot of bluster and nothing mich else.
So in essence if we are to progress as a nation we need a more positive outlook that addresses our Scottish perspective with unique solutions. Alec needs some good ideas as to how independance would improve our lot. He had precious little to offer so far on the financial crisis, something he should have been able to shine on.
But more work is definatley necessary if we are to progress.
Complain about this comment
#311 handclapping: There is some truth in what you say. I despair of the media at times. There is too much "easy" and "lazy" journalism on the back of PR handouts. Does the SNP not have a decent PR team? I don't know.
The other side of the coin is that editorial departments have been so run down, so may senior people paid off, that there aren't enough people to carry out proper investigation, no experienced seniors to advise and set examples, no real controlling hand to take major decisions. I suspect some journalists get work published when their editors don't even know it's a dressed-up handout.
Those who originate the handouts are well aware of the stresses, and that their propaganda will probably be received uncritically. So it's a vicious circle.
Times have changed. Why pick on journalists? When I was a teenager 50 years ago, almost everyone in the country would claim to (a) believe in a god; (b) respect the Royal Family, and (c) trust the Government. They would also stake their lives on the word of a bank manager, a lawyer or a doctor.
Need I say more?
Complain about this comment
#304
Selective history, brig
The Daily News was to be put up by Robert Maxwell.He didn't actually have the money.
Willie Wolfe, a close friend of mine and also an accountant, had a look at it, decided it was untenable and that Robert Maxwell was a crook. Willie was well ahead of the game. It took others(including the the Llabour party)a few more years to find out how much of a crook Maxwell was
Complain about this comment
314
If you want Alex Salmond to have the power to do anything about the economic crisis then you obviously must want him be PM of an independent Scotland.
He presently has no powers at all to deal in any way with the economic crisis.
Glad to welcome another convert on board
Complain about this comment
#313 brigadierjohn
Oh. Ok.
Well, it's funny because, like some unionists say, I've never yet come across any arguments convincing me of a better alternative!
Taking advantage of enhanced 'power' through Brand Britain and benefitting by going along for that ride for me holds no water.
An affinity for Britain's questionably considerable world status etc., I'd say doesn't stand up to international nor financial scrutiny, and makes inferior Scottish identity, which as you know I think is bad for Scots as people. (If it had been replaced with a British identity by now then it's likely I'd play for team Britain.) And, in any case, if we're riding, I'd rather be in the driving seat than the baby one...
But considering you are right, what better paths are there? You've seen them I take it? I confess I don't get what it is I'm supposed to.
;-)
Complain about this comment
#316 snecked again: Speak again to Mr Wolfe please. I believe he was in before Maxwell, and offered to "do the books" for the co-op. Maxwell came in as a last resort. Everyone knew he was a crook, but his was the only money on the table or the project would die. He did write a cheque, and it did not bounce!
My memory is that the co-op originally wanted to be an independent rival to the Express, but the merchant bankers would not back it. Favour was then offered to the Trade Unions (who could have financed it out of petty cash) but they couldn't agree among themselves. Then the SNP received an offer.
Of course, by his time the writing was on the wall, Maxwell was hovering and Mr Wolfe, an eminently sensible man, opted out.
I will be amazed if he does not confirm to you that the SNP were offered the Daily News as a political platform.
But I didn't choose to "select" history. And I do accept that I may have been misled, as many were in that sorry episode.
Complain about this comment
#313 brigadierjohn
Apologies, now I see you were being practical.
Complain about this comment
#311
It's "The Scots Independent" and its not really a newspaper; it only comes out monthly but it existed before the SNP!
I went to look at the SNP accounts as I thought it would be an "arms length" subsidiary, which it isn't. But have you seen what a tuppeny hapenny outfit the SNP is? They didn't even raise GBP 1 million for the 2007 elections! No wonder they have no PR, they can't afford anyone to do it, so its no wonder they don't get any good press.
How on earth did they get to Government on so little money? They must be hitting the right buttons with people in which case it doesn't matter what the media say the Union has had it. Labour should never have given us the Parliament. But the cat's out of the bag now.
Complain about this comment
#298 Neill_Small147
It would appear to be illogical to attempt to separate the question of loyalty from the independence question. In the constitutional debate it seems to me to be necessary to determine where one's loyalties lie: to the nation or the state. If, as in the case of Scotland, the one has become dissociated from the other, one has to decide whether, nevertheless, the various and multitudinous interests of the nation are adequately served by the UK state which has incorporated it in itself and whether this matters in the light of where one has determined that one's loyalties lie. This approach is equally applicable in both of the scenarios that I considered, i.e. wartime France (having been directed to thoughts of wartime by the UK PM) and present-day Scotland. It is useful to be able to consider general principles in more than one scenario.
I perfectly well understand the constraints by which politicians are bound. They do not apply to those who are not politicians, however, or, at least, not identically or to the same extent. In the real world it is useful to be able to call a spade a spade, so that one is not handed the wrong implement. Try digging a hole with something else. This can work, of course, provided that that something else is a shovel. Hence it may be worth calling a spade a shovel to make a point . . . but never a trowel, which would slow the whole process of cultivating one's garden down abominably.
Be that as it may, at least you and I are not shouting or shooting at one another. This relatively placid state of affairs, however, will not keep political rhetoric out of the war zone, I am afraid. The signs are that the UK government is intent upon rallying Scots around the UK flag in a simulacrum of wartime solidarity while the Scottish Government urges them to pull together in the face of the Crisis as the Scottish nation that they are.
Loyalty and identity are intertwined and are in there being pulled in opposite directions. One government calls upon the Scottish people to unite under the banner of the UK state while the other government calls upon them to unite under the banner of the Scottish nation and to restore its statehood so that loyalty to nation and to state may be unified. If one did not know whether one's loyalty was primarily to the Scottish nation or to the UK state, in which Scotland is a peripheral minority, how would one know which way to turn?
The loyalty question is an aid to clarity of thought, which is, of course, potentially dangerous, as the SB officer monitoring this blog would no doubt agree if we could ask him.
Complain about this comment
#321 handclapping
"No wonder they have no PR, they can't afford anyone to do it..."
Everyone loves a coffee morning! ;-)
Complain about this comment
300. At 11:52am on 30 Dec 2008, sneckedagain wrote:
#298
You're at it again
Unsubstantiated assertions.
Instance a few of the "wrong statements" and we'll know what you're talking about.
I don't expect you will.
After all I'm still waiting for the simple answers to the handful of simple questions I asked you over the weekend.
-------------------
Can you please switch off teacher mode. I'm not making assertions. I was responding to another post.
Your post is precisely what I was pointing out - any criticism of the SNP and bang! Enemy of the state.
Any MSP who decides that the bones of a long dead queen are more important than dealing with violence, bigotry, social issues and unemployment does not deserve to be respresenting his or her constituency. An MP or MSP's primary loyalty is to their constituents. The party should always come second. Of course, with nearly every politican the reverse is different. Robin Cook is probably the best recent example of an MP who showed where his priorities lay.
I'm not going to waste my time providing answers to your previous questions. Not that I do not have answers, but simply that you will respond as though marking a school test.
Complain about this comment
A point of view: Is it because Scotland has been in the Union for more than one lifetime, that the status quo has offered some pragmatic thinkers too many examples of how things have 'worked', that serves to distract, dissuade and disable them from wanting to enact change? If these same people were given a straight choice, with either the same amount of experience, or none, of both scenarios, then a truly pragmatic choice could be made. So therefore they, and Scotland, are victims of their own pragmatism, in that a case for another option, at a disadvantage by not having been lived through, for them is unable to be made?
Off to make tea.
Complain about this comment
#323 aye_wright
My appologies, I'm not one anyone's coffee morning list, so I would miss out on that.
Maybe you're right; I still can't see where the SNP vote came from in Glenrothes but if its from this sort of viral marketing, who knows when independence will become mainstream. I still don't think it will be by 2010 so the failure then should push it off the agenda for another 10 years but then the SNPwill just go back to their old cry of half the Scottish MPs to keep the pot boiling.
No doubt about it, we Scots are destined to live in interesting times!
Complain about this comment
325. At 4:58pm on 30 Dec 2008, aye_write wrote:
A point of view: Is it because Scotland has been in the Union for more than one lifetime, that the status quo has offered some pragmatic thinkers too many examples of how things have 'worked', that serves to distract, dissuade and disable them from wanting to enact change? If these same people were given a straight choice, with either the same amount of experience, or none, of both scenarios, then a truly pragmatic choice could be made. So therefore they, and Scotland, are victims of their own pragmatism, in that a case for another option, at a disadvantage by not having been lived through, for them is unable to be made?
-------------------------
Fair point.
The European mainland has experienced numerous changes, almost every single one due to conflict. The British mainland has been relatively stable due to the fact no one has invaded for a few hundred years.
You are right when you say that given a straight choice many would opt for the status quo, simply because the alternative really is a step into the unknown. And people will also ask what happens if it all goes horribly wrong.
I'm not scaremongering here, it is a serious question. Most voters look at headline news without the analysis. It's one of the ways politicians get their spin across.
Westminster still hold the trump card. They control the money. And until there is a change of attitude down there, I doubt if anyone will allow the Scottish Government full fiscal control, partly as decisions made in Edinburgh could seriously screw things up in England. I'm no economist but if for example taxes were very business friendly up here, then this could have a detrimental effect in England.
So the straight question is possibly the problem for the SNP, since without fiscal authority it is difficult to pose an alternative question. So leaving them with the straight question "yes or no", many voters may opt for the status quo.
Complain about this comment
#304 - There are a couple of flaws in your analysis, brig. Firstly, people tend to buy a paper that reflects their own views (the stereotypical Daily Mail reader may be a bit cliched but is no less stereotypical for that fact). Papers tend to survey their own readership and self-interest groups. Papers DO influence opinion. We, therefore, have a Unionist readership buying a Unionist paper and, when asked, confirm they have Unionist views and what the paper to reflect that. The paper does, the Unionist readership find their point of view validated and so on, and so forth, in every decreasing circles.
What is telling, though, and really highlights how wrong your reasoning is, is that the readership of these papers is falling, drastically. Now, yes, the economic climate will have something to do with that but it's not the whole reason. Could it be that these papers need to re-evaluate their target audience?
Complain about this comment
#324
Away sideways again!
You said some SNP MSP's said stupid things to the party's detriment but supplied no examples. That's unsubstantiated assertions.
The fact is you don't have the answers - or if you do they don't suit your purpose.
Must do better.
( I'm not in "teacher mode". I'm just trying to tidy up your debating skills which are sadly deficient on the evidence so far. Most of the time I can't make my mind up whether you are being deliberately disingenuous, whether you think we are all daft or whether you are just trying to wind us up by insulting the collective intelligence).
Complain about this comment
#328 I'd agree Neil, basic human psychology would decree that the majority of people who have been exposed to the Westminster / Labour conditioning over the last 50 or 60 years would still vote for what they know.
The job of the Scottish Parliament and in particular the SNP government is to create evidence (not propaganda) but real evidence obtained through increased powers and good governance that a well run independent Scotland is a realistic alternative, presented with such undeniable evidence then I believe a sizeable number of people would reconsider their vote.
Also the coming generations who have not been subject to the Westminster / Labour conditioning but who instead are growing up seeing Edinburgh as their main political hub, will I believe demand more powers and as such powers are obtained they will view independence as the natural conclusion to their political desires regardless of which party they support.
Scotland I believe will evolve towards independence not devolve.
Complain about this comment
#330 InMyKip
If I was wanting independence I'd want it a bit quicker!
See news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6057734.stm of 17 Oct 2008.
Now which would be the English and which the Scots?
Complain about this comment
#328 Forteanjo: Wrong, I'm afraid. These surveys are industry standard procedures carried out by accredited market research organisations. The results are presented in a universally accepted format, approved by such as The Avertising Standards Agency (the results are usually shown to targeted advertisers) the ABC (circulation watchdog) and other industry bodies. The researchers choose their own respondents independently.
So, your neat wee theory is blown away like the rest of your dogma.
Readership has been falling for some years now, chiefly as a result of 24/7 TV news. It will fall further, possibly papers will close, as the vital younger audience tends towards electronic sources. But, as I said above, standards have indeed fallen.
So, my reasoning is pretty good. And you, sir, are in a wishful-thinking fantasy land.
Complain about this comment
2 interesting reads for all political divides
Britain’s neo-liberal state
Scottish Labour, where's the coffee?
326. handclapping
I don't think the UK economy will be worth anything if we have to wait another decade as there will be so much outside debt to repay by then.
Complain about this comment
#329 sneckedagain: Try to remember this is not a debating society or a learned institution. Some posters here are deep thinkers, some are researchers, some are unashamed propagandists, some, like me, are just spontaneous commentators.
Nobody needs to account for themselves. Many a true word is just blurted out, many a researched thesis is pure piffle. Let people be what they are.
Complain about this comment
#332 - How right you'd be, brig, if you were actually right. That may be how things were done back in the day, but in the 21st century, most surveys are carried out by on-line market research companies where those taking part are a self-selecting group who have a particular interest. Examples can be seen on various paid for on-line survey website. People sign up on these websites and get paid to take part in market research. There are so many surveys they can take part in, people tend to only take part in the ones that interest them.
So, far from MY dogma being blown away (where on earth did you get that cliche from), your reasoning has been shown, yet again, to be flawed.
Complain about this comment
#332, brig, forgot to add - the Scottish Sun isn't suffering from the same sort of downturn as the likes of the Herald. Is that to do with price, or because it doesn't have the same hostility towards nationalism and the SNP? More evidence of flaws in your reasoning? What's that in the wind? Is that your dogma being blown away (that is just so corny - over-indulgence on the Christmas brandy seems to have lowered your standards!)
Complain about this comment
Interesting that the evidence I cited regarding BBC bias hasn't elicited any comment from unionists save for this from brigadierjohn:
"I do accept that it's easy to look at many relatively minor instances, collect and collate them, and come up with a conspiracy."
It's called evidence, my list was entirely from memory and took around 2-3 minutes to jot down. There are scores of other examples that could be listed, a bit of research would lengthen my list dramatically.
I would ask brigadierjohn to list those examples, from the Scottish media, of bias in favour of the SNP or against Labour. Any apologies issued to Labour by the BBC as a result of political presentation, again in Scotland?
The point I was making was that far from claims of bias being devoid of evidence, the evidence is already there and growing. For this to be chance there would have to be an equitable number of examples that favoured the SNP, but there aren't.
Take a look at the Trump story, a story headlined for months by all major Scottish newspapers. The headlines were totally without justification and merely repeated accusations made by Unionist politicians.
Other, more serious stories have since emerged, complete with documented evidence and third party testimony of political wrongdoing on the part of unionist politicians - yet no such 'Trump styled' campaign has materialised.
We all remember the front page headlines on the Councillor kalashikov, yet nothing on the Labour councillor from Paisley who was charged with fraud, nor anything on the Labour activist who was sacked recently as a result of fraudulanely claiming housing benefit for 14 years.
I don't use the word conspiracy, it is more blatant than that.
As I write, the BBC has just broadcast yet another attack on LIT, adding it on to an item on another business victim of the UK economy. Note that the SNP are under attack from our Scottish media as a result of the shocking state of the UK economy - Brown's name not mentioned.
Nothing on the need for full fiscal autonomy that would allow the Scottish Government to tackle the crisis.
The program also misrepresented 'The Homecoming' by making the ridiculous claim that the SNP have suggested that it is the answer to the recession.
Like I say, not a conspiracy, just brazen partisan reporting and propaganda.
Complain about this comment
#326 handclapping
"#323 aye_wright"
(That might've been a better name...?)
"My apologies, I'm not one anyone's coffee morning list, so I would miss out on that."
No, everyone's welcome. Or, were you barred?! ;-)
I'd thought that the SNP was big and scary enough to roll on regardless of the help of the majority on the periphery, but now I feel rather sorry for it. (It’s more endearing for it.)
It doesn't look like it's 'skint'. There is a donations bit on their website, and a shop, but I don’t suppose that brings in too much. (There wasn’t much of a plea for funds with an emotive, persuading incentive.)
They must know what they need to do gather in big funds, so I wonder what they are doing... I hadn’t thought much about it.
#327 Neil_Small147
“You are right when you say that given a straight choice many would opt for the status quo, simply because the alternative really is a step into the unknown.”
That's very interesting! I didn’t know exactly what I wrote meant (who cares!), but I am saying that any such opting as you describe, would be due to the flaws of the people choosing, and I happen to disagree with it. A more virtuous course would be to take the calculated risk. (Is that not usually required to get all the worthwhile things from life?)
Anyway, people probably won't, unless in unusual circumstances, so that's why I suggested that if they had an equal choice, meaning an equal experience of both options, then they would commit to the change.
Your response I think was more concerned with the current reality and not the hypothetical as was mine, but I presume that's typical of both of us!
I do however think people can be persuaded to base a rational decision on wider ranging grounds (purely evidence-based reasoning will let you down as much as purely instinct-based, and so on) and, although it's an imperfect science, history suggests it's only a matter of time before that trick is mastered again.
Complain about this comment
334. At 9:20pm on 30 Dec 2008, brigadierjohn wrote:
#329 sneckedagain: Try to remember this is not a debating society or a learned institution. Some posters here are deep thinkers, some are researchers, some are unashamed propagandists, some, like me, are just spontaneous commentators.
Nobody needs to account for themselves. Many a true word is just blurted out, many a researched thesis is pure piffle. Let people be what they are.
-------------------
Thanks Brig. Blogs like this are designed to create ideas. I am not going to spend six hours researching a point when there is always the likelihood the information is wrong at the point of source.
It may surprise sneckedagain, but I am actually a professionally trained public speaker with a lot of experience. Subjects have been public information or business. When I am required to give a presentation I spend a week if possible beforehand. I don't have the luxury here. If I had to take part in a live debate you can be assured I would be reasonably prepared.
Sure, some of the stuff I put down is wrong. Everyone does it. But a lot of the stuff is from thinking.
By the way, it was Christine Grahame (SNP) who raised the issue of Mary Queen of Scots remains being returned to Scotland.
My point was that these issues should be left to later. Some SNP supporters seem desperate to get everything done now.
337. At 11:02pm on 30 Dec 2008, greenockboy
One problem with the press at least is that it is the editors and owners who control the output. So any politicial influence over them will be manifested in the output.
While I take your point on the AK incident being given global media coverage, fraud is not that juicy at councillor level. There's a surprising amount of it goes on around the UK. Whereas an adult giving a five year old an automatic weapon to fire is.
The media would have pounced on the councillor regardless of political influence. Look at the facts behind the story. But regardless who told the media, it was the councillor himself who took the actions.
Remember that the media is basically a meritocratic industry. The soruce of information is irrelevant, it's the story that counts.
Complain about this comment
aye_write #301
You lambasted me for being pro-robot, now you're saying that there's no choice, and that people absorb an identity. That is living in a box.
Identity is created by humans, it's not a passive process of absorbing. And it's better to be a creator than a curator.
Complain about this comment
#340 Anaxim
"(...) it's better to be a creator than a curator."
This would appear to be a message that anglo-unionists should consider taking on board in preference to acting as the curators of the "subordinate patriotism" that AJ Balfour referred to in relation to Scottish identity at the time of the Irish Home Rule controversy.
The creation of a modern Scottish state based upon Scottish identity within a broader European framework than the narrow UK one that anglo-unionists seek to preserve is not something that mere curators aspire to.
Curators preserve the status quo. Creators move on from it. Anglo-unionists are the curators of the UK state and of the bogus "subordinate patriotism" that Scots are permitted within its framework. Pro-European Independentists are the creators here.
Living in a box may be inevitable, depending on how you view things. Remaining in the box that you were put in is not. We are not so boxed in that we do not have a choice of boxes.
Complain about this comment
Further to my #341, and endeavouring to think outside the box spontaneously, it occurs to me that, whereas the question of constitutional framework may relate to boxes, identity is organic and concerns roots.
We can be uprooted from our identity, of course, but does anything which is uprooted thrive if it is not replanted in soil which is appropriate for it?
The Scots most definitely have roots, whereas the English have branches.
Complain about this comment
#338. aye_write
Oops, sorry! 8-)
Comes of doing the ancestors at the same time. They were all wrights but the gene passed me by, completely haunless. Can't even spread bread on my butter.
Complain about this comment
#335 Forteanjo: You wouldn't be an obsessive, would you? Even so, you're still wrong.
Have you heard of a Hall Test? I recently witnessed one. A market research group hires a hall (yes) and invites about 200 random people from the voters' roll. They are given a tenner, a couple of drinks and tea and sandwiches. At this point they don't know why they were invited.
It is then explained they are about to consider newspaper "X." They are separated to tables for readers, non-readers, ex-readers, potential readers, etc. They are asked a long series of questions about their own opinions, their views on sections of the paper, any omissions they see, and suggestions they would make.
Then there is a question session, which may involve the editor of the publication.
It is an exciting, invogorating and educational experience, I can tell you.
Results can be patchy. There are people, like you, who are unflinching in their preconceived ideas both for and against publications. But trends are evident and valuable.
It's an expensive survey, but worth it. The electronic nonsense you refer to tends to involve only committed respondents whose views are previously known. It's a test of change rather than opinion.
As for The Sun, it's circulation is falling. But it is spun to show comparison with The Record (The Herald is not its rival). It is doing better than The Record, but still poorly.
Regarding The Sun and Nationalism, a conspiracy theorist like yourself shouldn't be so easily conned. If a Murdoch paper is kind to the SNP, it's only to give him leverage with the Big Two. Toe the line, or else, cobbers!
If Murdoch actually supports you, be afraid, be very afraid of what will be expected in return.
That's how it is, Sunshine. Believe it, or sink in you Maelstrom of paranoid delusion.
#337 greenockboy: The jury's out on your "evidence," without the defence having to call a witness. I'm not going to gratify you by wasting time on lists, but just look at the mileage Salmond has wrung from hijacking the Burns Anniversary. Did the BBC ignore it? BBC London, in particular, seem keen to let him "speak for Scotland" at every opportunity. And why not? I think he gets a fair crack. I don't think he's as villified as McLeish, McConnell and Alexander were. Fair enough by me. But the SNP now ARE The Scottish Government, there to be shot at and held to account. You no longer get free shots at opponents like you did in opposition. Deal with it.
Complain about this comment
Its hogmanay and the question must be how many labour party broadcasts do you think the BBC in Scotland will manage to air today before we reach the new year? GMS this morning was a disgrace with almost every single contributor no matter what they were actually supposed to be talking about still managed to praise Brown. the worst one being the "expert" who came on to talk about the new years honours list and managed to spend more time telling us all how great Brown was. unbiased my backside. public service broadcastor? don't think so.
Complain about this comment
#340 Anaxim wrote:
"You lambasted me for being pro-robot, now you're saying that there's no choice, and that people absorb an identity. That is living in a box.
Identity is created by humans, it's not a passive process of absorbing. And it's better to be a creator than a curator."
By Jove, you are too clever!
I did lambast you. I'd thought you were being a bit nippy. Bad me.
To your comments, I'm not sure it's quite that simple. Neither of us can be that sweeping. I think you are only partially correct and must take account of what I say about identity also being a passive thing. I suppose I was not clear in that I think it's the case only for the majority.
Much as we might not agree, and while I think humans are flawed, there are plenty who analyse and think for themselves about their identity and other things, but most I fear don't want to or bother. And children, who I was originally talking about, I'd say are very willing to accept what they see.
I wonder if what you were highlighting is more the exception rather than the rule. Can you say why more than three generations after the Union Scots still very much saw themselves as Scots, and lots still do today?
Everyone is probably fed up of my explaining! Can you make a case for the Union without it being based solely on the fact that it is the status quo?
PS Might British identity be a dubious place to start?! ;-)
Complain about this comment
#346 aye_write
The case for the Union
"You wanted to join after the Darien disaster. You want to quit after the RBoS and HBoS disaster?"
"You'll just do it again, you know."
Complain about this comment
There's a fundamental injustice surrounding the Scottish identity as part of Union that will never go away. And the only way that can be resolved to some degree is a referendum on independence. Even then though that contradiction will remain. Unionists will never be able to smother it. It's one reason I am no longer a Unionist. IMO I saw the light. Independence is rational AFAIC. It's a sensible, adult, responsible, mature, logical and dare I even squeeze in courageous response to the Scottish circumstance.
Complain about this comment
brigadierjohn says:
"I'm not going to gratify you by wasting time on lists"
Then the debate is over, I have provided evidence to back my claim that the Scottish press and broadcast media are anti SNP/independence.
You argue it isn't yet provide no counter to my evidence, despite stating that compiling such a list is easy.
My guess is that it isn't easy at all and that you and anyone else would struggle to provide evidence that these things happen by chance. They happen regularly, and always to the independence movement.
I say again, this is not a conspiracy, it is far too brazen for that.
Complain about this comment
Here is a couple of jokes to cheer you all up as we enter 2009:
An STV recruiter approaches a talented university graduate and asks if he would be interested in joining a new political commentary show for Scottish TV, the programme to be controlled by Scottish politicians and media personalities.
Who’s the producer?, asks the graduate?
“Salmond” says the recruiter.
“Alex Salmond?” Asks the graduate excitedly
“No”, says the recruiter, “Stevie Salmond, a cousin of Alex – works for the local radio”.
“Oh, I see” says the graduate
“Who’s the editor then?”
“Macwhirter” says the recruiter
“Iain Macwhirter?” asks the graduate in anticipation.
“No” says the recruiter “Bobby Macwhirter, Ian’s nephew - trainee journalist with the local paper, great guy”
“Oh” says the graduate disappointedly
“Who’s the presenter then?”
“Galloway” says the recruiter
“George Galloway?” asks the graduate, again excited.
“No” says the recruiter “Charlie Galloway, local councillor for over 20 years.”
“Oh well, who’s the director then?” asks the graduate
“Gray” says the recruiter
“Aw christ” replies the graduate “not Iain Gray?”
“Aye” says the producer “that’s right”
Duncan Macneil appears on Mastermind
“Name” enquires John Humphreys
“Duncan Macneil?” replies the rotund Labour MSP
“Chosen subject” asks Humphreys
“Bonanza” says Macneil
“I’m afraid that isn’t an appropriate subject Mr Macneil” says Humphreys “This quiz requires something a little more cerebral, history, politics or religion for example.”
“OK then, religion” says Duncan “… not sure about the other two.”
“Your time starts now” says Humphreys “According to the bible, who was the first man on earth?”
“Hoss !!” bellows Macneil
“No, it was Adam” says Humphreys.
“Ach, I knew it would be one of the Cartwrights” says Macneil.
Complain about this comment
BBC "onionist" bias:
Notice the title Scots leaders in 2009 predictions no SNP
Annabel has something to say as does Scot but Gray can't stop talking about the labour party, sad man.
Complain about this comment
#344 Brigadier your quite correct on the situation of Murdoch newspapers. It was pointed out recently that David Cameron wrote a piece for The Sun and it was basically slagging of the funding of the BBC. Now since Murdoch also owns SKY tv this can be seen as a potential conflict. As ive said before .... they will change sides to the Conservatives about 6 months before the general election. I still remember the headline 'Will the last person in Britain please turn out the lights' as Labour got into power .... lo and behold it wasnt long before The Sun changed political allegiances. The are about due to switch as its looking glum for Labour just now. I doubt tho that The Scottish Sun will follow suit .... i have a hunch that they might just back the SNP but i would put a tenner on it just now ;o)}
Happy New Year to you all when it comes. Cheers
Complain about this comment
#351 Thats a dreadful report ... im gonna cancel the direct debit for my tv licence at once.
Complain about this comment
#352 Oops should have read 'wouldnt put a tenner on it just now'
Complain about this comment
#344 brig, you make a lot of generalisations, assumptions and unfounded accusations in your post, but we'll let those slide, shall we? As I said, MOST modern surveys are done on-line these days. The pay, to those taking part, is the same (a tenner) but they are much cheaper to administer (no halls to rent) and collate (the website does the donkey work). The olde methody you witnessed was probably some sort of benchmarking exercise, validating pre-conceived notions of what the readership wants, etc. and making it easier to sell the "independent thinker" label to the likes of yourself.
Anyways, I never stated the Sun's circulation wasn't falling, I said it wasn't suffering from the "same sort of downturn" as the likes of the Herald, and this is true. But your accusations against Murdoch are inconsistent with your claims that the readship influence papers rather than the other way round. After all, what power does Murdoch have? If the readship all support Labour, his papers must support Labour - isn't that what you've been claiming? How can Murdoch have any leverage? Papers don't influence opinion, don't make governments. This is what you've repeatedly stated. Are you now changing your mind. Oops, that isn't you being hoisted on your own petard, by chance?
Complain about this comment
I may just be converted yet.
There is a snippet of news that Jacqui Smith is considering using a private company to hold records of all emails, telephone calls and internet use.
If Alex Salmond stands up and categorically states he would never consider such actions then it may help me shift over.
Are there not laws already in place to carry out monitoring of communications? And how do you possibly monitor everyone?
Oh well, Only An Excuse is on shortly......time to open a bottle.
Complain about this comment
Good evening,
I was just wondering how everyone has being celebrating Alex Salmond's birthday! ;-)
#343 handclapping
"Oops, sorry! 8-)
Comes of doing the ancestors at the same time. They were all wrights but the gene passed me by, completely haunless. Can't even spread bread on my butter."
So, you're posh! :-)
I was looking for a 'smart Rs' name as I was sure I'd either be ignored or lambasted on here. But there's a Glasgow book festival called 'Aye Write', which is funny as I'm not at all literary!
#346 aye_write
I'm going to refer to my own point. 8~)
I agree and would take it further and say that people in general don't perceive having a conscious choice over their identity to be especially problematic, but they do see having a recognised choice over who governs them as imperative.
#348 bluelaw
"Independence is rational AFAIC. It's a sensible, adult, responsible, mature, logical and dare I even squeeze in courageous response to the Scottish circumstance."
Yes, how cheering. I like to hear from other people with brass ones "an aw". ;-)
#356 Neil_Small147
"I may just be converted yet."
Ah, Neil, I think it's just a matter of time... Enjoy your beer! ;-)
Complain about this comment
#aye_write
"Ah, Neil, I think it's just a matter of time... Enjoy your beer! ;-)"
I hope its "more refined than that" could I suggest a Speyside single malt as all the stills have been shut since before xmas and won't be opening till next week, have some sympathy for this hard pressed industry please. Happy New Year to All Slainte.
How nulab works DUP was rewarded by government for backing 42 days, claims first minister
Complain about this comment
#358 cynicalHighlander
You must look a right geek at your party with your laptop... ;->
("Have I told you this interesting statistic about Labour / benefits of whyskey?")
Happy New Year
(& while I like "fusky",)
"Who Dares, Gins!"
:-)
"[Something about] folk,
Fae New Machar tae New Deer,
Cults folk, Couter folk,
Absolutely bloutered folk,
Tae a' the folk in Scotland,
We wish ye a' a Guid New Year!"
Complain about this comment
359 aye_write
No laptop just got my frozen shower working since temp is now a balmy -2c.
Stop wineing as I am stuck with my Old Deer. lol and I've still got my Lumsden to clean and then go and look for the Turra Coo which was last seen chasing King Edward towards Macduff thank goodness it didn't go for Peterheed. Goodnicht.
Complain about this comment
#360 cynicalHighlander
Very good! :-D
Gosh, you've travelled!
(You didn't mention Auchterturra, Bogs of Sharney Dubs...)
So near, yet so far though.
Good night :-)
Complain about this comment
#334
I agree entirely, Brig.
But robust debate is the stuff of all political discourse and there is never any malice in anything I contribute. A bit of leg pulling is the most I will do.
Basically I don't believe the ingenuous contibutions by Neil_Small are anything other than that but if he bases his political conviction on any of the stuff he posts here he will be none the worse of a regular kick up the backend.
Jim Sillars was the most effective anti SNP propagandist the Labour Party had till he realised he was spouting unsustainable rubbish which insulted his considerable intelligence. His conversion happened because of the robust response all the time from the SNP.
That is the route most converts take.
This issue is too important to be modified by polite niceties. I used to look at my children and hope I could see them prospering in a decent, progressive and independent Scotland. Now I am looking at my children's children with the same hope. My disgust at the Scots who turn their eyes from the facts and support the staus quo because of some loyalty to it which they imagine is to their advantage continues to grow.
Complain about this comment
Interesting thoughts about the Sun. It has no consistent political line but supported New Labour on basic committments from Blair that traditional Labour policies would be abandoned.
When Bob Bird and Andy Collier edited the Scottish Sun it supported the SNP. It did so very vigorously for several years. I have a laminated front page of the Sun of election day Thursday, 23rd January 1992 which headlined " Rise now and be a nation again"
At the subsequent election Bird and Collier were given by head office in London TWO DAYS to change their editorial line to support of Labour. I am assured it was touch and go with rebellion in the Glasgow office just headed off.
I also have a laminated copy of the Sun of election day Thursday 3rd May 2007 which headlined "Vote SNP today and you put Scotland's head in the noose" in quite the most disgraceful abuse of privilege I have ever seen in a Scottish so called newspaper. I feel , and many agree with me , that the behaviour of the Sun and the Daily Record in election week cost the SNP a comfortable victory.
Of course newspapers and television have a huge effect on peoples opinions and election results. Otherwise why would so many organisations spend huge fortunes advertising on TV and in newspapers.
Complain about this comment
#362 sneckedagain
#334 brigadierjohn
It is much better, more productive etc. that we heed the word of The Brig.
However, personally, I don't bother if posts seem harsh or aggressive. It can loose the poster's argument respect. Plus, when people post that way they uncover themselves. There is less second-guessing. It's easier to trust!
Unlike Neil_Small147's #327 example, I don't typically prefer what I already know, rather I tend to find what I don't understand far more interesting - and it's not determined by how it is presented.
But other people do just get offended!
#362 sneckedagain
I think the Unionist argument is suitable for deconstructing.
Complain about this comment
To all of you a Happy New Year, in your personal lives, but I trust that politically it will be better for those on the Nationalist side of the debate, as the falsity of the "Brown bounce" becomes apparent.
To those of you still undecided, remember that Ne'erday is a time for looking forward with hope, not looking backwards with regret and fear.
Complain about this comment
#365 - Good message, oldnat. One thing that's hard to deny is that nationalism seems to instill hope whilst unionism seems to instill fear. I wonder why that is.
Complain about this comment
happy new year to all , may 2009 bring you all exactly what you want or need.
as old nat says : never look back unless that is where you want to go.
onward and upward , Sid.
Complain about this comment
Northhighlander
Sorry, I missed your earlier response.
I know it sounds patronising to speak of a penny dropping. But compare this to the centuries long 'condescension' Scots have endured within Union at the hands of people who treated them at times no better than savages - and having grown up in SE England a few sadly still think this way.
I take your point about Prescription charges but my point which I feel is worth reiterating is that this was a direct appeal to the grass roots concerns of Scots by the SNP. It wasn't the stuff of previous scaremongering. It wasn't the SNP gratuitously picking a fight as corrupt traitors like Foulkes predicted. It wasn't the SNP turning Scotland into a basket case etc etc.
But for me and you'll note I don't really involve myself in what I consider the micro issues of Scotland when for me the macro issue or issues of independence as it were remain unresolved. That's not to say I don't think all these issues aren't important, they very much are, but for me personally they typically reflect the absurdity of our wider position. TeamGB is a classic example. Does Ireland or Iceland or Norway have to suffer such trivial indignities as this? Do they even have to waste one second of precious governmental time having to fend off such impositions and to add