The National shows just how much danger the Union – and Scotland – is still in

This new newspaper, whatever its quality, is a reminder that the thirst for change in Scotland remains unquenched

29 November 2014

9:00 AM

29 November 2014

9:00 AM

Nearly 20 years ago, during one of the many impasses on the road to ‘peace’ in Northern Ireland, Gerry Adams reminded his opponents that the republican movement would set the terms of any agreement. The IRA reserved a power of veto. ‘They haven’t gone away, you know,’ he said.

Scotland is not Ulster, of course, but the Scottish nationalists haven’t gone away either. Anyone who thinks the referendum settled this country’s constitutional future hasn’t been paying attention. The long war continues, albeit — and mercifully — in figurative terms. If anything, defeat has encouraged the nationalists to redouble their efforts.

The SNP is the only political party in Scotland that can credibly claim to be a mass organisation. It will soon, in all likelihood, have 100,000 members. Last weekend Nicola Sturgeon, its new leader, addressed a crowd of more than 10,000 enthusiasts in Glasgow, the largest such rally in Scotland in 40 years.

This week a new newspaper, the National, was launched to press the case for independence. It sold 50,000 copies of its first edition — almost twice what the Scotsman averages — and then doubled its print run. Copies of its launch issue were soon selling for £10 on eBay. Owned by the Herald group, it remains a shoestring operation for now — but its mere appearance is more significant than its quality. It is a reminder that the thirst for change in Scotland remains unquenched.

There are other tributaries of discontent feeding the national sense of grievance. As Sturgeon addressed her tribe, 3,000 ‘activists’ gathered for the Radical Independence Campaign’s latest conference. They produced a ‘People’s Vow’. This specifies that industry should be nationalised, a republic declared, land ownership reformed, fracking banned, Nato left and a ‘people’s budget’ published that would offer an alternative to ‘austerity’. It is easy to scoff, but the referendum opened a box of dreams that cannot easily be closed.

So the Scottish question is not settled. It is barely even paused. Secession, its partisans believe, is not a lost cause, merely (as John Steinbeck once put it) an ‘unwon cause’. The general election next May will be fraught with peril for unionists — and for Scotland.

There are two particular doomsday scenarios. First, it is entirely possible that the SNP will win the Scottish part of the election — if their performance matched the latest polls, they would take 50 of Scotland’s 59 Westminster constituencies. (Alistair Darling and Gordon Brown’s belated decisions not to run for Parliament again need to be understood against this backdrop.)

Second, and just as disturbingly, David Cameron may yet win a second term. Scots Tories, more than 90 per cent of whom backed the Union, would face a lose-lose proposition. The SNP’s popularity in Scotland might cost Labour the election but only at the price of further weakening the Union. A Tory government with little support in Scotland would encourage the nationalist narrative that Scotland and England are countries of such divergent character that divorce is inevitable. No wonder the SNP secretly pines for the very thing it professes to hate most: Tory supremacy at Westminster.

Not that a Labour victory would offer much consolation. The party’s enthusiasm for further devolution is limited and no one can sensibly have any confidence in Miliband’s ability to navigate these treacherous constitutional waters. Labour is likely to find itself pinned between ‘letting Scotland down’ and ‘antagonising English opinion’. The choice would be especially agonising for a minority Labour government depending on SNP votes.

In other words, as matters stand now, the general election looks like being a win-win proposition for nationalists and a lose-lose calamity for unionists. Scotland’s election will be 59 mini-referendums on the national question. And that will serve as an overture to the 2016 Scottish parliamentary elections, at which another SNP triumph would open the door to a second independence referendum.

Such a ballot would, technically, require Westminster’s approval — but it is difficult to imagine circumstances in which London could deny the clearly expressed will of the Scottish people. What Scotland wants, Scotland will get. The winds of change are still blowing and they will continue to blow in favour of the nationalists. They have not gone away and, you know, they need only get lucky once. The Union was preserved in September, but for how long?

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10

Show comments
  • thomasaikenhead

    ” The general election next May will be fraught with peril for unionists — and for Scotland.”

    Utter tosh!

    When the people of Scotland express their political will by voting, there is no question of ‘peril’, just democracy in action!

    Anyone with the most basic understanding of politics inScotland and the UK already knows the outcome, Scotland will vote a democratic majority to leave the UK.

    All that remains are the details, who, what, when, where and how.

    The ‘why’ is already clear!

    • Not in our lifetime, the matters settled for a generation and the SNP wont be in Holyrood forever.

      The UK is not a playground where you can jump of the swings and roundabouts whenever it pleases.


        It is not settled for a generation though. The unionists needed to change the goal posts at the last minute. The Smith Commission will not satisfy the vast majority of Scots who wanted Devo Max (about 2/3).
        The UK is an outdated concept. It is a relic from the imperial era. Time to look forward to international cooperation. A union where one country so clearly dominates through size and population (not to mention a feudal elite) has had its day.

        • The majority spoke and the said NO so you now need to come to terms with that because that majority NO vote meant that the constitution is still a reserved matter so go out and buy loads of copies of the Nationalist and join the SNP and vote SNP but its not altering the fact that for another referendum there needs to be a majority of MP’s throughout the UK backing it and although you should never say never its fair to say its not going to happen any time soon.


            Did you read this article? Another referendum is very likely and even people lie Massie know it.
            The SNP will either hold the balance of power or more years of the Tories (with a possible UKIP coalition) will seal the deal. The only way the unionists got to win it was by changng the goal posts. Opinion polls have already shown that Yes has got over the 50% mark (one was at 52%). The unionists won through a heavy barrage of misinformation and promises they couldn’t keep. Hardly sustainable.
            If the people of Scotland vote SNP in for a majority and there is popular support for another referendum (already over 60% for one in the next 5 years according to polls) then the UK Government will be in no position to refuse this. What will they base their refusal on? Thw world will be watching you know.

          • I like Alex and do enjoy his articles but he is not the messiah nor is he an MP so he cant actually say there will be another referendum although he does agree to my point that its not the SNP’s call.

            A vote next May for the SNP even if they are foolish enough to put a referendum in their manifesto only means even if they get every Scottish seat that they still aren’t in government so cant actually deliver, remember Scotland nor England nor Wales or Northern Ireland vote collectively in May it is constituencies across the UK that do.


            I see, so you are just ignoring the bits you don’t like. The UK election (it is commonly forecasted and understood) will result in another hung parliament. The SNP could hold the balance of power in this and basically make the Labour Party agree to a referendum. This is clearly explained in the article above and widely understood as a possible outcome of the UK election. If the Tories gt in it will push more towards the Yes side. The SNP will get another majority government and if there is popular will be able to call for another election. Especially if there is an English vte to leave the EU while the Scots wish to remain in the EU. There will be no way that the UK Government will be able to find a good enough reason to refuse. The world is watching as I said and the UK are keen not to come across as an anti democratic nation that keeps ‘territories’ against their will. Even if they do this will not go down well in Scotland and only strengthen resolve.
            The game is up and I noticed you couldn’t tell me what reason you think the UK government could possiby give for denying a referendum that had popular support (over 60% and growing). What reason could the UK government give for denying a referendum? Especially since the vow has not been honoured and a EU vote could see us dragged out of the EU against our will.

          • Long protracted replys can not alter the fact that even if the SNP get every seat in Scotland they still can not hold another referendum and no UK party will agrea to hold a coalition with the SNP under any terms.

            You had your chance to win and instead of being open and honest about the risks and rewards you lot decided fantasy land would be better so the majority of Scotland got out of bed on the 18th of September and ended your delusions.

            The UK government can and will refuse a referendum next term regardless of whose in power because there was a referendum only two months ago.


            It doesn’t matter if they are in a coalition or not they could still hold the balance of power. You really don’t seem to understand this. The SNP could have such a strong presence in Westminster (doesn’t even need to be that strong 20 seats might do), then their vote on each issue the government wanted to get through would be needed. They would effectively be able to get concessions from the UK Government for getting them to ratify each and every motion they wanted passed.

            The referendum was two months ago as we speak but after the election it will be 6 months and making the UK Government agree to a future rereferendum. We could have one in 2017 or after that. Then your two months reason doesn’t stand.

            We knew the realities and your win was only won when Devo Max was asically implied. It has not been granted as Smith shows today. The game is up. You won’t be able to make false promises next time.

          • Labour and the Liberals and the Conservatives will unite, as they did in the referendum process, to make the SNP irrelevant, you know that really.


            LOL. Jeez that is the most stupid thing I have heard in a while. One party politics in th UK?
            They won’t unite because then they would all have to have the same policies and they clearly don’t. How would it work? Would the Tories just agree with all Labour policies so the SNP were not crucial?
            The referendum was a single issue and there was enough in fighting in that from BT. This is running a government. Is this really the level of unionist comprehension!!?

          • It worked to get a majority NO vote and currently Germany is doing just fine with a Labour/Conservative coalition.

            You need to come out of the denial you are in here as we already have a Liberal/Conservative coalition so a Conservative/UKIP or Labour/Conservative is calition is entierly likely but a SNP coalition is a non starter.


            Okay Michael. Labour and the Tory Party are going to go into a coalition just so they can deny the Scottish people a referendum the majority of Scots already want.

            Yep….never going to happen. As I said I am not talking about an SNP coalition to make government.

            Though it is true that the nationalists in Wales and the Greens might be up for an SNP coalition thereby making the vote that the other parties would be relying on even stronger

          • Labour need Scotland to hold power themselves so aligning themselves with the Toys as they already did wont be problematic for them.

            There is a bigger picture outside the nationalist bubble and the world really does not revolve around the SNP.


            No I know and i don’t think the people of the rUK are going to like getting a coalition Labour Tory Government because of the SNP do you? That really would be revolving around the SNP and it aint going to happen.

            You seem to have had a logic bypass.

            Besides if Labour need Scotland a coalition with the Tories would finish them off for good. There would be no more Labour Party in Scotland.

          • No one like the current coalition so another one is not really going to rock the boat anyway, ultimately they are all Tory’s anyway so it matters not if we get the Red and the Blue and the Yellows together keeping out the Tartan.


            So basically a coalition of parties that Scotland didn’t vote for? Hmmm that seems like a good sustainable position to take.
            Scotland will have voted a majority of SNP members at Westminster and be denied any power at all.

            You Ukippers are really something. I think I am going to stop talking to you now.

          • TFFT.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Yellows will disappear…. Purple is the controlling colour now… as hard as that is for you to acknowledge… followed by blue… then …. not sure what colour labour is… if anything a fudgey maroon…

          • Sam Mitchell

            so.. the democratic will of the Scots is to be ignored?… because that cradle of corruption … wm says so… & we Scots are expecting to play by their rules??… the same rules that favour heating stable blocks at taxpayers expense… the same rules that OK duck houses…???… you appear to be in for a nasty shock… have you heard of UDI??… as I for one will NEVER agree to any coalition with ANY of the wm lame duck parties…. they have proven themselves to be willfully perjured individuals over almost every issue…. from EAW… to recall of corrupt mp’s… so… why would the Pro Indy Mp’s risk their reputations to whore themselves with those degenerates…

          • ColinPowis

            we’ve just had a referendum and you lost , you moron


            Yes lost the referendum. However, as I explained above that is not the end of the matter as promises were made and then were broken.
            Try reading the article again and then read this http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/61468/reality-check-the-snp-not-ukip-will-choose-next-pm
            We are not beaten. We are going to hold the balance of power at Westminster and will be able to get what we want. Most Scots wanted Devo Max and now they know the UK Government had no intention of ever giving it. The last youguv poll showed 52% support for yes and that was before the Smith Commission.
            Call me a moron all you want but if you think the constitutional question is now over you really need to do something about your observation skills.
            Don’t expect that lying to an entire nation is going to settle anything. The Smth Comission has been widely criticised by Scottish civil society. The third sector and the unions have condemned it (the unions are meant to be on Labours side).

            Meanwhile the Tories are going all little England. Hardly conducive with a healthy union is it. I have stocked up on popcorn because this is going to be fun.


            Have you seen the polls? Have you seen the reaction in civil Scotland to the Smith Commission? Pro Yes parties are headed for a landslide at the Westminster election. They will hold the balance of power at Westminster. I suggest you read the article again.

            You won the first round but had to rely on promises that were never going to be kept. The cat is out of the bag now. The Scottish people now know they were hoodwinked.

            Lying and tricking people to win a referendum was never going to be sustainable.

            Call me a moron all you want. Your referendum win is already history. Don’t expect the people of Scotland to never question the constitutional set up because of a close referendum win were lying and broken promises were a strong feature. You reap what you sow. Get used to it.

          • Sam Mitchell

            wrong sailor….. the 45% & growing who said YES will never accept it… there are many who feel the vote itself was seriously compromised…. given that the head of the tory party seemed to know a great deal more of the results by postal vote than she should have been legally allowed… not sure if she is on her second or third police interview… then there is the many videos of strange procedures…. including the “sealed ” ballot box being opened and the ballot papers cascaded out in a tied bundle… or the unescorted vans travelling along roads that were by no means the quickest way to the counting hall…. NOW… if there had been international observers…. as other countries seem to need…. then perhaps your post may have had some sympathy .. but… too many unanswered questions…

        • Gerschwin

          Denial eh? Always what the loser reaches for, not to worry, you’ve only got anger, bargaining and depression before you reach acceptance.


            Your just silly. But I lke you!xxxx

      • Sam Mitchell

        I am sorry that you wish it was all over…. it’s been ongoing since the 14th century at least… and the Uk is a playground for those wm corrupt & devious mp’s… that is why Ukip is basically your only chance to change…. although you could go Green…. how many of the playground bankers who actively schemed over years on screwing the public were jailed?…. how did all those mp’s expense documents end up in the shredder… what about all the cover ups…. incld auntie & its staff…. is that not part of the playground scenario??… your wm is a joke…. it cant be taken seriously by any citizen who thinks…. it’s gone… it’s backward…. it’s over…

  • ‘but its mere appearance is more significant than its quality’

    So basically its s@#t and the separatists are buying multiple copies, say no more Alex.


      Oh so you haven’t read it. Typical puerile analysis.

      The SNP alone have double the number of members needed to buy every copy. There are also the 1.6 million that voted yes. I don’t think anyone needs to buy multiple copies.

      • Defensive little fellow aren’t you.


          No need to be defensive I have reality on my side.

  • Barakzai

    ” . . . albeit — and mercifully — in figurative terms. ”

    How much would you bet on it staying ‘figurative’ if the Braveheart zealots don’t get exactly what they want?

    Anti-English direct action after the Welsh Nationalist arsonist faction, or a broader IRA-style insurgency? Douglas Hurd’s 40 year-old novel ‘Scotch on the Rocks’ may be highly prescient . . .

    Couldn’t happen? Don’t you believe it.

  • beenzrgud

    If I had the slightest confidence that Westminster wouldn’t well and truly be taken to the cleaners during any post independence negotiations then I’d be happy to be rid of Scotland. They could then go an a tax and spend spree, and we would be rid of their constant moaning.


      Constant moaning like this post you have just shared? Jeez what a bunch of whingers these unionists are. They change the goal posts and make offers they can’t begin to honour, they lie through their teeth and threaten pensioners with misinformation, break purdah and they they moan that the issue of independence hasn’t gone away. Hilarious!

      • beenzrgud

        I’m firmly convinced that nothing will make the malcontents north of the border happy, they’ll always find something to moan about, as it is normal for malcontents to do. I’ll simply be a lot happier when it no longer has anything to do with my country. Continue moaning if you like, I’ve heard it all before.


          Again you whinge. It seems you are the malcontent. The article above explains a political reality from the point of view of a very strong unionist and all you can do is throw about xenophobic cliches. Ethnic nationalism plain and simple.
          As the article states indeendence is coming and the last shift of the goal posts by Brown won’t save the union. What do puerile unionists do? They get all personal and xenophobic and moan about other people’s journey to self determination. It clearly points to the lack of serious debate left in the unionists. Al they have left are puerile and sulky appeals to having ‘won’ . As I said hilarious!

          • beenzrgud

            As I have already stated, although you appear not to have understood, my only concern regarding Scottish independence is the negotiating skills of Westminster. Other than that I’m happy for Scotland to go its own way.
            The UK is one of the most open and liberal economies on the planet. If you can’t make a success of yourself here then there really isn’t much hope for you. I’ll just be happy not to have to hear how the Scots are being kept down by their overbearing neighbours anymore. That clear enough old chum. It’ll have to be, things to do and all that, ok.


            Who says I am not a success? Or where you talking about Scotland not being a success? Funny if you were referring to Scotland because Scotland is part of the UK. Therefore it is also the open and liberal economy you speak off. It should already be a success. If it isn’t (as you seem to be implying), then it is the UK that is obviously not working too well. It is the UK that is moving towards breaking up. This is not because (as you try and suggest) the Scots are somehow inferior. We are already doing demonstrably far better under devolution than we were so how could it be?
            Self determination old chap. What could you possibly have to moan about? Why not just be happy for us going our own way without the xenophobic remarks?

          • beenzrgud

            Malcontents are unsuccessful people casting about for something/someone to blame for their situation, when in fact it is often their own actions, or lack of, that is to blame. Usually too much propping up a bar and not enough work.

            There are plenty of people in Scotland who are successful, but I’m pretty sure that most of those who support the SNP aren’t, although you’ll probably dispute this. I don’t like malcontents wherever I encounter them, but Scotland appears to have more than its fair share and I won’t be sorry to see the back of them. Like I said, my only worry is that my country will not be well represented in negotiations. If that makes me xenophobic then it’s a label I’ll happily wear.


            What utter boring reactionary dribble. Yep you wear that badge with pride mate . LOL.

          • beenzrgud

            Not much of a response but I suppose it’ll have to do !

          • Gerschwin

            He can’t be xenophobic, you’re not a foreigner, see you lost the referendum… looooosah!

          • Gerschwin

            Still bleating…looosah!

          • Derick Tulloch

            It always amazes me that the inhabitants of this forum, being generally Tories or Extra-Tories i.e. Kippers have such a dim view of self determination and independence. Seems they prefer dependency and for mummy to make the decisions. Very strange

      • Gerschwin

        Quit yer bleating loser.

  • anyfool

    The SNP will be doing the UK a favour if they destroy all chances of Labour ever becoming a major factor in the governance of their country, that this reduces its chances in Westminster is an added bonus.
    That the SNP will like Labour, destroy their country is a given, in that they intend to increase tax and spend without laying the groundwork of building up the base first.
    There will be no possibility of an English bale out, people seem to believe that the SS Great Britain is heading into a new dawn, those flashing white lights on the horizon are actually gigantic financial warrants for the repayment of debt and liabilities, something that even taxing the rich, at a 100% of their current and future earnings, would be able to cover.
    All the while the witless in Parliament are wittering on about honouring Browns foolish promises to give Scotland the keys to a bankrupt system.

    • Brown can’t promise anything and he wont even be an MP next parliament and the current Westminster government will do well if they remember that.

      But yes I don’t actually mind the SNP if it means Labour have no hope of getting in to government and you know what we really are as well to let the SNP have all the tax powers they want but first assign them 10% of the debt and let them know that under no circumstances will we bail them out because when you leave the common tax system you leave the common bailout system also.

      • Graham Purnell

        You speak as if the UK has bottomless pockets and a kindly beneficent largesse. Any money that Scotland receives, over and above what it generates, comes from international borrowing – just as it does for the rest of the UK. The UK is living beyond its means but not seeking ways to increase the tax take.

        We have a massive debt and deficit. The amount of the debt generated pro rata by Scotland has been much less than that generated by England, yet you would apportion 10% of that debt to us when we have around 8.4% of the population.

        • The population is around 10%, do excuse me for rounding numbers as I forgot for a second how sensitive you lot are.

          • Graham Purnell

            Strange why you would round our population to your financial benefit. Or not.

          • Its a generalisation, you know like the separatists claiming they are the 45% when its actually not 45% but hey how as always one rule for you lot and another for the rest of us.


            It was 52% last poll.

          • Its not a referendum though is it, keep dreaming kido.

          • rollo_tommasi

            The last poll on voting intentions was done by Survation……you
            know the ones who actually got the result right on the day?

            Even after all the media attention the nationalists have
            received since the vote NO still won 54% against 46%.

          • Graham Purnell

            Much like the oft-repeated unionist mantra that being part of something bigger is beneficial, unless it happens to be Europe.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Whats the population of Europe compared to the UK again? We’re not that rich.

          • Europe is a trade block seeking to become a federal country and Scotland being a nation and a country is incompatible with that.

            Be very careful what you wish for!

            Vote UKIP.

          • Graham Purnell

            Nope! Don’t think I will.

          • You can VOTE SNP for nothing (what’s their UK policy’s again?) or have the Tory’s austerity or Labours incompetence instead but for me its time for a fresh start and UKIP are offering that fresh start and that fresh start outside of the bureaucratic EU that we pay them to trade with will be the best thing for all of our Islands people.

          • Graham Purnell

            UKIP supporters can’t even agree on what they want. You seem to suggest a fresh start but other UKIP supporters have told me they want a continuation of Tory policies but with an EU exit. Fresh start or more of the same policy-wise, which is it to be?

          • This is the thing, out of the EU is a fresh start for all our political party’s as they will no longer be limited by Brussels.

          • Graham Purnell

            And out of the UK would be a fresh start for all Scottish parties as we would no longer have to pay taxes toward large infrastructure projects that don’t come anywhere near us. Keep voting UKIP, you’re a great recruitment officer for the SNP.

          • But the people of Scotland democratically voted to remain in the UK so this is now the topic of debate and it really should not be tribal party politics as leaving the EU can only benefit all party’s in the UK and it will empower the Scottish Parliament greatly and it will save us billions of £’s a year.

          • Graham Purnell

            Yes was on course for a win until ‘The Vow’, today exposed as ‘The Lie’ by the publishing of the Smith Commission proposals. As many as 1 in 4 Yes voters changed their vote due to promises of something approaching Devo Max. That ain’t gonna happen and another referendum would deliver independence, because you can’t tell the same lies twice when you’ve been rumbled.

            An in/out referendum on Europe will be the catalyst for another in/out referendum on the UK.

  • Ron Dickinson

    The National is way ahead of any other tabloid in quality – real journalism. Each day has been better than the one before. It’s here to stay!
    MSM & BBC shameful bias and dutiful reporting of a succession of lies and scare stories helped deliver the No vote. “The Vow”, now exposed as “The Lie” will help deliver indyref2 and independence.
    Only unionists use words like “secession”. Otherwise Mr. Massie makes many key points. Scotland WILL be independent, only a matter of time.

    • Its a daily Sunday Herald and its doomed to fail and its doomed to fail because all newspapers are, rem,ember the ‘Sunday Scot’? Scottish and proud of it…….

    • flippit

      When you accuse the BBC of bias you lose all credibility I’m afraid. Any outsider watching the run-up to the ref would be struck, more than anything, by Scots BBC journos fear of upsetting the SNP. Offence was taken very easily and appeasing that got in the way of truth.

      • The Master

        No bias? Quite apart from the independence debate, they are a bunch of communists.

        • rollo_tommasi

          So was Alex Salmond at one point!

          • The Master

            Think he grew up though. Not old auntie who bashes the multi-culti gong even harder than Labour, if that’s possible.

          • rollo_tommasi

            He didn’t grow out of it he just discovered parliamentary expenses!

      • rullko

        In other words, you’re accusing the BBC of bias?

      • Peter Duff

        I was disgusted watching Scottish reporters sneering at our First Minister. Even if she wasn’t a fan she should have shown respect. Then you have the multiple stories that were omitted to improve the No sides argument. Then you have every single comment towards the SNP’s positive message being followed up by multiple negative No comments. The time given to both sides was extremely uneven and as we approached the end they made no effort to even hide what they were doing.

      • William

        BBC Scotland’s (as well as STV’s) coverage was by and large exemplary as far as i’m concerned. I did find issue however with the London based news teams that rushed up from SW1 immediately after the 51% Yes poll was released, and spent the final three weeks dominating the airwaves. Swiftly shoving the BBC Scotland journalists out of the way, their knowledge of both the last two years of the referendum campaign and indeed the wider political landscape in Scotland was poor and they showed a blatant disregard for the referendum broadcasting guidelines that their counterparts at pacific quay had spent a long time implementing. I’m not alone in thinking this, indeed there were widespread rumours of dissatisfaction amongst the BBC’s Glasgow based journalists that they were being blamed for the lack of care being shown by their London colleagues (a reference i believe to the BBC Scotland referendum protests).

        • Sam Mitchell

          “”exemplary”” gawd help us…. Radio 4 Today prog. .naughtie… couldn’t have been a more pliant sycophant unionist …. one miserable example of many taped for future reference was when he interviewed two farmers in D & G over their views on Indy… guess which one he failed to mention appeared on almost every bbc sponsored question time… guess which one he failed to mention was a liberal councillor…… guess which one he failed to badger or hector allowing her backward view of how great the world was pre Holyrood… NO…. the bbc and its drafting in of the smith girl … or the lamentable interviews conducted by jackie bird simply confirm your “”exemplary”” niaveity…

        • Ron Dickinson

          ‘Exemplary’ just goes to show that you are a No voter or sympathiser. No-one who voted Yes saw BBC as unbiased. Balance was frequently seen to be one party v 3 parties rather than Yes v No.
          Some reporters were scrupulous about lack of bias, e.g., Brian Taylor. Jackie Bird and others were hostile in extreme, as was the general editorial coverage.
          Add to that every newspaper except Sunday Herald against independence and 45% of 85% voting Yes looks like a miracle!

      • Red Priest

        Any outsider watching the runnup would have noted the abrupt change in tone and quality when BBC London, Robinson and all arrived. The BBC Scotland output had leant No all along, but not in an offensive way, and it had done its job pretty darn well – James Cooke was a revelation. and then things got hairy and the WM parties went north, with the WM/London news cadre in tow, and the whole thing went to pot.

    • mikewaller

      I deeply wish it were now. Although English, like my father I used to think that the Scots were the pick of the four nations. Now, I just see those represented by the SNP as a pack of whinging whatsits. You have dominated our media for many months then failed to quite pull it off in spite of bucket loads of nonsense and obfuscations. Could you not just shut up for a bit and give us a rest? Contra Salmond’s nonsense, the promises made are now being delivered so lick your wounds and get on with it.

      Perhaps you are too myopic to understand, but the Western world now faces threats that that neither the SNP in Scotland, Ukip in England or Sinn Fein in Ireland can resolve. Their current revitalisation is, however, deeply symptomatic. We have had over a century of enjoying living standards very much above those of most of the rest of the world. That phase in world history is now coming to an end because the technological edge upon which it was built has now largely been lost, not least by the idiots who exported both the jobs and the technology to places with much lower cost bases. As the realities of this increasingly start to bite, folks will blindly reach out for all sorts of panacea solutions, such as voting for the parties listed. Unfortunately, not even a resurrected Robert the Bruce, King Alfred and Michael Collins working in combination, or separately, could turn back the forces now bearing down upon us. That said, in the short run it may well be a lot less stressful for you if you keep focusing on your navel!

      • Peter Duff

        You don’t have to read the stories. You don’t have to get involved in the debate. Unfortunately we cannot control your media the way ours is controlled.

        • mikewaller

          So I must miss great gouts of the Today programme etc.etc. etc, so you can go banging on about Scottish independence forever? As my dear old Mother used to say, can you not just give it a rest?

          And please forget the bias crap. I had to listen to that untrained rottweiler Humprehy’s continually setting about John Major as the latter was trying to wax eloquent about the Union then,the next day, hear that lovable old cove Jim Naughtie play softball with a SNP rep. And for years we have had the SNP’s BBC insider, Alun Little, telling us how independence has to come. As in my lifetime the BBC has been subject to official inquiries from both the left
          (Harold Wilson) and the right (Norman Tebbit) on grounds of bias, does it not occur to you that those with a dog in the fight are not entirely capable of taking a balanced view.

          • Sam Mitchell

            I have all the tapes of every naughtie interview… Please give me the link to the interview you post on….

          • mikewaller

            The difference between you an me is that I am unlikely to have kept the link as I am – at 70 – to run up Ben Nevis. That is why I am bore to death with the whole business and it clearly remains of consuming interest to you. However, if you do want to run it to ground, first find the Major Humphry’s exchange and I am pretty sure that Naughtie’s was the day after.

  • cambridgeelephant

    Some of us saw this coming with a narrow Unionist win so it’s no surprise.

    Any way, chin up, as Cameron won’t win in May. UKIP will, as the EU is the gift that just keeps on giving and it’s not going to stop.

  • Dusty01

    Willie Rennie for it right when he said: “Unionists must treat every election from now on as if Scottish independence is just around the corner”
    1.6 million out of almost 3.8 million voters voted YES. That says loads….

  • Gerschwin

    Blahdy blahdy blah… the losers always close ranks, the winners move on with their lives… give it twelve months tops before the subscription renewals come through the letter box, SNP membership will halve – besides this is the Scots we’re talking about! Know what I mean?


      I know what you mean yes. You are implying in a puerile and xenophobic manner that the Scots as a people in some way have a mass fault. Pathetic really.

      Is this kind of xenophobia common in the posts here or are you a one off?

      • Gerschwin

        It ain’t xenophobia wee Jimmy, see… you’re not a foreigner – you come from my country.


          I don’t come from your country I come from Scotland. The UK is a union of countries. Jeez.

  • Bill Cruickshank

    Excellent summary of the situation in Scotland. In 40 plus years of political activity I have never know such hatred of Labour and such an appetite for constitutional change. The Smith Commission proposals are already seen as a betrayal of the ‘Vow’, even the STUC say they are underwhelmed. Meanwhile Labour and the Tories still sleep with each other. The SNP will do very well in the UK May General Election and will win a majority in the Scottish Parliament in 2016. You are right another referendum is inevitable.

    • Derick Tulloch

      Smith is an utter dog’s breakfast. A bit of income tax power. A bit of welfare power. No Corporation Tax even though that’s OK to devolve to Northern Ireland. Aggregates Levy? Well haud me back. Even Scots Tories like Alex Massie should feel insulted.

      • Look on the bright side, when we leave the EU in the next two years all of the fishing and farming industry’s will be controlled from Holyrood along with all the civil and criminal law that the EU deals with and no longer will the residents of Scotland be forced to pay for tens of thousands of EU students in Scotland to the detriment of the Scottish youth and no longer will the Scottish government be forced into taking EU contracts when they can award contracts to Scottish firms for Scottish jobs for the benefit of Scotland.

        Vote UKIP and make it happen.


          If England votes us out of the EU there will be another referendum. The Scots don’t want out of the EU. That will be the break up of the UK.

          Seriously, have you read the article?

          • You are clueless, the SNP only want in the EU because the UK is in it so when we leave it matters not to Scotland.


            No I think it is you that doesn’t understand. It is not the SNP but the people of Scotland. It is the people of Scotland that want to be in the EU. All polls show this. This makes us different from voters in England who have a stronger desire for leaving the EU.
            The people of Scotland don’t want to be n the EU because the UK is in it. England is not the be all and end all. Other countries manage just fine without England you know. In fact some of the most succesful countries in the world are small European countries with no union to England.

          • The polls only show a slight majority in favour of remaining in the EU but the polls include EU nationals who will be excluded from a Westminster referendum due to the franchise.

            There really is little point in an independent Scotland being in the EU when the rest of the UK is not as that would mean the majority of Scotland’s trade would no longer be on the completely free basis that it currently is under the UK arrangements and the EU is after all a trade block.

            Are you saying that as an independence supporter you do not want the powers over the fishing and farming industry’s along with civil and criminal law returned from Brussels to Holyrood? A simple yes or no will suffice.


            You do seem limited to the simple! Latest YG, check it out – that’s nothing like what it says.

            The EU is after all, a trade bloc, and a larger one than the rUK. Currently, the UK Gov refuse to measure Scotland’s trade, counting all exports to the EU as UK exports. In the event of Brexit, Scotland will have to choose between the comparatively tiny, isolated and isolationist UK and the massive, globalised EU as trading partners. In either scenario, the upheaval would be immense anyway, so there would be *no* rational reason to pick the tiny, longterm.

            Your fantasy ‘powers over fishing farming, civil and criminal law’ currently ‘held’ by Brussels are just that. So no, simply, I don’t value your fantasy over rational policy and international co-operation.

          • They are not fantasy powers, everything not reserved is automatically devolved except what the EU does and the EU does manage everything I said it did.

            It seems that you are just a SNP sheep as if you really had Scotland’s interests at heart you would accept that the powers being repatriated from the EU to Scotland on our EU exit will be a good thing and that as most of Scotland’s trade is with the UK and only a small proportion is with the EU then sticking with the UK is for the best.


            You don’t appear to be able to read. As I said Currently, the UK Gov refuse to measure Scotland’s trade, counting all exports to the EU as UK exports.

            What part of that don’t you understand. Your form of English nationalism really is something to behold.

            A UKIP man? Really? LOL.

          • Our own exports leaving out of Europe (due to shipping) are counted as EU trade when its actually external, the UK gov does not make the rules.

          • Tim Morrison

            That is not the case – powers are specifically handed over.

          • Powers for Holyrood are all handed over unless specifically reserved it is Wales where they are specifically handed over, do you know nothing of your own country?


          • Tim Morrison

            One of the things that seems to differentiate people on this side of the debate from the other is the acceptance of people making mistakes. You are right. I am wrong. Difference is I don’t call you names. Civility rules.

          • I never called you names I simply asked if you know anything about your own country but now you do so it matters not.

          • Jambo25

            Hold on a bit. The anti-EU groups down south are constantly telling us that Brexit would not interfere with trade between the EU and Britain. So what is it?

          • What is what? Try rephrasing you question a bit so its understandable.

          • Gerschwin

            Sorry Hamish, but on this collection of islands England is the be all and end all – the rest of you are just cannon fodder. Let it be.


            Yes you see and that is why the union is coming to an end. I suggest you just earn to accept this will be the cse just as Massie above has.

          • It seems to me that Scotland just reaffirmed the union, did you miss the 55% in favour referendum on staying in the UK?


            Did you miss the vow being widely discredited today and already polls showing more spport for independence?

            Your days are numbered my dear.

          • What polls?


            Oh ffs try and pay attention if you are going to take part in a debate. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/01/scotland-vote-independence-poll-yougov

          • That one from the other week, the way you were talking it was as if a poll came out today after the Smith Commission reported, nice edit btw!


            I didn’t suggest it was out today anywhere. It is a very recent poll though. Is this what you do? You lose a point so you just eep digging.LOL.

            Silly and puerile Ukipper.


            Oh and if this was the vote before the Smith Commission it will only go one way once there is no longer any getting away from the fact that Brown and BT lied at te last minute to shift the goal posts. Shameful stuff.

          • I really hoped you were a man of your word and would stop talking to me as you said you would but alas my side bar is riddled with your gibberish.

          • greggf

            If the SNP get a majority of Scottish MPs for Westminster in 2015 DM, might the SNP do what Sinn Fein did in 1918?

          • Bo Williams

            Most Scots want Scotland to remain British. Any GE is unlikely to have 85% turnout and the SNP are unlikely to get the near 2,000,000 votes needed to make up 50% of the electorate. Any suggestion that the SNP will declare Scotland independent on the back of winning the majority of Scottish seats should be and presumably will be resisted with the full force of British law. It is the least the British government can do for the over 2,000,000 Scots who made it clear they wish to remain British.

          • greggf

            What are your precedents for citing such figures Bo?
            Sinn Fein had less than those in 1918 and still took all their MPs out of Westminster.

          • Bo Williams

            What are my precedents for citing more than 2,000,000 Scots want to remain British? Pretty obvious really.

          • greggf

            How can it be obvious Bo?
            The GE (in 2015) has not been held…. yet!
            Are you clairvoyant?

          • Guest

            “00 noted no, many want #indy but were scared into a no vote, let us be very clear on that. The growth in support for the YES parties post referendum is an acknowledged that people KNEW they were being coerced by fearashamed off it. That is why (other than the facist extravaganzy in Gearge Square), there were no spontaneous celebrations on teh strette s at a NO..

          • GOFINDIT007

            2,000,000 And Dropping.

          • David Younger

            You might be very surprised at the turnout in the next election. Don’t imagine that people won’t vote to support Scottish parties over Westminster parties.

          • Kaine

            A ludicrous line given that these are elections for Westminster. If you send MPs to Westminster and they take their salaries and expenses you are a Westminster Party.

          • Shiprex

            From Scotland and only voting on matters that are of Scottish interest and abstaining those that do not

          • Kaine

            The SNP voted on tuition fees because they argued that it affected the size of the block grant. By that standard any vote affects Scotland.

            The rest is cant. If an MP from Manchester declares they are there to represent Manchester’s interests and only vote on issues which affect Manchester are they not a Westminster politician?

          • Shiprex

            Not if you have half a brain it doesn’t. Some bills passed affect only certain constituencies and those which deal with ones not in Scotland are not voted on by SNP because they do not believe it is any of their business UNLIKE the rest of the Britisher political establishment who deem everything party political.

          • Kaine

            You’re going to argue the problem with UK politics is there is too much partisanship? Shall we all get in a circle and sing kumbaya instead?

          • justejudexultionis

            The SNP will not attempt UDI after the next election. UDI will not be necessary since the SNP will have a mandate for calling a second referendum. The outcome of such a referendum is likely to be full independence for Scotland.

          • greggf

            Well juste, like Ulster, there may be some dissidents in the Orkneys, Shetlands, Western Isles and the Borders to full independence. Would they or any be allowed to secede?

          • GOFINDIT007


          • disqus_EjgKZ1VUFS

            Well should Glasgow,Dundee and the other areas that voted YES be allowed to secede from the union now ????? works both ways doesn’t it.

          • greggf

            Well maybe disqus, but the point is can the SNP carry a majority of MPs to independence as Sinn Fein did in the ROI in 1918 (see above).

          • Bigmac

            I’ve stopped worrying about that. I do hope that they would stay with the rest of Scotland, but again if they democratically decide to go with England it would be their choice.

          • Jackie Dawson

            I don’t think they can , I remember reading something that they are tied to Scotland, they just don’t want to be ruled by Edinburgh.

          • Derick Tulloch

            Fortunately support for Partition in the Isles exists only in the imagination of Unionist tribunes. No party exists to promote it. Individual candidates who have suggested it get less than 60 votes.

          • Flintshire Ian

            Constitutional matters are reserved for the UK Government. Anything else is UDI.
            Eck-onomics made no sense when oil was $100+ a barrel. The socialist utopia sure isn’t going to be funded at $60-$70 a barrel even whilst it lasts.

          • malcolmb

            Samuel Goldwyn (?) said that predictions are specially difficult when they concern the future. The price of oil is an example. Political change is another.

            New jobs and growth in Scotland depend on investor decisions and the one thing that investors hate is uncertainty.

          • SouthOhioGipper

            ..they also hate the idea that radical socialist mob will just nationalize their investment and deny them profit and.property rights.

          • disqus_EjgKZ1VUFS

            And we are all doing so well under this right wing dictatorship aren’t we.

            Now of course I don’t think it is a dictatorship anymore than independence would have been a socialist utopia.

          • Bigmac

            We don’t necessarily need to be better off financially. We just need to be rid of Westminster.

          • Jackie Dawson

            One will get us the other…..eventually.

          • Sam Mitchell

            so.. a democratic vote by the majority in Scotland will be ignored?… that All the Scots will sit still & decide that wm knows best?…. that we shall then play by wm rules… & only their rules??….. NAH sunshine…. it wouldn’t matter if they sold the oil for turnips…. we are going… & the sooner the better…

          • SouthOhioGipper

            Yeah right, with a demand for the nationalizion of industry? Scotland will be Venezuela.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Gawd… you know so much… where do you find all this garbage… I’m amazed…. please please share your source… who amongst the INDY crew have mentioned Venezuela??.. or… I can give you lots of references to the bt britNatz who continually pontificate about this… such negative doom…. or as someone else posted…. It wasn’t that they were unconvinced – they were scared $hitless by the unrelenting doomsday propaganda carpet bombing them day and night month after month. THAT’S the reason NO prevailed, nothing else.

          • SouthOhioGipper

            Nationalization of industry equals doomsday. Get over it. Foreign investors will not invest in a society that despises profit and nationalizes its industry. When foreign investment collapses you get social conditions like Venezuela.

          • Sam Mitchell

            please please please… tell me the source of your hallucinations…… and when you do come down from the “medication” please tell me WHO actually within the INDY camp said that nationalisation was the end game???… as I can give you many of the bt britNatz who rabbit on about Scotland becoming the new Venezuela … and thats seemingly the only course open to us without the advice of wm running things… still without any debt… I can tell you which country is more than likely to go under….

          • SouthOhioGipper

            5th paragraph of.this article states 3000 activists calling for the nationalization of industry, “land reform” and we can imagine what that means. A whole host of socialist poppy chopping!

            Are you saying and independent Scotland would be Capitalist? I wouldn’t bet one of my yank dollars on it.

          • AtMyDeskToday

            The SNP has 80000 members of whom 3000 are nutters. Not unlike the Republican Party in your good ole USA. Best you don’t take that bet I think.

          • Shiprex

            Scotland is a Socially democratic population. NOT the neoliberal population of Thatcherite wet dreams.

          • Shiprex

            No it doesn’t
            Look at Norway with Statoil. Think that model is better than the foodbanks for the population and the BEST of champagne for the Lords while they claim millions and do nothing for it.

          • Jim Station

            What industry can be nationalised? There are a few financial jobs in Edinburgh – which will be shifted south of the border in the case of independence and a few oil based ones in Aberdeen for the next few years until the oil shortly runs out. Apart from those jobs the rest are state / quango ones. The nats are totally out of touch with reality, and are truly determined to lead Scotland and the wider UK to utter ruin. Totally criminal!

          • Sam Mitchell

            clearly you missed the BP news about the oil find… they thought possibly the worlds 6th biggest oil field… …. or sir ian woods latest pronouncement turning his view once again… BUT… its only to gather a fund in any case for Scotland’s future generations… as Norway… or the other Oil rich countries… as.. we have an overabundance of wind power generation… in fact ALL of scotland electricity could come from this source alone… we seemingly export at the moment…. some 32% of the surplus … South of the border…. which once your fracking takes off will be available to the highest bidder… that is providing there isn’t civil unrest in the fracking shires…

          • Jim Station

            I did hear a claim of further oil -of course that is BOUND to be enough to raise enough taxes to fund all the nats’ socialist pipe dreams…not! I do NOT want Scotland to turn into another socialist looney country funded by oil like Venezuela – mind you there is no chance of that since there has never been any evidence of Venezuelan size amounts of oil.
            Why on earth do people want Scotland to become more isolated from the world – leaving the UK also means leaving the EU and other trading blocs.

          • Harryagain

            Socialism always fails.

          • Shiprex

            tell that to Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Finland just to name a few EUROPEAN ones.

          • Jackie Dawson

            Its not about the oil that’s only 15% of the revenues Scotland has. Scotland is rich, why do you think they are holding on with their teeth. Mandate will be in 2016 – full independence for 2017, after everyone is in foodbanks by then.

          • Shiprex

            Scotland would not be a one party state as Westminster politics has become (imported neoliberal politics from the US)

          • Kaine

            A referendum which will have all the weight and legal standing of the one in Catalonia, and all international recognition of the one in Crimea.

          • Shiprex

            Don’t think democracy is that lost a cause that if it were to be ignored as much as your religious devotion to the Britisher concept then UDI would be the only way to go mass protests strikes etc and think of the impact on your lords and masters portfolios in the City. Wouldn’t make sterling all that good a bet.

          • Kaine

            Would this be the Sterling an IndyScotland thinks it will be using as its currency? Will these be the City bankers it is planning to lure with its race-to-the-bottom corporate tax rates? You think international capital has to be physically based in a country to dominate it?

            You don’t know a thing about socialism. Now wave your flag like a good little bourgeois nationalist and keep fighting for your little comprador state based on licking the boots of global corporations.

          • Shiprex

            Yes the Sterling ANY country can choose as its currency.
            The city bankers who’s sole purpose is to make money from the pensions, mortgages, insurance policies and all sorts of other ‘products’ they use as gambling chips to maintain their champagne lifestyle while working for the even bigger fish intent on taking over control of everything so they can dictate their world view on the rest of us (they’re waiting in the wings for you neolib fools who’ve bit on their lure and are hanging on to it for your lives because you can’t see the bigger picture) which your sort are more than happy to allow them to do with your worship of consumerist market economics that do nothing for society but bring polarisation of capital and power.
            Socialism it seems is a term you keep associating with democratic socialists which is not surprising as ignorance has been a strong point of the Britisher mindset. However the promotion of small businesses and restriction of corporate power and freedom is where you’re blinkers seem to be hiding from you.
            Don’t forget to bow to your corporate master while you consume what your expected to consume and keep up that debt so they own you and yours well beyond your end so your offspring will continue to be paying for your foolish self indulgent ways of the present.
            Britannia has sunk. Pretensions of world power are just that so leave it where it belongs, in the pages of History instead of clinging on to the past like a desperate child on to a comfort blanket. It’s an embarrassment to observe let alone be associated with.

          • James Cammeron

            A win does not need 50% of electorate, just 50% of those who vote. And in a low vote poll, you can bet the YES side will be more motivated to get out.

          • Jackie Dawson

            Correct…….its like living with an abusive partner. Some just cant break away and do it on their own, while others can.

          • Jackie Dawson

            6% is all they needed and with the Smith Commision the NOs who wanted power and got shate on. Are not happy..

          • Shiprex

            You missed the 25% of NO voters (that’s 500 000 of the 2 million) who did so BECAUSE of the promises that are not being delivered.

          • Red Priest

            No. It lead automatically to war in 1919. Here’s a question, though. Who appoints Scots judges?

          • greggf

            It’s probably the same system they had for Ireland in 1918/19!

          • Derick Tulloch

            Predictions are best avoided but probably not because we have just had a referendum and a majority voted No. We should respect that.
            However, we know from Ashcroft that 25% of No voters did so on the basis that we would get substantial Home Rule. There is not a majority for Independence: yet. But 75% of the population (me included, at this time) would support full Devomax where all taxation is raised in Scotland and a sum remitted to Westminster for shared services. Smith has utterly failed that constituency

          • greggf

            Yes Derick, Home Rule – an aspiration shared by the English.

          • andagain

            We’ll have referendum after referendum until we get the right result – and that decision, of course, will last forever.

            Then, when the impossible promises are not fulfilled, it will all be someone elses fault.

            Meanwhile, UKIP will be doing pretty much the same thing in England.

          • Jackie Dawson

            Westminster is broken, its filling the pockets of the rich, while kids starve and they think nothing of it. Look at the Tory MP complaining that Oxfam have shown their policies up, then want them investigated………a charity for god sake. They must be running scared…….

          • andagain

            “kids starve”

            Thatmustbe why I keep seeing somany fat people around.

          • Fraziel

            The last poll i saw , taken about 2 weeks ago,showed NO on 53% and yes on 47%, however, polls are irrelevant. The only one that counted, just like at any election, is the one on the day and NO won. Accept it and stop trying to usurp democracy.


            I am not trying to usurp democracy that was done when the unionists made a very shady last minute promise of home rule that they have just broken. I am not going to accept that type of democracy.
            Besides that was then. Democracy doesn’t stand still and support for YES grows (as even your figures show). You shuld try and accept this. One vote was never going to settle it for ever. If there is support we will win. That is democracy. If there isn’t support you have nothing to worry about. I don’t see most unionists being unworried though.

            As veteran BBc reporter Paul Mason put it “‘Not since Iraq have I seen BBC News working at propaganda strength like this. So glad I’m out of there,’”. This is what we had to put up with and any EU referendum will be the same. That and last minute promises they have no intention of keeping etc.

          • Kaine

            Ah, I see. So if it’s YES we can have another poll five years after correct? Or does this only work one way?


            Get yourselves a party tyogether and winn all the elections. Have a majority in Holyrood with mass support from Holyrood and a willing rUK and I don’t see how it couldn’t be, That is how democracy works. Neither you or I make the rules.

          • Kaine

            So on this basis if, say, Orkney wanted to split from Scotland, whether for independence or to remain within the UK, all it needs is a majority of voters on a given day right?


            Orkney is not a country in a union. If there is a political will in Orkney to go independent from Scotland they are quite entitiled to do that in the way that regions of a country normally would. The fact is though is there is no political will. The Orkney and Shetland Isles were polled by the unionist Press and Journal and it was 82% wanted to stay with Scotland, 10% didn’t know and just 8% wanted independence. This is just divide and conquer being poorly attempted by the Britnats. It only ever comes up when independence is looking likely. It is shameful and quite laughable.

          • Kaine

            You’re calling for partition, bit rich for you to be screeching ‘divide and conquer’ when it is your raison d’être.


            Calling for self determination. You know like all the other countries that have left the British project have done over the years. Divide and conquer is a completely different thing. I suggest you look it up. We are not looking to conquer or in any way subdue anybody. We are looking to have more local government that isn’t side tracked by that centre of capitalism (I am sure you as a ‘socialist’ will apreciate this) City of London (financial district rather than people of the city). We look to international cooperation and welcome immigration. It is not our raison d’etre. I think you should do more research and less puerile posting.
            Since when did socialists stand against the idea of self determination by the people? Where is the divide and conquer? Truly idiotic response.

          • Kaine

            Nationalism is a bourgeois deviation, and ‘self-determination’ based on ethno-cultural lines is racist, Wilsonian nonsense, predicated on the idea that people living either side of an imaginary line created by rich men centuries ago are fundamentally different.

            Moreover, the attempt by the YesNP to appropriate the struggles of oppressed people around the world, when Scotland itself was an imperial nation even before 1707, is offensive to anyone of good sense who didn’t learn history from Mel Gibson movies.

            This simultaneous notion of specialness and imagined victimhood is the creed of all nationalists, whatever stupid flag they like to wave. You’re not special. We all have to live on this rock in space together. The attempt by some to divide people so they can become bigger fishes in their smaller pond is execrable.

            Thankfully, the majority of those living in the north of Britain saw this nonsense for what it is. Democracy triumphed. I know that pains you darling.


            Yes we would all like to l;ive in a world without borders and all that but just how is staying within the Uk going to do that? We were even told during this campaign by the UKs legal experts that Scotland had ceased to exist and been swallowed up by England.
            All you are doing is replacing one nationalism with another and you are too dim to see it. British nationalism that we saw during the referendum campaign even appealed to the war dead from the 1st world war and warned us not to become foreigners. That is the type of nationalism I want to get away from.
            The world is made up of nation states. The Uk fancies itself as still being obne of the powerful ones that has weight in the world. This is most often shown through the military.
            I know a lot about history darling and have studied it at post graduate level. I don’t need some dimwit coming on here and blethering ill informed dogma at me.
            So, can you tell me how voting to stay in the UK with its pretensions of still being a world power (imperialism?) going to get any of us any closer to the world without borders you speak of? Especially as we could be dragged out of the EU.
            Democracy did not triumph. Anyone with the least sense knows that. Campaigns based on no prenegotiation, propaganda and when you look like you are losing making a load of promises you have no intention of keeping is not a triumph for democracy. LOL.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Can you possibly explain what is democratic about Scotland returning one ( 1 ) tory mp …. does that not give you a little hint as to how the majority of Scots are thinking… yet have this unequal tory/lib gov foisted on us…. is that democratic?… is that how we will live in future…. wasting our time voting because the south of Eng will always return three times the number of Scots mp’s … therefore whatever they want… we must meekly accept…

          • Kaine

            37% of the Scottish electorate voted for the Coalition. The fact there is only a single Tory MP is a result of boundaries. On a proportional system they’d have about 10.

            There are parts of Scotland where the SNP do badly, why should Berwickshire languish under Nationalist rule when it doesn’t vote for them?

            Somehow having the last two Prime Ministers of the UK and the last three leaders of the Labour Party be Scottish (yes Blair is yours) is a demonstration of Scotland being forced to “meekly accept” whatever is thrust upon it. I bet some genuine victims of political oppression, perhaps the Hong Kong protestors, would love to be ‘oppressed’ to that extent.


            Typical ethnic nationalism from the Britnats. Blair was Scottish so what. He represents a UK party and he was quick to try and stifle powers going to Scotland. He wasn’t interested in Scotland and the Labour Party has become just another Tory party as it chases middle England’s vote.
            The fact that he happens to be from Scotland originally is hardly here or there. Do they represent Scotlands interests or are they just going along with the over centralised British establishment view of things. That is the question not where someone is from. You Britnats just don’t get it do you.

          • Kaine

            I think you’ll find your position is the very definition of the ‘No True Scotsman’ fallacy. Kudos.

            And I’m a socialist, for the record, something the YesNP brigade wouldn’t understand.


            What nonsense you talk. You are no socialist. True socialists wouldn’t use ethnic nationalist arguments. I at no point said he wasn’t a true Scotsman I just said he didn’t prioritise Scotland as politicians within Holyrood do. Blair actively shut down the Scottish 6 news program (on the advice of Blair MacDougall -your BT top man) because it would lead to independence. They shut down information coming from Scotland about Scotland because they thought it would lead to independence.
            The YES side is full of socialists by the way. Have you read the Common Weal? You on the No side have just voted for beong bullied by government and big business, the British establishment and the Queen purring.
            Socialist my back side. The UK is a hangover from the imperial era. It uses weapons of mass destruction to try and keep its place in the world. That and invading other countries on the USAs say so.
            Where are the socialists from the No side? Tell me what Better Together Party is socialist? Labour are a joke with their privatisation, PFI, austerity, pro nuclear and pro illegal invasion, sudsidising low wage employers and a low wage economy. They are not socialists. So where is your socialist UK going to come from. The UK has become the 4th most unequal country in the developed world according to Cambridge Universities Prof Danny Dorling and his extensive work on the subject.

            The UK has been on a neo liberal trajectory for the last 30 years or so. Socialist LOL. Give me peace!

          • Kaine

            Except independence as laid down in the White Paper would have kept the Queen, kept the NATO nuclear shield, kept the capitalist financial settlement of the BoE and the Pound, remained in the EU with its rules against state aid, cut corporation tax etc, etc.

            There is no reason whatsoever to suspect a socialist paradise in Scotland. There is every reason to think it would do the same thing as Ireland, and be an entrepot for global capital to access European markets. Except the Irish expat community is rather larger, so it probably wouldn’t have done it as well.

            But Common Weal, those would be the guys who wanted someone to work unpaid making coffee? Yeah, they’re the kind of hypocritical lefty academics you should build a nation on.


            More childish and ignorant nonsense.
            Who said we would be a socialist paradise? No one on the YES side ever said this. They did say it would take a lot of work to turn Scotland away from the notion that has been encouraged in the UK that there is no other way. That was also the reason why so many things like Nato membership, keeping the Queen and a currency union were put forward. People were not happy with this but you can’t force people to lose the things they have become accustomed t and the Yes side knew that BT would use the Queen, NATO and the pound as British nationalist symbols that could be used to spread fear (foreigness etc).
            A lot What was proposed was that we would develop a high quality manufacturing base linked to universities. We would have far more childcare and that we would rid ourselves of Triident (got to start somewhere).

            You seem to be saying that because we wouldn’t have been able to set up a proper social democratic state stright away it wouldn’t have been worth doing. We should just put up with what we have neo liberal Uk getting ever more unequal. That we could only ever turn out like Ireland (that has had a completely different recent history) rather than turn out like some other sucessful social democtratic countries. It is almost like you would wish Scotland failure. Are you glad Ireland has not had a smooth ride because it too broke away from the UK?
            Also, you know nothing of Scotland or Scotland’s histroy if you think it doesn’t have a large ex pat community. Nothing at all.
            Have you read any of the Common Weal? Have you looked into what they are about and what they are doing? They are not nationalists you see. Also, they wanted people to volunteer so what? There is a huge voluntary grass roots movement in scotland. It is more socialistor social democratic than anything on offer from Westminster. It is people led. As is the Common Weal.
            You obviously know sweet f all about anything. Just another uninformed loud mouth.
            How do you feel that so many senior Labour Party members and normal party members left the Labour party in scotland over this referendum? Do you know that some of them left because BT were phoning up pensioners and telling them lies about their pensions? That is what the Labour Party has become.
            So who is it you vote for? Labour are no party for socialists.

          • Shiprex

            You forget that would be with an SNP controlled Holyrood AFTER independence.

          • Kaine

            No, the SNP have not proposed anything that would approach a social-democratic model of governance. All they’ve done is strip local authorities of power while centralising it in Holyrood, and bought off the Scottish middle class with tax breaks. However if they did, I fail to see why they wouldn’t want to agitate for it for all people of these isles.

            Yes, socialist, I know nationalists struggle to understand the term. Put down the flag and pick up a book.


            The SNP are far more social democratic than anything on offer from Westminster. The SNP are at the moment looking at devolving power to communities and have been taking COSLAs recent report very seriously. They are looking to replace the council tax (which they froze to help a lot of lower paid people out), they are goiing to introduce a land rental value tax and take on land reform properly by getting rid of primogeniture also.
            They are by no means perfect but compared to the alternatives they are not doing badly. Besides Local Authorities shouldn’t hold the power the people should. That is what is happenning here. That is the most talked about issue. It was the UK governments of the last 50 years that stripped power from local government. Trying to blame the SNP for that is utterly silly and ignorant.
            Also, the SNP is the most democratic party out. There are meetings all over with new members being accomodated all over and these people all have votes. The people of Scotland became engaged through the referendum and I don’t see much engagement that any real socialist would be afraid of.

            You are just aping discredited Labour arguments. The SNP have done more for poorer people in this country than Labour ever did. Why do you think they are so popular at the moment. Not with the middle classes but with Glasgows poor?
            You say you are not a nationalist but then you say you want similar policies for all the people of these isles. Why stop at these Isles? That is a bit nationalistic isn’t it. Why not policies for the entire world? Or at least Europe? Why aren’t you into tearing down westminster?
            You are no socialist. What party in the Uk and Scotland do you support?

            Your arguments are puerile. Simplistic nonsense where there needs to be goodies and baddies. You imagine nasty nationalists and that all nationalsim apart from your own you try and describe as a unitary nasty thing. It is student politics. In fact that is not fair most students are far less closed minded.
            Gandhi was a nationalist and so was Nelson Mandella. Nationalism has allowed for a lot of peoples to throw off imperial rule and enter democracy. Scotland had a part in imperial history (some parts from both sides) but we don’t have a national myth that we are some kind of world power. That is an archaic handicap that the UK seems to be holding onto.
            In short you are a nationalist. If you are not please tell me what you have done to break down all borders world wide lately. If Scotland suceeds as another northern European social democracy then it is far more likely that England will start to realise there are other ways. At the moment we are the most neo liberal country in Europe and we are a bad (neo liberal) influence on the rest in anything. How can a socialist think Westminster has anything to offer?

            I suggest you stop inabiting your little fantasy world and start looking around for people that might actually be able to deliver social democracy.


            You should listen to English socialist Billy Bragg. He knows what flag needs to be put down. LOL.
            So much support from socialists in England and Scotland for YES yet you must think they are all Scottish nationalists. Doesn’t it occur to you that something else might be going on?

          • Shiprex

            That a champagne socialist of the Blairite era? All for the privatisation of all state assets as long as there is a profit in it then it’s COOL Britania all the way

          • Kaine

            Can’t stand the stuff myself, though Bevan used to down it by the magnum and I don’t think it affected his politics.

            Independence was supported by Michael Portillo, does that make every Yesser a closet Tory?

          • Shiprex

            No It doesn’t which was evident because it was about self determination for ALL POLITICAL views who value Scotland more than Britain. Not rocket science but creating confusion and pushing lies and threats and negativity of the unknowns is what Little Britains are all about. Sneaky, conniving, sleazy self centred little golum types with an ‘all about me’ mindset.

          • Kaine

            I don’t believe in ‘self determination’. It’s a racist policy dreamt up by KKK-sympathiser Woodrow Wilson that states that people born either side of an imaginary line laid down by powerful elites are fundamentally different to each other. I don’t have time for jingoism and narcissistic nationalism, regardless of the flag.

            Now some blocks might be more efficient than others for arranging certain social organisations. That’s an empirical question. I happen to favour states big enough to face down corporate power and get things done. Some others favour the utility that comes from being small enough to react quickly to internal and external changes. These are interesting debates on which honourable men and women may differ, without the need for doubting the intentions of those of other opinions.

            Also, the geek in me means I have to point out that Gollum saved the world. Frodo refused to give up the ring.

          • Shiprex

            You must have missed the book and the movie. I did not use it to judge your purpose but your mindset and it is only with the end of those such as you can things become good again. Perhaps that’s too much for your ego to take but that’s how it ends up with the self gratifying being sacrificed for the betterment of the whole.
            Since self determination is not a worthy cause I am sure you’d be fine with the EU taking control over the Britisher empire though I expect that even they would balk at that prospect. Fact is culturally, philosophically, socially and in many other ways Scots are not like Brits just as English Welsh and Irish aren’t. The Brit is a construct of the elitist expansionist invasive parasite who is willing to take by force the resources of another. That’s where the individual nations differ from the Britisher.
            It is rather strange that you choose the very reason Scots and others rally against the corporates as a member of the very entity that is supporting such futures. The Establishment are hell bent on allowing oil, agriculture, pharmaceutical, medical and military to take over the nation and you’re blind to it. The idea that BIG is better can be summed up by looking at how the Warsaw pact and even Soviet Union coped. Too much difference between the inhabitants. Britisher as a notion has had it’s day and brought good and bad to the world. It’s now past its sell by date so let it die with dignity instead of the Britisher grasping at straws and begging to keep the thing alive when there are too many who aren’t part of it and want a change.

          • Shiprex

            By the way Wilson didn’t ‘dream it up’. It’s been a principle since civilisation began. Just because you are happy to be ruled by a master race of elitists that have diverging and often conflicting values from most of the citizens of the nation merely makes you ill informed. Just remember the UN actually regard it as a fundamental principle and the Atlantic charter (Roosevelt & Churchill) has it as one of the 8 points of the Charter. So if the world body on nationality deems it fundamentally important your opinion has such little weight it’s floating above the clouds

          • Shiprex

            Those British Corporation PMs were bought and paid for by the foreign oligarchs and media barons that run this country with their lobbyist family and friends.
            As for Hong Kong it has DevoMax at the moment and a lot more control over its economy than that offered Scotland. Glad you pointed out the two countries One system policy difference though (or was it the other way round?)

          • Kaine

            So we’re agreed there’s nothing magically different about Scottish politicians. Excellent.

            Hong Kong does not have ‘Devomax’, a meaningless term. It has something much closer to the Northern Ireland situation under direct rule.

            I know the bourgeois nationalists of the SNP like to pretend they have something in common with the Easter Risers but really, no one is buying it.

          • Shiprex

            British MPs from Scotland aren’t the same as Scottish MPs.
            British ones are looking out for the Establishment and the parties that they represent then the people. The Scottish ones look out for Scotland. Subtle difference.
            Hong Kong raises and spends its own taxes ALL OF THEM. They contribute to the mainland for military and foreign policy BUT they also have their own foreign affairs department which is MORE than devo max as it is currently understood to be absolute control over all aspects of a nations existence except foreign policy and defence. I know you Britishers like to use terms that are ambiguous like the CCP are doing to Hong Kong people but there are pretty clear definitions and trying to reinterpret wording merely proves the sleezy manner in which both those entities deserve any respect.

          • Kaine

            Again, this is a ‘No true Scotsman’ fallacy. I name Scottish MPs representing Scottish constituencies who disagree with your politics and you claim they aren’t really Scottish because all Scottish MPs agree with your politics.

            Under you definition of DevoMax the UK itself falls short, because EU regulations determine far more than defence and foreign policy. The regulate everything from energy costs, to agriculture, to industrial intervention, Health&Safety laws, civil rights etc, etc. Is the UK an independent country? If Westminster appointed a Scottish Secretary with dictatorial powers in Scotland over everything but Defence and Foreign Policy would that fulfill ‘DevoMax’? I don’t know why I’m asking, as you won’t answer.

            Your use of the term ‘Britisher’ is also odd, considering (as the YES campaign repeatedly stated) you could vote YES and be British because Britain is a geographic as well as a political construct. If you’re born on the island you are, under one definition, British, just as you are European.

          • Shiprex

            So you do get it that if you want to remain British then your that BRITISH it’s your nationality and the passport you want to have. Scots want to be Scottish and have a Scottish passport.
            Using your child like logic we’d have this panacea of no borders (very unbritish of you old boy). Scotland does not prosper as it could in the UK SO the thoughtful would have it that perhaps with less of a national focus on property and financial services as well as city gambling practices as the backbone of a nations economy a different one that promote Scottish industries with a different approach to manufacturing and state owned rather than foreign owned essential services at the same time encouraging entrepreneurial activities at the local level. Westminster doesn’t do that.
            Other aspects such as energy production which has huge potential in Scotland are being ignored in favour of the 19th Century technology of fossil fuels (to the detriment of the environment but as long as there is a buck in it it’s fine and the water is super clean already they won’t mind).
            Then there is the rented foreign WMDs that are one of the biggest wastes of money and that hinder development of West coast renewables or exploration.
            Glad you mention the EU given that Scotland has a population 10 times that of Malta yet has the same representation in the EU? How to square that circle is surely something a Britisher would accept as acceptable given Scottish farmers receive the lowest rate of rebates from the EU and Scottish fisheries have been left for dead almost thanks to the Britisher influence.
            I do use the term Britisher in a derogatory sense because it is NOT a country Britain is an Island and Britons are the residents of that Island. BRITISHER is a state of mind. One where you have the delusion that because you are at the top middle of the map of the world you deserve extra kudos and expect respect. You have rented nuclear weapons in your arsenal (need foreigners permission to use them though but it is your big Uncle Sam and he’s pretty awesome so all is good). You believe you are a world power with world opinion. You use military intervention as foreign policy. You support expansionism of your ideology through economic and military intervention. The Britishers are not of the land they exist in but of the confrontational exploitation and assimilation mindset of others for your own gain. You believe wealth gaps are the way things should be that might is right and that people who choose to serve society are less worthy than those who make money.You could say you have a religion of currency. Money is your GOD.

          • Shiprex

            Your ignorance of the vast difference between cultures and values of the parts of Britain is further evidence of your Britisher nationality.
            Scots are Scots not Britishers in the same way Christians are not Buddhists.

          • Chris

            Just wondering, given the SNP public spendingp plans depended on oil at $118 a barrel, who was really conned?


            Given that oil is a diminishing resource it is not going to stay at that price is it. Besides the Scottish economy without oil is the same as the UK economy. The oil prices will rise in the future there can be nothing surerer. It is simple supply and demand.
            The people of Scotland were conned even senior political BBC journalists like Paul Mason saw this. The broken promises won’t last. The UK will tear itself apart now.

          • Chris

            The White Paper explicitly said oil had to be sustained $118 a barrel to sustain their public services. Oil has been at the price the SNP needed it to stay at for 4 months in human history.
            It will not rise for a while, the US and the Saudis are boosting production, beyond demand, to starve the Russians.

            If the Scottish and UK economies are equal, why did you need a gargantuan bailout from the rUK taxpayer when RBS blew up?

            Every fiscal study showed you faced a much bigger hole than the rest of the UK, with a deficit over 8% of GDP.


            So much replication of propaganda. We weren’t bailed out we were still in the UK. It would have been the UK that suffered if RBS hadn’t been bailed out. RBS should have bben allowed to fail simple as that. The poor should not have been made to pay. Now the UK follows pretty much the same path as it did pre crash.
            Oil will go up as well as down. We have over a 100 years of it left as it became clear straight after the referendum.
            Every fiscal study showed nothing of the sort. The fiscal report that was written by Nobel laureate winners was roundly ignored by the press. I wonder why that was. Instead we were fed a load of propaganda from UK civil servants. Our civik servants spreading propaganda.
            Besides all these projections of Scotland’s future assumed we would be in the same position as today. That we wouldn’t invest in research and development linked to our universities (that at the moment is woeful). That our farmers would continue to get the lowest subsidies in Europe and that our renewables sector wouldn’t keep gwetting held back by Westminster decisions. Scotland is one of the richest countries in the world. A lot of economic forecasts for the UK are quite dire as well you know. Besides what is the point in a country doing well economically if it is only a tiny elite that benefits?
            Scotland is just about to get land rental value tax with this we will be able to tax vast areas of land and break up the feudal infrastructure we have been left with. The British establishment is going to start to lose its grip as our land is taken over by more people who can use it to better ends. This is already apparent in the way the community land has been out performing these hunting estates-relics from the imperial and feudal era.
            Scotland is ready to be developed. We don’t need the UK.

            Oh and another thing. When England runs out of water and you are relying on private companies to rip you off who do you think is going to be supplying you with that resource? Scotland’s state owned Scottish Warter that is who. Play nicely and we will. Water will be what wars are fought over in coming years. You should look to the future and not the past.

          • Shiprex

            RBS is a BRITISH bank most of its business and hence liabilities according to LAW is in LONDON. It’s not in the name otherwise we’d be suicidal by eating ourselves every time we had a Milky Way.
            Do some research.

          • Shiprex

            Scotland does not benefit one bit from the oil at the moment therefore logic would suggest that WITH ALL coming to the country no matter HOW much would be a BENEFIT to the nation. Right now the rest of the economy is sufficient to maintain the same gdp as the rest of the UK. Don’t forget that the GDP of the UK would go down without the oil too (reason to make up untruths and promote fear and negativity instead of how wonderful it is to be a ‘Britisher’

          • livnletliv

            As well as more support for leaving the EU.

          • Krackerman

            Indeed – based on a vow of devo-max now lying broken and bloody on the floor. Did you not read the lines in the article making clear that the outcome was a mere stay of execution??? One wonders if you read the article at all!

          • LastmaninEurope

            Thank you for the link to the report.

            “The Yes campaign can therefore be seen as having failed to enlarge its social base beyond the reform-enthusiasts who always vote for new powers. Those of us who were there know very well that the Yes campaign made us all commit much more deeply to the cause than ever before – but we didn’t actually attract new converts. All we did was maintain the roughly 40% of the electorate that support new powers for Scotland.

            This might be summed up as a deepening of commitment to new powers, but not a broadening of the support base.”

            Disarmingly honest from a pro Yes supporter.

          • Most people support more powers, why wouldn’t they as its entirely rational to get things as local as possible but that in turn does not mean its rational or sensible to leave the UK.

            I’m glad you found a quote you liked so that must mean you read the bit about the ‘vow’ not making all that much of a difference?

          • LastmaninEurope

            Indeed I did.

            The article firmly suggests the Vow made no difference. However, It is not possible to be certain one way or the other.

            The tragedy is that it was made by nervous politicians without reference to the population at large.

            It has handed Yes a fresh stick to beat their drum.

          • I’m not sure the people of Scotland are that gullible as to believe that an MP from Fife who never turns up at Westminster and is not even in the shadow cabinet nor is the shadow party leader would in any way be able to deliver anything but as you say the SNP do think the people of Scotland are that stupid so do indeed bang that drum.

            Your right about the new powers not referencing the people at large though and a referendum should really be called before they are implemented.

          • Bo Williams

            The SNP think an opinion poll which show 57% of Scots want to remain in the EU is definitive proof that Scots are pro-European however, an actual vote of over 85% of Scots which showed 55.5% of Scots are pro-British actually means Scotland wants to be independent.


            No they don’t. They never said they did. You guys just make it up as you go along.

            They do think that a poll 6 weeks after the referendum showing 52% want independence and another showing over 60% want another ref within 5 years is pretty promising though.

          • Derick Tulloch

            No. It said 55% of the electorate in Scotland, on the 18th of September 2014, did not want the UK to dissolve.
            Time passes

          • There was no 55%. More like 73 for yes and 27 for no. The 55-45 was what the westminster elite government allowed to be published, they rigged the vote in order to get that figure. Education is the key to acceptance you dumb feck

          • So Westminster all by itself somehow got over a million people to fraudulently vote for them, gosh!

          • Will Mackie

            What if the UK don’t leave the EU? What it if the sovereign will of the British is to stay as members of the EU? Will you accept that or will you continue to push for separation from the EU?

            Serious question…

          • Ill come back in a generation and ask again not next week like these numpties.

          • Will Mackie

            Do you care to tell the other British nationalists this, then?
            If it truly is the desire of the Scottish people to stay in the union then they will always vote no, right? So why is it of such a concern to you?
            The union is safe…

          • The union is safe and referendums are to settle matters for a long time otherwise we would just hold elections.

            The separatists got their chance with full control over the timing and the question and the franchise and they had unlimited funds available and they lost so really they do need to accept this now.

          • Will Mackie

            Exactly, the union is safe, right? So why are you so worried of another referendum being held in this generation?

            I think you’ll find it was the British nationalists that had the unlimited fund from WM. The Yes campaign was a grassroots movement focused mainly on Twitter and being on the streets. I’m sure you’ll try to refute that, though.

            Well, I don’t accept it.
            Just like you admitted to not accepting a no vote in an EU referendum, it’s not a bad thing – It works both ways, pal.

          • I actually said I would accept the result of the EU referendum ten try again in a generation if my opinion lost.

            Oh the grass roots campaign funded by the Euro millions winners who stumped up over 6 million for the cause with Scotland’s biggest homophobes throwing in a £ for every £ Better Together got.

          • Will Mackie

            I know you did and I said that was perfectly fine. I’d consider you a pretty weak individual if you just gave up your beliefs straight away.

            Yes. The funds didn’t come from a party. Those Euro Millions winners are just some lucky sods who won the lottery.

            Besides, for you to say that the Yes campaign had unlimited funds, you must therefore admit that the British nationalists also had unlimited funds, if so, what is your argument? (You said yourself “throwing in a £ for every £ Better Together got.”)

            Scotland’s biggest homophobes? Can you please clarify?

            I see you made no mention of the Orange Order when talking about British nationalists… Convenience? Both sides had regrettable affiliations – including the neo-nazi British nationalists who were burning Saltires and throwing up Hitler salutes… Again, what is your point?

          • Better Together struggled to campaign due to lack of money while the SNP kept the millions the lottery winners gave them for the referendum for themselves and then went back again with their hands out.

            I’m not a British nationalist you know I’m more about getting out of the EU so we can then have full powers for ourselves then the Welsh assembly would need scrapping along with the Northern Irish parliament and then equal Scottish/English/Welsh/N Ireland parliaments set-up on the same powers Scotland has with a very light Westminster and a reformed House Of Lords.

          • Will Mackie

            “Better Together struggled to campaign due to lack of money”
            And there it is ladies and gentlemen… The most ludicrous thing I’ve read on the internet this week….

            Can you provide proof that the SNP done that? I have become a member and my membership would be in question if this actually happened.

            BT could have won with £0 what with having MSM and BBC on their side. (I have a video of a professor who explains the bias) – I’m not sure if I can post links on these comments.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajd4R-9BEIw I mean, he’s only a professor…

            Darling complained about the OBR before indyref saying that it wasn’t independent then Darling used figures from the OBR and the IFS (IFS uses OBR figures to undertake studies) to make his argument for a weaker Scotland from the union.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2_JqiEyzfE (not sure if this will work or you will watch it, but this is the video where he admits it)

            That’s great. I never called you a British nationalist.
            So you want full powers? You to become independent from the EU?
            (nothing wrong with that).

            I don’t think the UK can survive without the EU. Let’s not break our relationship and family with leaving the EU.

          • It did actually happen, party donations are public record and it was widely reported that the SNP kept several million back so the Wiers then had to give several millions more to ‘Yes Scotland’ and then in the last week of the referendum the Weirs gave another million to the SNP.

            Goggle ‘SNP missing millions’ and you’ll find out all you need to know, really had they spent the money Yes may well have won.

            Regarding the EU then its not like our union where trade is actually free as with the EU we need to pay them billions so they can buy from us ‘freely’ and its really quite ridiculous when you think about it. We buy substantially more from them than they do us so a trade deal on our own terms when we exit is a certainty so really we will still keep our relationship, its not like we share a currency or a military or a head of state or allow passport free movement with them.

          • Martin Sinclair

            Currency – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0DQM6Z2Kro He makes a valid point. “How does one country stop another country from using its currency?”
            Military – Yip we won’t be going off to invade middle eastern countries in direct violation of international law, but we never really wanted to do that anyway.
            Head of State – Ever heard of the Commonwealth? I think they throw a big shin dig every so often. Think Glasgow 2014 or Australia 2018
            Passport free movement – You don’t need a passport to go to the Republic of Ireland. Last time I checked that isn’t in the UK but is in the EU

            As for the Weirs, they made separate donations. To the Yes campaign and to the SNP. They’re actually SNP members. They donated to the party they support as well as making a separate donation to the Yes campaign.

          • The SNP held back several millions from the independence campaign and likely lost because of that so you see the SNP having millions in the bank to spend on themselves was more important than Scottish independence.

          • Sam Mitchell

            It’s strange that you seem to feel that bt had limited funds.. given that the head weasel… alistair… claimed over £250,000 in expenses from the well funded bt crew who had the help of a tory benefactor… the bbc…. ALL the media…. & lastly the old subsidised lady who lives occasionally in the large palace at the end of the mall… possibly she didn’t dip into the well stocked piggy bank…. but it was obvious where her sentiments were… when the strategically placed “citizen” asked the question as she emerged from her devotions… with copious media in attendance…

          • Tim Morrison

            Well ‘No’ had all the media supporting it for free – the State Broadcasters in particular. It had the resources that Labour and the Tories were prepared to commit to it nationally. We did it ourselves. Sure, a lot of money came from a few individuals but I sat in a ‘yes’ shop and kids were coming in with their pocket money.

          • David Younger

            The Yes campaign had £1.6m less than the so-called Better Together lot. Figures were published. Out there for all to see.

          • Michael wants what HE wants, and he is quite prepared to see an entire nation denied what it wants, if what it wants is not what he wants.

            He understands that the People were conned – he even did some of the conning – and he realises it’s odds-on another indyref will return a YES vote. So his only recourse is to lobby for the denial of another one,

          • What now the entire nation is SNP is it? time for your meds I think.

          • Will Mackie

            That’s my thinking Christian.

            If it’s the will of the Scottish people to stay in the union, then it must also be the will of the Scottish people to ask for another referendum. Is that too simplistic? Perhaps.

          • Kaine

            If you get 85%+ turn out in the next Holyrood elections with an SNP platform of another referendum and an SNP majority that might have some traction as an argument. Otherwise it doesn’t.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Surely according to all you nationalists It was odds on the
            last referendum would produce a YES vote wasn’t it?

          • Derick Tulloch

            No. It was odds on that it would produce a No, which it did. It was also certain that the No vote would not be large enough to kill the issue, which it wasn’t.
            Roll on May!

          • rollo_tommasi

            Ha ….pretty much every nat was predicting a resounding YES
            win yet they all now claim that subsequent events were all part of some kind of
            a long term game plan. The fact is that only 37% of the entire population of
            Scotland were sufficiently hoodwinked in
            endorsing the SNP’s version of McNarnia.

            Roll on May indeed!

          • Sam Mitchell

            You are correct…. and it came as a huge shock .. but the videos that came after were equally shocking… showing very very strange behaviour…. then we had ALL those britNatz rioting in George Sq in Glasgow… all those butcher aprons being held aloft… all those nazi salutes… all those orange order members trying so hard to keep their more excitable brothers in line…. as they held aloft their framed photos of the old subsidised lady with the palaces & land holdings… and HUGE private bank account… But… what was really shocking was ALL the bbc news cameras recording the tragic events…. all those TV satellite vans broadcasting the police charging into the over enthusiastic britNatz … all the bright scarlet flares being thrown beneath the horses hooves… all the blood flowing from the head wounds as the polices’s batons found and tested the thickness of shaven headed skulls… But… I am so glad the bbc found some wisdom not to send these reports world wide…. it would have possibly harmed the bt cause…

          • Krackerman

            LOL – replace England with “rich elite” and you are closer to the truth…

          • rjbh

            Yes indeed Greta Garbo..and of course The Inglish can do as they please just as soon as Scotland is done with them.

          • Bo Williams

            The polls show 61% of English people want to be in the EU but only 57% of Scots want to be in the EU. Scotland is more Eurosceptic than England.


            Nonsense. What poll. You might have some outlier of a poll that says that (where is it?) but all other polls have shown and continue to show more support for the EU in Scotland than in England. Everyone knows this to be true. You are just being a very silly billy. Check out the latest you guv poll.

          • Bo Williams

            The latest opinion polls show the majority of English people want to remain in the EU. However it is interesting that you think 57% is a decisive Yes to the EU, but a 55.5% No vote is NOT a decisive vote for Scotland to remain in Britain.


            Morons I am talking to morons. The No side won. It was decisive. No one is saying it wasn’t. However, it only won because of a last minute change of the goal posts. Promises that today it became clear were not kept. Already the polls show 52% for YES and that over 60% want another referendum within 5 years. The vote itself was won by the unionists but it was done in such a way that it won’t be sustainable. Massie in the article above knows it and he is a very strong unionist.

            The referendum vote doesn’t mean that Scotland can never again hold a referendum on this issue if it is what the people of Scotland want. I know a lot of unionists are afraid they won’t be able to spin the same lies again and they know they will lose because of this. That is just how it goes though. If the union is strong it will stay together if not it will break up. Most people are aware that a 55% win built on a vow that immediately the next day at 7am had conditions attached to it (and now has not been honoured) is not going to be strong enough to end this debate. That and the fact that old age pensioners were basically told complete lies by Labour activists. Face facts man. The people of Scotland are increasingly aware they were lied to.

          • Wee Scitter

            “it only won because of a last minute change of the goal posts”

            This is dubious and was an extremely foolish mistake for Cameron and Brown to make such appeasements in the first place. Now we can never tell, and those who did not want this progressive destruction of the United Kingdom are having their voices ignored in favour of progressing the relentless SNP agenda.


            At least you are honest. Very refreshing on this page.

            Well if they hadn’t there is every chance Yes would have won. I know 3 people personally who had last minute doubts because of what was apparently offered on the eve of the referendum by Brown. Others must have been swayed as well. So what ever way you look at it change was coming anyway. It was always going to be too close for it to be otherwise. I thnk you are right it is a relentless SNP agenda and support is growing 52% at last poll probable more now Smith is out.
            The thing is most Scots supported Devo Max. This is consistently shown in polls. Devo Max is understod to be just about everything apart from defence and foregn affairs. Most Scots want far more powers than we have been given. Our democratic will has been ignored. There should have been a Devo Max option on the ballot paper. Now independence is going to be the likely outcome.

          • scott01634

            why the hell would the people of Scotland want to be in th e.u have u seen some of the videos on youtube…..

          • Krackerman

            UKIP is the party of English Nationalism – witness the glee of it’s leader in playing up to English feelings that they are being ignored and side-lined… why would any sane Scot vote for that???

          • UKIP is the United Kingdom Independence Party and I am Scottish and will be voting for them in May because I believe that Scotand will be better off out of the EU as the functions the EU does can be better done in Holyrood as that is where most of the powers will go when we leave the EU due to the current Scotland Act that devolves everything not reserved automatically.

            UKIP don’t currently support an English state or parliament so its difficult to see how they can be the party of English nationalism when they want simply the UK’s independence..

          • Paul Wilson


          • What a sore little loser you are.

          • Paul Wilson

            That’s as may be but I would rather be a poor loser than a lying pratt.I suggest you worry more about the NHS cuts in the Midlands after all that is where you live IDIOT.

          • What lies Paul?

          • Bo Williams

            The latest opinion polls show more Scots want to leave the EU than English so I don’t know what you are talking about.


            No they don’t. No polls show that you just made it up. Check out the latest Youguv polls on the subject. God you lot are just awful.

          • Jambo25

            No they don’t.

          • Fraziel

            Comments like this are not only complete sh*te but very aggravating. Currently more Scots want to stay in the eu than want out but how do you know that will remain the case after a campaign leading up to a referendum? If we were to just go with the polling on independence before the campaign NO would have taken 70% of the vote.

            Scots voted NO knowing full well there is an EU referendum coming that might result in the UK leaving up so to suggest that a vote to leave is a mandate for another refrendum is , of course, complete and utter rubbish. Lastly, a vote for independence was, according to EU experts, a vote to leave the EU so how can you complain if the UK votes to leave?. What staggering hypocrisy!


            What utter nonsense. For a start just wait to see what happens if you do get a EU referendum. As with every other referendum the UK Government will go out to try and convince people towards its point of view. They will use every trick in the book as well. The EU will all of a sudden be held up as the only way forward and the economic case will be repeated and boosted. Your narrow support in England will likely fall when the realities are held up. If not it is ridiculous that one country should vote the others out of the EU. This is supposed to be a union of countries not a dictatorship where one country tells the others what international organisations it can and can’t be part of. Besides it is not up to you. If the people of Scotland find it unacceptable there will be another referendum. There is nothing you will be able to do to stop it. The international community and the EU will be on our side.

            The EU experts did not hold one opinion. This just shows your utter disregard for any opinion that is not your own. It is moronic and all too common a tactic of unionists to ignore the substantial senior voices from Europe who said otherwise. I suggest you start reading papers that don’t just reflect your own prejudices back at you. We would have been accepted in the EU everybody of any weight knew and said this and knew it was just a timescale issue.

            The NO vote won through propaganda and promises it couldn’t keep. It is not sustainable. If you think it is well that is fine but you are deluding yourself.

          • Fraziel

            I should know better than to debate with you as yessers are all the same. Just like evangelical christians you have already decided what you want the answer to be regardless of facts or evidence. To say No won through propaganda is separatist stupidity, lies, paranoia and idiocy of the highest order. They won, accept it. The case wasnt made and yes didnt do a good enough job. People saw that and rejected them,thankfully.

            As for it being ridiculous that England should be able to vote for all countries to leave, we are in the UK and we just voted to stay in the UK despite knowing a referendum was on the way so i think its perfectly acceptable as we are in a union and want to remain so. More lies and attempts to deny and usurp democracy from separatists.

            As for being accepted into the EU,LOL,LOL,LOL. ALL the top eu guys said we would have to reapply, however only a separatist would see it otherwise and lets not even start on the unaffordable promises requiring enormous tax rises and the farcical and dangerous idea of a huge banking sector, sharing the pound and no central bank. I really have to laugh at a yesser saying No made promises it couldnt keep, you dont do irony do you? Lol.

            As for reading other papers, i read a wide variety of media from left and right.

            And we STILL voted no knowing there would be a referendum and Scots may still yet vote to leave after a capaign. Nats dont even want to give the people a voice though and i have not yet decided one way or the other how i will vote,just like many many Scots.

            No new referendum for a generation was the Edinburgh agreement which the nats are shamefully trying to go back on already. Any attempt to hold another one will not be tolerated either by westminster or the Scottish people who have spoken on this issue whether you like it or not.

            Now p*ss off back to yestapo headquarters.Save yourself the time commenting too as i wont be back to read your comments or post new ones as i dont debate with paranoid, anti democratic, lying yessers


            Puerile nonsense. There seems to ba a lot of this schoolboy/girl nonsense from a lot on the Britnat side. You only see black and right and right and wrong. There are shades of grey in life you know. Scotland would have been another sucessful small European country as even Cameron said himself. Yes we would have had to reapply but as top EU experts said including the Labour Parties most senior MEP ( a staunch unionist) it would be a mere formality http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/labour-mep-independence-no-barrier-to-eu-membership.24250593
            It was Paul Mason a senior British political journalist from England that said he hadn’t seen ropaganda like it since we were at war in Afghanistan (or words to that affect).
            Of course Scotland could be a succesful country . I think that was Darling wasn’t it. Yet we were told there would be a world wide depression at one point if we went independent. That and a clear lie (the vow) that now noone wants to claim responsibility for. The Daily Record say they got it in an email from UK Government but now they say they have no record. Funny you would have thought everyone would want to claim ownership for themselves. Only morons and the totaaly unperceptive don’t smell a huge stinking rat.


            Also, it will be up to the people of Scotland. I am merely going to try and put the case to them. The last poll showed 52% for a YES and that was before the Smith commission. Support for the SNP looks like it will claim most of Labours seats at Westminster. The SNP will hold the balance of power. If, and only if, the majority of Scots want another referendum there will be one. What is so bad about that? If the union is indeed strong then it will be another defeat for YES. However, I doubt it will be because everyone now knows we were lied to. The polls were showing that most didn’t buy the UK propagada that is why they camre in with a last minute bit of jiggery pokery. If the case for the union was so strong why the need for this dishonesty.


            All the 69% from Dundee University figure shows is that on certain questions concerning immigration and welfare reform the media has been effective in getting out the current goverments spin.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Staggering rubbish is about the sum of what you have pontificated on in your post… “”” according to EU experts””” can you name them… can you give a little hint who these mysterious experts are???… are they the same experts who foresaw the Oil running out the day after Indy… or our pensions disappearing down a black hole….or any one of the other so called friendly advice given to frighten the genetically unengineered… in the meantime whilst you scrabble in research…. I quote my Law Professor friend… It is the EU legal principle of Continuity of Effect – which protects citizens of the EU – and we have been citizens for over 40 Years. I think if you look on Lawyers for Yes you may find some case law referred to in articles somewhere. In circumstances where citizens have exercised their democratic right for self determination in a referendum agreed to by the member state, as we have done, and these citizens wish to remain citizens under EU law – we are entitled to continuity of effect – so we can never drop off the end of the membership cliff to become members at a later date – this is just not how the EU works. Hope that helps.

          • Pootles

            Actually, the English don’t want out of the EU either. In fact differences in views on subjects like the EU and social justice aren’t nearly as great between Scots and English as people think. In fact, the differences are less than the gap between ‘yes’ and ‘no’ in the referendum. Here’s John Curtice on the EU:

            ‘an analysis of opinion poll data collected during the course of this year [2013] suggests that whereas across Britain as a whole only 37% would vote to stay in the European Union, in Scotland that figure is rather higher, 43% – a difference of six points. Equally, the proportion who would vote to leave is six points lower in Scotland. While that difference is potentially enough to alter the majority outcome, it is not enough to suggest that there is a far stronger groundswell in favour of the European project north of the border.

            So those who hope that independence would pave the way for Scotland to become a markedly more social democratic country that in addition would wish to be in the European fast lane should perhaps not set their expectations too high. At present at least, what Scotland wants looks too similar to what England wants for us to assume that is what would happen.’

            see: http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2013/10/two-different-countries-scottish-and-english-attitudes-to-equality-and-europe/


            So the proportion that would wish to stay is 6 points higher and the porportion who want to leave 6 points lower. That looks to me like a significant difference. Also, these are polls and reflect the populations view rather than referendum results that we cannot view in isolation from the last minute vow that the BBC gave up precious air time to tell us all about. That the BBC is on record as calling devo max (when of course it was nothing of the sort -a recent poll showed that most Scots think Smith fell far short of what was promised). The two things are not comparable. You also have to account for the fact that the referendum result was a product of a propaganda machine that was brought to bear on Scotland that veteran BBC political journalist Paul Mason (now with the BBC) could compare only to the propaganda he had seen in the wars in the Middle East. Also, recent polling has shown that support for a YES vote was at 52% before the Smith Commission released their watered down offer. That shows a significant shift in relation to ongoing events.

            Prof Curtice’s British attitude surveys (or whatever they are called) have come under criticism because of their methods. Of course Scottish and English attitudes are not going to differ that greatly because of the UK media being largely the same in outlook. Also, we have been governed from the most centralised state in the whole of Europe so finding political difference at this point is going to be harder than in a properly devolved country. However, it is also down to the way questions are asked. For example ask someone if they would vote a certain way to be £500 better off each year and you will get a lot of people agreeing to it. This is a question Curtis went on and on about but anyone who has any experience in surveying knows this is a leading question and not one people really think about too deeply in a survey situation. Curtis has shown himself not to be the objective analyst he pretends to be over the course of the referendum time and again. Of course he will try and make us all look like we think the same because that is his leaning. If we all think the same on these issues why is there a difference?
            I don’t think the social attitudes of normal people are vastly different
            anywhere in the UK at the moment (although there has always been a
            distinction made between the north and South of England Labour/Tory).
            However, I do think that certain political trajectories can take over
            and that the UK has been suffering from an ‘there is no other way’
            perception for a while. In Scotland the political reality is
            that we have been taking a different path for example universalism (non means tested benefits). This is something none of the UK parties really support
            The facts are at the moment that most Scots want to be in the EU despite the same barrage of anti European media. What will undoubtedly happen across the UK if there is a referendum is you will see the big guns come out and try and scare the whole population into voting the way it wants. This happened with the AV referendum as well as the one held in Northern England for devolution. Here is an article about the fear factor. http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/12/03/spiders-and-soor-plooms-the-fear-neuropolitics-of-scotlands-independence-referendum/

            We have a different government now in Scotland and emergent alternative media that is not under the control of the big metropolitan boys. We can vote how we want and we do. We vote SNP and if polls are to be believed we will vote SNP in the Westminster elections this time too. That itself is a different political attitude and trajectory to the one in England. The SNP are definitely pro European. I personally think that England may well be turned around in a referendum and the narrow support for leaving the EU may evaporate. We have already heard of big business looking to plan exits from the UK in the event of it leaving the EU. However, if England votes to leave and Scotland doesn’t it is most likely that the people of Scotland will not be happy to be dragged out of the EU against its wishes. Then most of the arguments made by Better Together will become meaningless as we leave a larger union and trading pact if we stay with the UK in those circumstances. An extrememly difficult position to try and defend. If the people of Scotland then wnat another referendum (over 60% have said they want one within 5 years regardless of the political situation) then how can it be stopped? The world will be watching and all the countries of the EU will be keen that Scotland stays if it wants to even if England goes.

          • Pootles

            Yes, 6% is a difference, although less than the 10% difference in the Scottish referendum. Although I would like to see exit from the EU, I suspect that even England would vote to remain (if, and that is a big if, there is a referendum). As for your other points, they may be right, or they may be wrong. In general, as Scottish Social Attitudes show, there are few substantial differences in attitudes between Scotland and England on major topics.


            Yes but already polls show that difference is no longer there. Events have taken over and now there is likely to be a larger support for YES. Besides as I said the two are not comparable for a number of reasons.
            I think you are right that attitudes don’t differ that greatly when someone is asked questions in a social attitudes survey. This is not surprising given that up until very recently we all got pretty much the same media. In fact Tony Blair, on the advice from Blair MacDougall (the leader of Better Together) axed a Scottish 6 News program that had been promised as part of the original devolution settlement (back in 1999 or whatever). The reasons given by Blair MacDougall were that a news program that was presented from a Scottish point of view would lead to independence. That is they decided that if we had a news program made in Scotland we would support independece because we wouldn’t be looking at things through a UK lense. Very telling indeed and more than a little Big Brother don’t you think? Instead we had to make do with a farty wee Newsnight Scotland program that got axed half way throught the referendum campaign.

            For these reasons there may not be huge differences in opinion. However, it is always changing. We have a centre left party that most people support. The UK no longer has a centre left party. Not a real one that doesn’t believe in privatising everything and doing away with free university education etc.
            As I said universalism is still strongly supported in Scotland. It may be in England too (especially in a survey depending on how the question is asked) but the political reality is it has been eroded in England to a point it hasn’t in Scotland. these are changes that will make the difference in political perception ever greater.

            Also we have to go by the latest polls these days because there has been
            a lot more political engagement in Scotland lately and as the
            referendum vote showed there has been a significant shift (a lot of
            commentators earlier this year thought that No would win by 70% vs 30%).

            The Latest You Guv polls I have seen suggest that there is a
            significant difference between English and Scottish EU ref voting
            intentions Scotland 59 % for staying and 23% for leaving whereas
            England 40% vs 41%. You Guv Sunday Times.
            These are significant differences. It maybe one poll but the EU issue has not stood still in England or Scotland. In England it appears at the moment that support for leaving the EU may be growing with support for UKIP. In Scotland this has not happened. Support for teh SNP a pro EU party has been growing. That is in reality a substantial difference that will matter if a referendum is called. As will the people of Scotlands access to alternative media that was built up in the referendum.

          • Pootles

            There is, of course, a problem if you credit the UK media with so much power. If that is true, how can one explain the 45% result, and the continued success of the SNP?


            I take it you weren’t in Scotland for the referendum? The UK media does have a lot of power. Not only that but the UK Government was calling in all sorts of favours and had for example the heads of the supermarkets called to Downing Street and urged to help them with their propaganda machine. Some refused to say prices would be harder but we only really heard from those willing to toe the government line. The main stream media supported this British establishment message almost to a man.

            As I said before we now have a substantial alternative media. There is even a YES supporting daily now. The 45% result was despite the propaganda and the last minute changing of goal posts and the breach of purdah. That and the UK Governments refusal for any prenegotiation (prenegotiation that was strongly recommended by the neutral electoral commission). So you see the UK Government were happy to keep us in the dark about matters that could have been cleared up with some prenegotiation and they went on a full out propaganda war. As I said veteran BBC journalist Paul Mason compared it to the propaganda in a war zone. He isn’t one of ours he is an ex BBC man. Did you read the article I attached?
            The continued success of the SNP comes down to a few things. One is the collapse of the Labour party as a party of any integrity. They have become another centre right neo liberal UK party. The other is the fact that Scots don’t vote Tory and the Libdems have shown themselves to have as little integrity as Labour when in power. They are all chasing the famous ‘middle England vote’ you see. Scotland votes for social democratic parties and this shows a difference with at least some parts of England despite what social attitude surveys might say. In fact Scotland is more akin to Northern England politically and this merely shows that Northern England could deal with a great deal more devolution as well.
            As well as the alternative media Scotland has been switched on politically. There are still mass meetings in halls across the country. There are meetings of lots of different types of groups and the mass media can do nothing to infiltrate this.
            The sources we have show that older people voted no in larger numbers. This was because they were intimidated and told lies about their pensions (At least one senior Labour member left giving this as the cause he left the party) and did not have as much access to social and alternative media. Most younger people voted yes.

            Most Scots wanted Devo Max. A lot thought they had been offered it at the last moment by a panicky Better Together. They hadn’t it was a lie. This will keep the SNP high in the polls. Now the people of Scotland know that Devo Max will never be on offer they will seek out independence. Unless anything major happens I fully expect the constitutional debate to go on till another referendum within the next 10years.

          • Pootles

            Enjoy your next referendum.


            Thank you. I hope we all get a better outcome next time. 🙂

        • MichtyMe

          You do come out with a heap of hocum. Lets just consider, one at a time, just how does the EU “deal” with Scots civil and criminal law?

        • Bofh

          so, your argument is.. vote for the party that wants to ABOLISH the holyrood parliament… in order to get more powers for the holyrood parliament?

          share the drugs.

          • Share your source first.

          • Bofh

            some sourcing.

            as we can clearly see, suggesting that voting ukip is in anyway whatsoever ‘good’ for scotland, is complete and utter rubbish.

          • UKIP will empower the Scottish government with the fishing and farming industry’s and control over the environment along with all civil and criminal aspects of law that the EU deals with and also Scotland will be saved several billion a year in membership costs, really what’s not to like?

          • Bofh

            so you’re just going to pretend you didn’t get sourcing of ukip’s desire to abolish the scottish government, and carry on claiming ukip will empower it instead, despite ukip’s own position on the matter.

            there’s a shock, eh?

            bolt, ya rocket.

          • Where in UKIP’s prospectus does it mention abolishing the Scottish parliament? Please cite the source as I will stop supporting them if what you are saying is true.

          • Bofh

            i linked you multiple sourcings above.

            stop asking for what has already been provided as if it hasn’t been.

          • I’m struggling to find one source you linked let alone multiple, humour me and just post a url to a UKIP prospects or manifesto that says what you say they say.

          • Bofh

            you’re not struggling at all, you’re simply being mendaciously disingenuous.

          • Give me the link or don’t reply any more as you are just wasting my time.

          • Bofh

            you were given three links in a single comment. scroll up the conversation thread and stop trying to dodge matters.

          • I just gave you the benefit of the doubt and looked at all links in this article and none show any information from UKIP about abolishing any devolved administration.

        • Kaine

          The inability of, for instance, the British state to run its own rail infrastructure is not caused by the EU. Indeed, Section 25 of the 1993 Railways Act is a violation of European competition law. This idea that there is a radical, autarkists, interventionist state waiting to burst from the shackles of Brussels is nonsense.

          • We can’t even run Royal Mail without them sticking their noses in so the idea is not actually far from nonsense. Our railways are predominantly run by other EU states thanks to EU rules so that really was a poor example.

          • Kaine

            No, it was the perfect example. Our railways are run by other EU states because the Tory government in 1993 violated free market rules by specifically banning British Rail, or any other UK state body, from bidding for contracts.

            Let me restate that, there is nothing in EU rules that says the UK railways cannot be publicly run, that is UK law.

          • There is plenty in EU law that prevents us from having a preferred public bidder though and there is plenty in EU law that allows these foreign governments that run our rail services to dodge tax here and instead pay in in their home country.

          • Kaine

            Which are issues for the UK government to have out in the ECJ. It chooses not to, because UK governments have, since at least the late nineteenth century, believed in free markets as a point of dogma.

          • Its nothing to do with the court of justice it has to do with EU trading rules and EU tax legislation.

          • Kaine

            For which there are many, many exceptions and a great deal of leeway which can be achieved, as it was over the banking system, provided national governments are willing to make their case. The UK government is not because the UK government approves of the restrictions on state action the EU treaties and rules lay down, because UK orthodoxy is that the state should not be interventionist.

      • Red Priest

        It’s not like the UK didn’t legisalate for actual Home Rule before. Look at Government of Ireland Act 1920 (not the 1923 post-war free state act, the actual 1920 home rule one) – look at the bare list of reserved powers.
        Now, seriously, Clegg’s gonna try and say this Smith thing is Home Rule? Seriously?

        • Derick Tulloch

          Well, Clegg is a Liberal and hence a Stranger to the Truth. It’d be more surprising if he was ever honest

      • Jackie Dawson

        no wait we get 14 billion in tax and welfare….oopps no that’s all ready in Block Grant, so its just another way lying.

      • Peter Gardner

        Quite right, Derick. They aren’t even coherent. They are completely impracticable. It is almost impossible to implement any UK policy consistently through these proposals, especially income tax by which the basic rate threshold is UK but bands and rates are Scottish. And how can the required UK, ie, English, support of Scottish debt required by inadequate Scottish taxation and profligate Scottish spending be estimated? That is why the Scots (England was not represented on this Commission) want Scottish votes on UK fiscal matters but complete freedom to tax Scots inadequately and spend English money in Scotland. The English taxpayer will be forced to pick up the Scottish deficit. It’s a blank cheque to Scotland.

        And David Cameron has cravenly promised to deliver it.

        • All I can say is that the British Tories are lavishly equipping UKIP with opportunity to provide where UKIP is distinct, when compared to the British Tories.

        • Derick Tulloch

          Your second last paragraph suggests that England subsidizes Scotland. The exact opposite is the case.
          I support full Independence, but I could live with proper Devomax whereby all Scotland’s tax revenues, and yes that includes the continental shelf, are gathered in Scotland and a block grant remitted south to pay for shared services.
          That would end this ‘who subsidizes who’ nonsense once and for all. The ‘UK’ would survive. Nigel and Rupert would still get to swan around the security council pretending to be important. But Scotland would finally get a grown up politics.
          EVEL would be absolutely fine.

          • Peter Gardner

            So you would be happy for the Barnett formula to be scrapped?

          • Derick Tulloch

            If all onshore and offshore tax revenues from Scotland and the continental shelf were gathered by Revenue Scotland there would be no need for Barnett. Scotland would live within her means. Scottish MP’s would only need to participate in Westminster in regard of remaining UK services – Defence and Foreign Affairs mostly. It’s not what I want, but it would do.
            Of course that would mean we would no longer be paying 9% of ‘national’ infrastructure – e.g. trunk roads in England, from which we derive no benefit.

          • Peter Gardner

            The thing is that if ordinary people like you and me were to sort it out we would probably be able to agree something equitable. The trouble is that Cameron has commissioned a bunch of politicians who have, no surprise, come up with a dog’s dinner which betrays their true and venal motives, and Cameron is the most useless negotiator, has no ability as a national leader, has little sense of patriotism, does not respect the constitution and cares not a jot for English interests. He made a pig’s ear of the referendum and is now making a pig’s ear of devolution. One just despairs.

          • It isn’t for the first time that the little guy pays for the hubris that is attached to those who wield power.

    • Terence Wilkinson

      Em your lot lost the referendum. Let it go. Show respect for democracy and do everyone a favour and focus on governing. Use the powers already in place to come up with something better than charging 5p for plastic bags.

      • Sam Mitchell

        so free uni places for those academically able… or free prescriptions… or medical help… is to be ignored in favour of your wee whinge on plastic bags…. although why farmers are not being charged more for wrapping their crops in copious amounts of non degradable plastic is beyond me… still all farmers are green at heart… aren’t they???

        • Terence Wilkinson

          Try analysing who these policies really help: free university places if you went to state school or a private school while ignoring the financial problems of universities or ignoring that top staff can easily move to England or America for better salaries. Incidentally I had my university fees paid for me and received a grant before Devolution and under a nasty Tory government. Medical help? That is called the NHS, you know the NHS whose budgets the SNP have been cutting while that wicked, evil Mr Cameron has been increasing his NHS budgets. Finally please get off your high horse about the environment as the SNP’s one and only answer to Scotland’s problems is oil – the price of which is in decline so sn independent Scotland relying on the revenues of this fossil fuel would have any even larger budget deficit which means that all that free stuff the SNP likes to promise would be unaffordable.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Oh dear… A.S. has been cutting funds to the NHS whilst dave has been increasing them… is that why the staff of the NHS in Eng staged a huge protest march that the bbc didn’t find time in their busy schedule to report on…. or have they not had a pay rise for three years now?…. and top staff moving… so they can’t do that now?… it’s only once we are Indy that this will occur… didn’t realise that!!… so the free medical help that all these southern incomers make use of is widely available south of the border?… I wonder why they bother… and… as for oil… it’s only a PART of Scotland’s many great assets… still once the fracking takes place in Eng…. you too will have this wonderful bonanza flowing into daves shareholders accounts… as you will need this… given your debt problems… though thankfully we ” separatists will be long gone and you will not have the “burden” of supporting us…

      • Bill Cruickshank

        You obviously have no idea of the political situation in Scotland. For your information SNP membership is now approaching 95,000 and YES supporting parties combined now have memberships of well over 100,000.

    • Red Priest

      1) When the Scottish TUC complain about Smith, SNP are pretty much off the hook on ‘grievence’ accusations. they simply turn and say ‘for goodness sake, Labours core support say it’s not enough!’ Neutralised in one shot.
      One wonders at the damage this might do to Lab if STUC turn against them, especially if/when Murphy/Dugsdale get allected.
      2) Meanwhile news breaks that all but total welfare devolution was agreed, but then pulled with only days to go by Tories, with labour approval, when IDS complained. IDS!!
      Imagine for one minute how that’s going to play in Glasgow? SNP literally couldn’t have asked for better – “Labour gang up with Tories to welch at last minute on agreement to rescue Scottish poor from Duncan Smith!!” – and that on top of the known reluctance of Labour to devolve even this much tax power, and the immediate stunt of Balls and Umana to undermine Smith for fear of hurting Newcastle airport!
      It is like actually watching a corporate suicide.
      Nothing is inevitable, but SNP are going to have have a calamity not to pulversie Labour in the next few elections, the way things are going…

    • Peter Gardner

      The Smith Commission’s proposals are also a betrayal of England. I am reminded that when US President Wilson completed his Treaty of Versailles negotiations in 1919 he remaked that since he had pleased nobody he must have done a fair job. He did at least establish widespread recognition of the the right to self-determination. I cannot see any coherence or sense whatsoever in the Smith proposals.

      I hope the day will come when supporters of Scottish independence realise that the Westminster elite whose rule they rightly resent, is in reality an EU elite that happens to be British. The Westminster government is merely the local executive branch of the EU. I hope the timings of this coming realisation, the next referendum on Scottish independence and the inevitable referendum on EU membership are such that England and Scotland can remain united in regained sovereign parliamentary democracy freed from foreign rule.

      Sadly, it may take direct rule from Brussels for the Scots to shed their illusions about Westminster.

  • smilingvulture

    #fmqs today Nicola Sturgeon surpassed my expectations,Scotland is in good hands

  • jazz606

    Maybe the Scots will declare UDI. That would be fun.
    In the mean time I expect that big Scottish companies ( and many small ones ) are discretely screwing up brass plates in England.
    Personally I’m getting sick and tired of the Scots.
    We’re hearing far too much about them and from them.


      You better get used to it because there is more to come. You don’t get to just tire of whole nations of people within a political union and shut them up. This is the real world.

      If companies leave they will be replaced. Exports are up in Scotland as a result of a referendum. With independence and staying in the EU it will possibly be English companies heading north as they are already checking out Eire/Ireland because of the EU refererendum. Silly unionists think it all works one way.

      • jazz606

        Independence and staying in the EU ?

        Whatever happens Scotland would have to negotiate a new relationship with the EU.
        And then there’s the currency issue.
        Which one do you fancy? The ‘Merk, Groat or whatever, or the €uro. Although I guess you’ll have to choose the €uro if you want to be in the EU.


          Our own currency will do. Lots of other succesful small countries manage this without the sky crashing in on their heads.
          We won’t have to take the Euro just as Sweden haven’t. Oh dear!

          • jazz606

            By all means have your own currency.

  • ghostly

    Strange choice of words, an SNP Westminster majority in the election is “disturbing” – how?

  • Alistair Gray

    Just so.

    The referendum was not an isolated event, but a part of a long process stretching back to the 1980s, of Scotland repatriating power from Westminster.

    Until the last few weeks of the campaign, there was no expectation that Yes would win. The Yes vote of 45% on a huge turnout was a big step forward for Scottish independence, not a defeat. The campaign radicalised Scotland, and made independence an attractive, credible, mainstream option. It entrenched the SNP as the natural party of government, and severely damaged the reputation of the Westminster parties in Scotland.

    The movement of repatriation continues. The Smith Commission is the next step, but it will not be the last step. The end to this process can scarcely be in doubt: in 30 years time, it is unlikely that the UK will exist.

    • Sam Mitchell

      Sorry Alistair…. the union is already finished…. there are many such as I who will have no truck with any supporters of the union…. especially those quasi Scots… But… the English are being told ” facts ” as misleading as the willfully perjured misinformation that bt sponsored throughout Scotland… so their ignorance of future events is understandable…

      • ColinPowis

        you’re such a moron …what a total embarrassment for Scotland

        • Sam Mitchell

          dear dear.. name calling… proves your lack of substance… as most of your clan…. britNatz…. when the police charged you in George Sq… did you manage to duck… or are you still picking skelves out of your thick skull???

  • Massie: ” … Scotland’s election will be 59 mini-referendums on the national question. And that will serve as an overture to the 2016 Scottish parliamentary elections, at which another SNP triumph would open the door to a second independence referendum.”

    Nonsense. If the SNP (and other pro-indy parties) gain a majority of Westminster seats, then that is more than an adequate mandate to demand an immediate referendum. No need to wait to win Holyrood elections yet again.

    If the Westminster Government defies the express will of the Scottish people and refuses Section 30 enabling legislation, then as night follows day, a UDI will be the result.

    • Oh dear……………..

      • Still unschooled I see.

        • UDI, really?

          • Read my post above your “Oh dear” .

          • I did and you implied UDI and that quite frankly sums up the arrogant undemocratic nature of the separatists, you lost the referendum now be a good loser and accept defeat gracefully.

          • I didn’t “imply” a UDI, I shouted it from the rafters. In the event of the UK Parliament’s refusal to move the required Section 30 legislation, the sovereign people of Scotland can and will revoke the Articles of Union and since the UK of GB has ceased to be, declare Scotland to be once again, an independent state.

          • It does not work like that, referendums are to settle things for a considerable time they are not monthly events.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Only parliament can dissolve the Act of Union. UDI means Scotland
            wouldn’t get any share of assets, currency oil, it would get zilch. Best case
            scenario would be that Scotland would be a banana republic. Worst case could be
            a potential civil war.

          • Sam Mitchell

            No share of the assets… Jeezus H … what assets?… but then again… NO DEBT… no kick into the 1.5 trillion & rising debt… that ALL unionists seem to ignore… you rabbit on about assets… but this jumbo you seem to never see… or… like dave said… we are not paying the £1.5 BILLION to the EU… but… we all know what a liar the man is… and the payments will be in the post…. so… I wouldn’t care if Scotland had to use turnips… in international trade… we are RICH in assets that wm knows only too well… that why all the praying on bended knees from wm & its branch parties… for a no vote… thats why all the Vows…. all the threats…. all the scare stories… from shipbuilding to banks laying off staff… & guess what sailor???

          • rollo_tommasi

            I don’t think you have the faintest idea what no assets actually means. It means no money to pay essential public services (hospitals, police and of course that massive benefits bill). As well as no armed forces of any kind to quell any civil unrest that would ensue. No EU membership and use of the pound. Scotland would be a rogue state and would have to borrow on day one at extortinate rates if it could borrow at all.

            Financial Services would up sticks in a heatbeat and the oil industry would be off. An abruptly independent Scotland
            would be left with the forest of decaying junk in the North Sea, much of it already well overdue for decommissioning.

            As I said before Scotland would be a basket case and with the potential for civil war. You seem to typify the braindead nationalist who doesn’t care or understand the consequences so long as you get your freedumb!!!

          • Sam Mitchell

            Isn’t it strange that a small INDEPENDENT country called New Zealand… manages without the aid and “”” assistance “” of the EU… of “”the pound “” of all these belligerent world powers waiting of shore to swallow it as it doesn’t have any Air craft carriers… but only a small standing army with a small navy… and an NHS system… aligned with a social services dept that does not FORCE it’s fellow citizens into food banks… or pay day loans… OR.. zero hour contracts… or… penalises them with sanctions… or… a broadcaster??? which takes £145 per year to watch such rivetting entertainment as “” bake offs….. come dancing…. etc etc… …. that doesn’t have a self styled “mother of parliaments “… wallowing in corruption… riddled with liars…. who can not comprehend the basis of the word TRUTH… still you are clearly missing your medication… and the hallucinations should go once matron has tucked you in…. basket case… is that down to the massive debt that Eng. has … the £1.5 trillion…. that is using Scotlands VAST asset base to try pay off the interest… to daves banking friends… & the civil war…. WOW!!!… bring it on then…. write to your mp and explain how you don’t want to be tied to such a disaster… Im sure they will listen….

          • rollo_tommasi

            That massive debt was partly run up bailing out your cr*p banks. In particular RBS after they failed to do the correct due dilligence on purchasing ABNO AMRO (s endorsed by that clown of a first minister). Of course if he wasn’t FM then he would have persuaded them against it…..ha ha ha what a loser.

            You hate the UK I get it…..p***off somewhere else then far away. The absence of you and your ilk won’t be noticed.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Oh dear oh dear…. do you mean the banks with the name Scotland in their title?… as they are no more owned by Scots than you own Lloyds… though you do now… as the US of A actually bailed out this and other banks… £630 Billion to RBS alone.. …. to the relief of the arch quisling alistair…. also… these banks have cost the jobs of more Scots than any other… Plus… gordo said print money… £390 billion… then he GAVE this to the banks…. who then in turn loaned it to wm in the Bond Markets… and it goes round in one big circle… only you are so far up the britNatz posterior that you can not see that you are being fed b++++++t…. also… the ABNO deal was signed off by….. I’ll let you guess here…… the FSA who gave it a BIG THUMBS UP…. the FSA was set up by gordo to give a “light touch ” to banks in the Uk… which in turn schemed in every possible way to fiddle their fellow citizens… and its still going on… only as its an old chaps club… no one has been sent down for it…. though had they lied like some of the Met they would have been well banged up… so… why in gawds name should I leave… my country will be soon & I will strive with every ounce to bring that about… waving a tearful goodbye to the struggling masses of incomers who have moved north to escape the nirvana that the Uk was once…. Lastly… if you search Youtube … you can actually still see gordo congratulating ALL those dinner suited bankers at the lord mayors function… where he congratulated them on their “innovativeness”… so what A.S. said to fred the shred is as nothing to what wm & its corrupt shareholders enjoyed… so… as wm controls ALL Scotlands finance… how you can assume that Holyrood had anything to do with Oking a deal like that is beyond me… you need to spend more time researching….. old chap…

          • rollo_tommasi

            Rubbish…i think you’ll find RBS was bailed out by the UK tax payer who is yet to receive a return. The US Federal Reserve did not spend a cent on British bank bailouts. You’re getting confused with bailouts and liquidity support. The latter being profitable and safe to taxpayers; whilst bailout are risky and generally loss making.

            The US Federal Reserve’s made a profitable
            short term loan to Barclay’s not a bailout as Barclay’s had just spent £1.75bn buying a
            chunk of the US bank Lehman Brothers and the Fed was keen to support the
            rescue. Barclay’s had in fact wanted to buy all of Lehman Brothers but Alistair
            Darling blocked the deal on the grounds of risk to the UK

            The decision to takeover ABN AMRO was made by the RBS board in Edinburgh and was the main reason the countrys in such a mess.

            Oh and by the way Alex Salmond wanted LESS regulation…..


          • Ed  

            New Zealand’s the wrong comparison. The correct one is Newfoundland. Independence there failed.

          • Sam Mitchell

            why in Gawds name is NZ not appropriate?… because YOU say so?… it is a small country… same geographically … hills & lochs & coastline… £3.5 million of a population… NO NUKES… wealthy …independent… socially minded… not involved in fighting the US of A’s oil related wars… & INDEPENDENT of wm … has its markets 1000’s of miles from it’s shores & does not subsidise it’s farmers… amazing… no EU dictates… what more could you ask for… of course anything that does not favour the stupidity of wm would never sit comfortably with you….

          • Ed  

            Well then, how familiar are you with Newfoundland’s failed independence?

          • Sam Mitchell

            Ed… you keep mentioning Newfoundland… so does it have considerable Oil stocks… forestry… agriculture… tourism… fishing… some heavy engineering… a well educated population of almost 5.5 Million…. NO DEBT… etc etc… & was Newfoundland governed at some stage by wm?… so whilst you ponder on your dogmatic reply … this is a quote from THE 2014 LEGATUM PROSPERITY INDEX… which surveys many factors affecting the citizens of each of the 140 countries… so… NZ… has risen to THIRD PLACE IN THE PROSPERITY INDEX… The result of a large increase in NZ social Capital… & a rise of FOUR places in the Personal Freedom Sub Index… … can you quote the same for the Uk… SO…. are our freedoms being removed by the day?… are you financially better of…. why not write to your mp and tell him of how desperate you are that the whinging Scots be removed from the Uk… I am sure he will listen… I am sure he will …

          • Ed  

            Newfoundland has many of the assets you mention. And a failed history of independence.

            “No debt”. You’re funny.

            Next question?

    • Gerschwin

      Yeah… tell that to the UN and EU… but at least North Korea and Argentina will recognise you. Silly, silly boy… or maybe just a bad loser eh? Tut, tut.

      • No you clown. In matters constitutional and Scottish, the people of Scotland are sovereign. Having expressed their will, and encountering obduracy by the UK parliament, the People, through their parliament can declare the Treaty (Acts) of Union binding Scotland to England, null and void.

        The United Kingdom of Great Britain is a legal and political entity formed by the Union of two and only two countries – the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England (incorporating Wales). It was created by a bilateral internationally recognised voluntary treaty.

        It is the case that upon dissolution of the Treaty of Union, its associated enabling acts of parliaments, and any subsequent contingent intra-state treaties and agreements derived therefrom, the United Kingdom of Great Britain will cease to be.

        • The people have expressed their will but your in the denial stage so cant see it or see what a raving hypocrite you are.

          • Invective’s all you have left, isn’t it, Michael? No Herald censors to protect you here.

            The Unionist cabal have through bullying and duplicity, sown the wind, and now they will reap the whirlwind.

          • The Herald censors censored me around the time the SNP started flooding the place with Scottish Government adverts.

        • Gerschwin

          I don’t give a flying fig what you think the justification is – not a soul bar the Argies and North Koreans will ever recognise you. Stick that up yer kilt and be grateful for English handouts.

          • Dick Gagel

            English handouts? Still living in the dark ages.
            Scotland has been subsidising Westminster for decades – why otherwise do you thing No was so anxious to hang on to Scotland??

          • Gerschwin

            Think you’ll find the No campaign was led by Scots for Scots and voted on by Scots, as you keep sanctimoniously reminding everyone Scots independence is a matter…wait for it… for the Scots… see my comment above for why 55% of you voted No. Sorry about that.

          • Derick Tulloch

            Well, technically Alistair Darling is English, having been born in Londinium, and Gordon Brown is not really of this planet, so he doesn’t count.

        • Dick Gagel

          Spot on – Westminster parliament has no competence to “grant” Scots right to have a referendum; likewise the so-called Edinburgh Agreement had no standing in International Law either

      • Sam Mitchell

        do you honestly think that given the democratic will of the majority of Scots that the rest of the FREE countries of this world will not recognise that…. & accept UDI … given that so far no shots have been fired… that it is our choice…. PLUS… Oz & the US of A & the Chinese spoke out against Scotland indy …. but… do you think we really care given their controlled reluctance to accept daves hand in the region of their posteriors… are the Scots so shallow that we can not work out how false all this “”international “” condemnation is… given that Russia’s intervention in the Ukraine is the subject to mere economic sanctions… and that the deaths from the downed passenger jet have merely meant some traveling restrictions being placed on a few wealthy Russians… The Scots are unlikely to bother with such fear mongering again…

  • The scurrilous conduct of the British state, big business, state television and other Unionis media, radicalised many Scots.

    They are resolved that if at first you don’t secede, try, try, try, again.


    Well that was fun. I had one guy who said he would happily wear the badge of xenophobe and another telling me that a Labour Conservative coalition will be the result of the next hung parliament.

    What a silly bunch you are. I will see you some other time for some more silliness as all your silly answers are taking too long to answer and well they are not worth answering anyway. I suggest there should be more reading and less posting.

  • JPJ2

    Unionists need to recognise reality. Every opinion poll of recent years which has addressed the issue of what powers the people of Scotland want has shown the following:
    The majority, or at least a plurality, want everything except defence and foreign affairs devolved to Scotland. Smith comes nowhere near that, so a significant swing to the SNP at the GE in 2015 is assuredly on the way.

  • FF42

    The basic situation is that the nation is split. There is no consensus for independence, nor for the Union. At the moment the Nationalists are on a roll because they represent a relatively unified half of the the population. That’s the good news for them.

    Less good news for them, I believe: the reason for the No win will likely carry forward to future reruns. Most of the people in the middle were unconvinced by the independence proposal. They are not opposed in principle, but they see issues in practice.

    After going on about an issue for a while, to no effect, people get fed up with it, as apparently happened in Quebec

    • It wasn’t that they were unconvinced – they were scared $hitless by the unrelenting doomsday propaganda carpet bombing them day and night month after month. THAT’S the reason NO prevailed, nothing else.

      • FF42

        Is there are reason why you and Sam Mitchell above are plagiarising each other? Cyborg-nats programmed to spout identical nonsense when prompted by a somewhat thoughtful comment

  • flippit

    Hard to see why more people voted for the Union at the referendum them and then many of those same people vote for nationalist party locally. If voters trust SNP to govern local why not national? Frankly, wish they’d make up their minds. What still remains, unchanged, is that there will be no currency Union with an independent Scotland, once SNP sort that out then Scotland needs to go.

  • The reason the Unionists scraped a win was that through total control of traditional media they managed to scare the krap out of the elder demographic. That cohort’s mass movement to NO made the difference.

    The fact is that it takes but a five-and-a-bit point swing to turn the majority NO to a majority YES. That has already occurred. Recent polls confirm the great majority of Scots want another referendum now they know they’ve been had, and a majority of Scots say they would vote YES if there were another indyref ballot today.

    • FF42

      Recent polls confirm the great majority of Scots want another referendum now.

      14% of the population, so not really.

      • what on earth are you on about?

        • rollo_tommasi

          He means only 14% of the population want another poll today
          according to the Survation poll a couple of weeks back.

          Not too difficult to understand is it?

          • You and you accomplice having difficulty with comprehension are you?

            I said, ” Scots want another referendum now they know they’ve been had” AND “… a majority of Scots say they would vote YES if there were another indyref ballot today”.

            I did NOT say there was majority preference for a referendum today. D’you understand the difference?

            Two different questions asked of respondents – discounting DKs 52% of respondents said IF there were a vote “today” they would vote YES.

            On the issue of preference of the interval until a second referendum, the results were: NOW 16%; Before 2019 – 24%; Between 2019 and 2024 – 15%; After 202414%; Never 32%.

            Perhaps britnat extremism is borne of fundamental cognitive deficits. Certainly you two seem to suffer some impediment in that regard.

          • rollo_tommasi

            Let me get this straight….so 52% said they would vote YES if another vote was held today yet only 16% actually want one??……surely if as you say the majority of Scots think they’ve been conned most of that 52% would want one right now? why wait???

            I’d take that as not a very strong base of support to me. In fact it sounds like most of them want to put the whole issue on the backburner. Besides a lot can happen in 5/10/15 years…..kids, mortgages, new jobs and attitudes can change.

            PS You conveniently missed the more recent Survation poll (which got the referendum result bang on unlike Youguv) which said that if the result was held tommorow NO would still win by 53%


          • 1. 52% say, if there were a referendum today they would vote YES. Now try to hold on to that . . .

            2. When all were asked their PREFERENCE of a timescale for another referendum 16% said, now, 24% said within 5 yrs; 15% said within 10 yrs; 14% said at least 10yrs; 32% said never.

            Now rollo, are you able to discern the difference between choosing YES or NO to independence if the referendum was today, and expressing a preference for the date of the referendum if it was up to you?

            I hope so, since otherwise it would evince you have the cognitive awareness of a lobotomised fruit fly.

          • rollo_tommasi

            You didn’t answer my question…….you didn’t even try.

            Let me try again.

            I’ve voted NO to independence but have since felt I had been misled by the government (as you previously suggested). I now want to vote YES why on earth would I want to wait 5/10/15 years to do so?

            Surely I would want another referendum now??!!!!

            Does this make sense to you?? it might involve thinking outside the box a little which in your case might also involve a health warning!

  • SC1

    The problem is that Westminster doesn’t want any competition for London, so no significant job creating powers will be devolved.
    Unionists actually WANT Scotland to be subsidised to help maintain the union.

    Scots must realize now they have to TAKE powers, not just wait endlessly on half hearted promises.
    But many are still too fearful.. It’s always one step at a time.

    I think the next move is ‘Independence within the UK’

    • FF42

      Could you explain what you think “job creating powers” actually means?

      • SC1

        Powers to compete and grow the economy / tax base.

        A wide range of taxes with the ability to give more business incentives or raise more income in different areas. The ability to vary corporation tax, NI rates, land taxation, alcohol duties etc

        Income tax is just too limited and inflexible on its own.
        Due to electoral competition between Labour and the SNP, all the pressure will be to increase it only, making the economy less competitive.

        A few welfare powers just give more areas to redistribute / spend money in, not raise revenues in the first place.

        Overall, this is mostly about re-labeling existing income, not giving real competitive powers.

        (Airport passenger duty is a worthwhile exception.)

  • Channel4’s Gary Gibbon has just solicited comment from Labour MPs on the Party’s decision to accept Smith agreement to fully devolving income tax. Gibbon reports he could find NO Westminster Labour pol who saw this as other than the end of the Union.

    Here’s a taster:

    Scottish Labour MP: “Well you’d better keep looking … I can’t see any point in carrying on with this (job) now.”

    Shadow cabinet member: “… yeah, it could be the end.”

    Labour MP: “I don’t see how this doesn’t lead to independence …. I just can’t see it going anywhere else.”

    Great bit of reporting by Gibbon

    Worth adding that from recent opinion polling of the Scottish electorate, simply devolving income tax is a sop and will be nowhere near enough – wholly unacceptable as a settlement. It will be seen as a slap in the face and dispositive evidence of treachery on the part of the Westminster vow-givers.

    The UK? . . . It’s over chaps.

    • The Smith commission never actually supported full income tax devolution, best to read the report before embarking on comments Christian.

      • Yes they did.

        • Your a very confused individual. The Smith Commission report is here so do read that rather than newsnat:


          Taxation 75

          Income Tax will remain a shared tax and both the UK and Scottish Parliaments will share control of Income Tax. MPs representing constituencies across the whole of the UK will continue to decide the UK’s Budget, including Income Tax.

          • “The cross-party panel said in a report that the Scottish parliament in Edinburgh should be given control to set and collect all income tax raised in Scotland …”

          • BBC: “The Smith Commission, which took forward its recommendations in consultation with the Scottish Parliament’s five parties – … recommended that:

            The parliament should be given the power to set income tax rates and bands on earned income and will retain all of the income tax raised in Scotland.”

          • Like I said you are a very confused individual, the report concludes that aspects of income tax should be devolved while you quote that to me also in some rather bizarre attempt to make out it means all of income tax is to be devolved, its Saturday night so are you on the sauce?

          • “The Smith Commission has recommended full control over income tax rates and bands be devolved to Holyrood.”


            Smith Commission: full income tax devolution


          • You are quite remarkable, I have linked you to the Smith Commission report and even highlighted the income tax provision yet you still cant seem to accept that that is how it actually is and instead continue to post links to news reports.

            The report is published and full control over income tax has not been recommended and you really need to accept that now because that is how things are.

            You said this “Channel4’s Gary Gibbon has just solicited comment from Labour MPs on the Party’s decision to accept Smith agreement to fully devolving income tax” and that is just not true.

  • CraigStrachan

    There will be no commitment to a second referendum in the SNP’s manifesto for 2016. Sturgeon will shite it.

  • jim mitchell

    MikeMckeown, Looking up SNP & missing millions just turns up articles about missing voters, so how about the full address if you actually have one.

    You don’t seem to realise that the amounts spent by each side have been published and bearing in mind that the YES campaign was funded by more than just the SNP, the better together campaign outspent the yes side by a considerable ammount!

  • Terence Wilkinson

    Getting that parallel universe feeling again reading The Spectator. I was completely unaware of this new nationalist newspaper (although why they bother when The Spectator’s articles about Scotland seem to come straight from SNP HQ) as I have not seen it in any shops nor seen anyone reading nor even heard anyone talking about its existence. As for holding another another referendum, we just had one and the SNP lost. Gaining a few extra members, holding Nuremberg style rallies and opinion polls do not change that fact. Would seriously love to know who the people asked their opinions by pollsters are: the Royal Family? Russian billionaires? Greek Gods? The must be extremely important people because appatently their opinion counts for more, way more, than the votes of 2 million ordinary souls. As one of these ordinary souls I would like to see all lazy articles that include “opinion polls say” banned from this newspaper.

    • You not keeping up with events and ignorance of elementary statistics and sampling methods is the issue, not polling and not the 50,000 sales per day of The National.

      We had a referendum and a majority voted NO. 20% of those who voted NO say they did so predicated on AND CONDITIONAL on the promise that devo max / home rule would be implemented.

      Your bunch of shysters have reneged on that promise AND IN SO DOING HAVE RENDERED THE RESULT OF THE REFERENDUM NULL AND VOID.

      As for laziness – you need to stop whining, get off your duff, and get educated.

  • Bo Williams

    Whether the SNP win the coming elections or not there should be no question of another referendum for at least 10 or even 15 years. We cannot be having referendums every 2 years. It is ridiculous. The Scots have just voted No. You cannot just get another vote because the SNP think – maybe – 50.1% now – might – support independence. Scotland has had its chance for a generation at least.

    • Red Priest

      Not the way democracy works – ask Ireland about the Nice treaty. Realpolitik doesn’t care what one person considers ridiculous. Politics IS ridiculous.
      Personally, for myself, 10 yrs actually sounds fair – two electoral cycles, and an entire batch of new young voters currently aged 7-16, that’s reasonalbly close to a ‘generation’ in the normal political sense of the word. It also happens to meet the desires of about 65-70% of Scots according to recent polling.
      But if the Scots decide they want it quicker, they’ll get it, because the precedent is set – an SNP majority at holyrood, on a referendum manifesto, is basically unignorable. Especially post EVEL when scots MPs will be second class anyway.

      • “Personally, for myself, 10 yrs actually sounds fair … It also happens to meet the desires of about 65-70% of Scots according to recent polling.”

        13 November 2014: Survation survey 1001 respondents

        The numbers are: 16% say indyref NOW; 24% say within 5 years; 15% say 5 to 10 years; only 14% say after 10 years; 32% say never.

        So, a majority of those who want it, 40% of the whole, want indyref now or at most, within 5 years
        55% want indyref now or within 5 years or within 10 years
        69% of the entire electorate want indyref now or within 5 years or within 10 years or after 10 years

        • Jim Forbes

          And a third never. Breaks my heart! Why are they so blinkered?

  • davidofkent

    It must surely be obvious that the Union is on its last legs. The SNP will keep banging away at their victimhood until there is another referendum. The Union has been very good for Scotland for three centuries. Now they wish to go it alone. Let them. Let’s top whittling away at political union, have another referendum and let the Scots vote correctly next time. It won’t hurt England at all. We could have a referendum on our EU membership at the same time.

    • Sam Mitchell

      the union has been very good for Scotland…. has matron not tucked you in yet?… Scotland has the basic infrastructure that a third world country with Oil reserves could exist with… fishing controlled by the EU… forestry that is being depleted to feed the power stations south of Carlisle… land that is owned by 430 individuals… a wm gov that is represented by ONE mp… a branch political crew who are afraid to lose from their gravy train existence… that sees 70% of its tax raising revenue returned as being enough… that relies on the dominance of Eng owned supermarkets… or stores like M & S or B & Q… that has banks that have actually closed more Scottish business than started and encouraged them …. that has wind farms owned by non Uk companies whilst supported by Uk taxpayers… OH YES… Scotland has done really well… which implies we couldn’t have done better without the benevolence of the Uk system…. RUBBISH!!!!

      • davidofkent

        Calm down. I wrote ‘for three centuries’. I’m sure you feel embittered, rightly or wrongly, but not everything good or bad has happened in the last twenty years. In any case, I firmly support your desire for independence. I shall wave you goodbye with a little tear in my eye.

        • Derick Tulloch

          Not sure that the Union has been that good for ‘three centuries’. At the time of the Union Scotland had no national debt and was paid the Equivalent as compensation for taking on a share of England’s debt, run up by constant wars.
          The Union was initially disastrous for Scotland. For example Shetland had a triving trade with the Baltic, which was destroyed by the Union and led to a half century economic depression. Marvellous.
          And Scotland has been subsidizing rUK financially for at least 120 years. I’m all for ‘pooling and sharing’ but it seems always to be one way. It will not do.

  • colchar

    I don’t see them as being any more successful than the Quebec nationalists. They failed, twice, and although they haven’t gone away theirs is a minority voice that people are increasingly inclined to ignore as the rantings of the perpetually aggrieved.

    • Red Priest

      That would be why membership and poling is soaring for them then…The problem with the Quebec analogy is taking it too far. The playbook worked – in a sense, it was always going to. But the Nationalists were much better prepared for this than the Quebeqois – if you’d given the SNP a 45-55 loss at the very beginning, they’d never admit it, but they’d have bitten your hand off. And Canada didn’t hand the Nationalists a beautiful post-ref lifeboat in any event the way Cameron and EVEL did.
      Independence at some relatively forseeable point (10-20 yrs) is not inevitable. But it’s not that unlikely either.

  • fluffnik

    The Union was shocked back into a semblance of life in September, but it’s dead for sure.

    The only risk to Scotland is that it fails to expire quickly and quietly.

    …oh, yes, Scotland will be dissolving the Union, not seceding from it.

    • rollo_tommasi

      There was a referendum on the 18th September.

      You lost remember?

      • fluffnik

        We didn’t win decisively but we did fatally wound the Union.

        • Tim Morrison

          We lost. We did not win. We did better than we thought we would and we got close enough to smell their fear. But we did win. I agree we have wounded the Union – fatally – let’s hope but it is too early for triumphalism yet.

        • rollo_tommasi

          Somethings take a long time to die. Would lay of the pies porky if you want to be around to see it!

  • Lucy

    ‘the nationalists’ — misses the point entirely about who the supporters of indy are. I am tired hearing that and ‘separatists’ using incessantly.

    • The_greyhound

      No one cares what the defeated supporters of salmond’s daydream are. Nationalists, liars, fantasists, traitors, fruitcakes, loonies, closet racists – call SNP supporters anything you like – they will still stink the same.

  • justejudexultionis

    The 2014 may just go down in history as the most Pyrrhic of Pyrrhic victories: the most Pyrrhic victory in global history!

    Even intelligent unionists such as Massie are beginning to see that the writing is on the wall for the union.


    • The_greyhound

      But it probably won’t.

      The nationalists lost, as they deserved to, and the poltroon that led them crawled off with its tails between its legs.

      And don’t bother to quote the Irish expressions you laboriously copy out – hardly anyone in Scotland uses the language.

      • Sam Mitchell

        I will give you a Gaelic quote… “Otrachas aonachdach” which now appears on the bumper stickers of many vehicles… look out for it…

  • Marxists know that when the new European union with Russia materializes (‘From the Atlantic to Vladivostok’) a united Britain will not join, so naturally Britain then must be (1) weakened by separating Scotland from the nation; and (2) checked militarily with the presence of military forces belonging to the new union with Russia…

    Two revealing admissions from Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and Soviet minister of foreign affairs Eduard Shevardnadze on the upcoming new union:

    “Editor’s Note: The phrases ‘From the Atlantic to the Urals’, ‘From the Atlantic to Vladivostok’ and ‘From Vancouver to Vladivostok’ are interchangeable in the strategists’ lexicon. In the course of his Nobel Peace Prize Lecture, delivered in Oslo in June 1992, Gorbachev said: ‘Our [sic] vision of the European space from the Atlantic to the Urals is not that of a closed system. Since it includes the Soviet Union [sic], which reaches to the shores of the Pacific, it goes beyond nominal geographical boundaries’. Note that Gorbachev, who had been out of office for six months, referred to the Soviet Union, not Russia. In an interview on Moscow Television on 19 November 1991, Eduard Shevardnadze continued speaking as though he was still Soviet Foreign Minister: ‘I think that the idea of a Common European Home, the building of a united Europe, and I would like to underline today, of great Europe, the building of Great Europe, great, united Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, from the Atlantic to Vladivostok, including all our territory, most probably a European-Asian space, this project is inevitable. I am sure that we will come to building a united military space as well. To say more precisely: we will build a united Europe, whose security will be based on the principles of collective security. Precisely, collective security’. These statements by key implementers of the strategy reflect the central strategic objective of asserting ‘irreversible’ Russian/Soviet hegemony over Eurasia, thus establishing the primary geographical component of the intended World Government.” — ‘The Perestroika Deception’, by KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn.


    and here’s more on the upcoming “Atlantic to Vladivostok” union…


    and here’s Vladimir Putin in 2012 pushing the new union with Europe…

    “Russia is an inalienable and organic part of Greater Europe and European civilization. Our citizens think of themselves as Europeans. We are by no means indifferent to developments in united Europe.

    That is why Russia proposes moving toward the creation of a common economic and human space from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean – a community referred by Russian experts to as “the Union of Europe,” which will strengthen Russia’s potential and position in its economic pivot toward the “new Asia.”‘


    When the new “Atlantic to Vladivostok” union materializes, Communist strategists will have achieved two goals, (1) the further isolation of the United States in the world; and (2) the disbanding of NATO.

    The fraudulent “collapse” of the USSR (and East Bloc) couldn’t have been pulled off until both political parties in the United States (and political parties elsewhere in the West) were co-opted by Moscow & Allies, which explains why verification of the “collapse” was never undertaken by the West, such verification being (1) a natural administrative procedure (since the USSR wasn’t occupied by Western military forces); and (2) necessary for the survival of the West. Recall President Reagan’s favorite phrase, “Trust, but verify”.

    Notice that not one political party in the West demanded verification of the collapse of the USSR,* and the media failed to alert your attention to this fact, including the “alternative” media. When determining whether the “former” USSR is complying with arms control treaties, what does the United States do to confirm compliance? Right, the United States sends into the “former” USSR investigative teams to VERIFY compliance, yet when it’s the fate of the West that’s at stake should the collapse of the USSR be a ruse, what does the United States do to confirm the collapse? Nothing!

    It gets worse–the “freed” Soviets and West also never (1) de-Communized the Soviet Armed Forces of its Communist Party officer corps, which was 90% officered by Communist Party members;** and (2) arrested/de-mobilized the 6-million vigilantes that assisted the Soviet Union’s Ministry of the Interior and police control the populations of the larger cities during the period of “Perestroika” (1986-1991)!***

    There can be no collapse of the USSR (or East Bloc nations) without…

    Verification, De-Communization and De-mobilization.

    The West never verified the collapse of the USSR because no collapse occurred, since if a real collapse had occurred the West would have verified it, since the survival of the West depends on verification. Conversely, this proves that the political parties of the West were co-opted by Marxists long before the fraudulent collapse of the USSR, since the survival of the West depends on verification.

    The above means that the so-called “War on Terror” is a USSR & Allies-tasked operation being carried out by the co-opted governments of the West, the purpose being to (1) destroy the prominence of the West in the eyes of the world, where the West is seen (i) invading nations without cause; (ii) causing chaos around the globe; and (iii) killing over one-million civilians and boasting of torture; (2) close off non-Russian supplies of oil for export, thereby increasing the price of oil, the higher price allowing oil exporting Russia to maintain economic stability while she modernizes and increases her military forces; (3) destroy the United States Armed Forces via the never-ending “War on Terror”; the ultimate purpose of the aforementioned to (4) bring about the demise of the United States in the world, opening up a political void to be filled by a new pan-national entity composed of Europe and Russia (replacing the European Union), a union “From the Atlantic to Vladivostok”; which will (5) see the end of NATO.

    The failed socialist inspired and controlled pan-European revolutions that swept the continent in 1848 thought Marxists and socialists a powerful lesson, that lesson being they couldn’t win overtly, so they adopted the tactic of infiltration of the West’s political parties/institutions.

    *A verification process would have entailed hundreds of teams from the West going into the USSR and having unqualified access of all government files, searching for (1) indications that the collapse was a ruse; (2) secret Communist party agents/non-Communist Party agents placed into positions of authority; and (3) Russians to bring back to the West for questioning (with their families if deemed necessary, which would in itself be deemed an indication that the “collapse” was indeed a ruse), where the questioning can take place without fear of retribution should the collapse be a ruse.

    **A de-Communization of the Soviet Armed Forces would have seen the former USSR republics joining NATO and requesting the assistance of NATO to supervise a de-Communization process, the first stage of which would be the pensioning out of General officers, and full Colonels within the land combat regiments; and all Admirals, and Full Captains assigned to ships, pensioned out. The pensioned out officers would be replaced by NATO officers. NATO would take over schools that educate military officers, until such time that non-Communist Party native instructors were available.

    The Russian ICBM Triad would have been de-operationalized (until the necessary number of non-Communist Party member nuclear forces officers had graduated and attained ranks necessary to operate such nuclear weapon systems), pursuant to which the United States would have cut its nuclear ICBM Triad forces by at least two-thirds, since the only major threat now would be China. Russian Intermediate/Medium ballistic nuclear systems would fall under NATO operation, again until the necessary number of non-Communist Party member nuclear forces officers had graduated and attained ranks necessary to operate such nuclear weapon systems.

    ***Then we have to deal with the five-six-million vigilantes the Soviet Ministry of Interior used to control the population. The vigilantes would need to be de-mobilized and its leaders interned until the Russian economy came back to life via real free market policies. As the economy improved, those vigilantes interned and not serving sentences for serious crimes such as murder or rape, would be released on a staggered basis, where lower-level leaders are the first to be released into society…

    “On the initiative of the KGB, an army of Soviet vigilantes five million strong, the so-called ‘druzhiny’, was recruited from among the Komsomol activists. They have been patrolling and policing the streets of all the Soviet cities. Their primary task has been to prepare the Soviet people to ‘behave’ during the forthcoming ‘liberalisation’.” — KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn, March 1989.


  • Mode4

    The Scots may vote for SNP for local issues but I don’t believe the silent majority want independence. Scott’s are very canny, some of my rels are just that. The last thing I would want is to be controlled by head cases in the SNP. Scotland would turn into an introverted little Country, introspective and controlled by Germany. See Ireland for more information. I’m not convinced that the Majority of Scots want the EU either, it’s about to implode and they’ve worked that out too. The oil is running out and we should all stick together.

    • Tim Morrison

      Look at the polls. Oh, and the new oil discoveries off the west coast.

      • The_greyhound

        The imbecile nationalists will still be wailing about the Brigadoon oilfields as the last SNP representative loses its seat in the Edinburgh Parliament. The fund of slack-mouthed credulity is Scotland’s one inexhaustible resource.

        • Sam Mitchell

          so lets look at daves pronouncements…. EAW… free vote??? Limit immigration…. Recall of dodgy mp’s…. Not paying the EU invoice…. all spin… all turned into the EXACT opposite of what he said to the gullible tory voting hordes… or… that other pillar of the coalition… clegg…. do I really need to spell it out ….. nah… Im sure your not that thick…. Oh… better spell it out then… Uni fees… free school meals to under 7’s but not a penny more allocated… so has to come out of normal budgets… 100% behind whatever the EU dictate to wm…. doesn’t want the Scots to leave… backed reynard… backed the penalty points combination two… so… please do not think your wonderful leaders are crystal white..

        • Tim Morrison

          Mmmm its not the SNP that have presided over the great destruction of the British economy, the catastrophic deregulation of banks and who still insist on repeating the same old mistakes.

    • Derick Tulloch

      Sticking together is all very well. But it’s costing Scotland billions of pounds every year and has done for the last century. Taking improving missions a bit far

  • Callum

    In all the political excitement, I’ve often wondered why there wasn’t a conservative-but-not-unionist movement based on a low-tax haven fuelled by enormous energy resources… mine’s a gold plated bugatti.

    • Tim Morrison

      You are absolutely right Callum. I do not understand why there is no longer a non racist rightwing in Scotland. I do not understand why they gave up the nationalist label to us on the left at all.

      • The_greyhound

        Racism is now welcomed and made fashionable by the SNP.

    • Derick Tulloch

      There is. It’s called the Scottish Democratic Alliance. Nae MSP’s right enough, but they do exist. And Wealthy Nation.

  • HenBroon

    I have said this many many times, Scottish Independence is inevitable. Westminster treating Scotland the way it did in the build up to the 2014 referndum really did ensure that. The cynical lies and condescending bigotry that has barked from that place is vile. The sad thing is it was in the gift of Westminster to solve this and their arrogant imperialist posturing and self interest blew it away.

    “For as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.” From the declaration of Arbroath, the nearest we have to a constitution.

    There are many many more than a hundred of us left alive, despite the best attempts of the UK machine.

    Saor Alab Gu Brath.

    • The_greyhound

      Scottish independence is not inevitable, it is impossible.

      The foolish and mendacious nationalists couldn’t and wouldn’t answer the currency question, and never will.

      How does it feel to be defeated by George Osborne and dispatched by Alistair Darling and the Mothers’ Unon? Humiliating obviously, but it puts into clear perspective the nationalist failure. These impotent bigmouths and fantasists couldn’t knock the skin off a rice pudding, though salmond evidently spent his life trying.

      And don’t bother quoting Irish. it’s hardly better understood in Scotland than it is in England.

      • Sam Mitchell

        the currency question WAS answered… even the arch quisling alistair recognised that…. it’s simply that you do not like the answer…. or can’t deal with the fact that an ASSET rich country will soon be in the EU and free of the debt burden that we have carried for TOO long… though I notice you mention the “mothers union”… so a bunch of middle class housewives aligned with the BNP.. Orange Order… and the other far right tory groups “defeated ” the Scots… you really do live in la la land…. safe in Surrey somewhere no doubt… .

      • HenBroon

        Impossible only in the blinkered minds of the colonised plastic jocks who fill their bank accounts from Londons purse that bulges with Scottish revenues. Those poor deluded bubble dwellers and their hangers on are in for a dreadfull shock in May, when they are booted out. You are obviously one of that ilk.

        The currency question was answered, only your colonised ears are not gentically programmed to receive these answers. Scotland will use the pound sterling which is as much Scottish as it is English. We will use it with or with out the consent of ozzie and his little toffs, who may well be on their way to obscurity very soon. We do not need the permission of anyone to do so.

        As to your predictable sneers at Alex Salmond, he is the most able politician in these islands and can buy and sell any of you. He and the SNP has driven the agenda these past 40 years, and he will continue to do so. London is in for a rude awakening very soon. Scotlands independence is inevitable. No wonder the paedophiles assassinated Willie Macrae.

        Saor Alba Gu Brath

  • Margaret Kirkwood

    Good article. Throughout the referendum campaign there was a strong sense that the London media just didn’t “get it”. The nationalist cause was wrongly portrayed as “anti-English” (when in, fact, English for Independence was one of the grass-roots movements). Now we have the undignified squabble at Westminster over the new powers proposed for Scotland under Smith. Scottish independence would have been, by far, the more dignified route to a new settlement across the British Isles.

    • The_greyhound

      More nonsense.

      There weren’t any “grass roots movements”, just SNP shams. They’ve all now collapsed, and the deluded nationalist minority have publicly signed up to the corrupt little Scottish nationalist party, to which they had always adhered in practice.

      And the dumb nationalists were in fact anti-English.

      Represent your bankrupt platform how you might, the truth is inescapable – the nationalists lost the argument, and lost the vote. Nothing has changed, except that the fat poltroon that led them has fled the field.


      • Sam Mitchell

        so much rubbish & vittrol… all bundled in a small minded package… some form of award is needed surely… as the smallest of checks would have revealed the HUGE growth in ALL the grass roots social web sites… the almost wipe out of the daily rag. & it’s sister “newspaper “…the hootsman… .. the growing mass membership of the Indy parties… which has now became the third largest & possibly the best group of switched on activists in the Uk… BUT… it is so unfortunate that I seem to be talking to a closet racialist…. as much to your disappointment…. MANY of the most active members are English…. the lead campaigner in this area Wimbledon… his depute… Hampshire… assist…. Kent…. so… sunshine… stroll on…

    • FF42

      And a rather more dignified comment than the others on here, Margaret. Thanks for posting.

  • FrankieThompson

    Just one point about the SNP pinning for Tory supremacy Alex.

    In 2007, with a majority Labour government in Westminster, and Gordon Brown just about to take over as PM( in the days when respect for him was high), Labour lost the Scottish election to the SNP.

    Where does that fit into your analysis Alex?

  • FrankieThompson

    The mark of David Cameron was his awful ( for The Union) statement in Downing Street on the morning of 19th September.

    Unlike the penitient self-flagellator we had witnessed at the Scottish Widows office a few days before, we had the arrogant junior officer addressing the men, throwing in the nonsense of EVEL, which was mentioned not once in the campaign, in a desperate attempt to stymie the Labour Party, a PPE approach to statemanship.

    He may be bright, in a conventional 2014 fashion, and glib, of course, but he is a shallow man, a politician of no depth, just like his hero Blair who, when asked what his greatest achievement was said, truthfully, w”Winning three elections”.

  • JimHHalpert

    Are these whingeing Scotch still here? They’ve had their tantrum and they can jolly well go and sit on the naughty step, for a couple of centuries if necessary.

    Can anyone imagine Spain giving the populations of Catalonia or the Basque region the right to decide on secession? It’s a question for the UK, not Scotland, and if they don’t like it we can always send in the tanks.

    • Derick Tulloch

      How many tanks does the British Army have?

    • “It’s a question for the UK, not Scotland, and if they don’t like it we can always send in the tanks.”

      They’re a bit short on tanks right now. They could send the carriers up ready or not, but they won’t have any planes to fly off them till 2020.

      Well, they’re just going to have to send them up the Clyde anyway, line the sailors up on deck, and on command, give the hysterically laughing Glaswegians a dirty look.

      That’ll put the fear of God into them.

  • William MacDougall

    Of course Westminster should refuse another referendum for at least 25 years; we can’t have neverendum. But you’re right that it probably will not have the nerve.

  • ColinPowis

    they only need to get lucky once …that’s exactly what the IRA used to say

  • scotchthistle

    I know of no one who voted No who now wishes they had voted Yes. The separatists are still in a minority.

    Nicola Sturgeon doesn’t have what it takes to lead a party through difficult times. The fact that she is not so horrible a person as Salmond is standing her in good stead just now, but once some of the carpet-baggers who have joined the SNP recently start throwing their weight around, the SNP will become a very unhappy place.

    I am horrified at the amount of extra power proposed being delegated to the incompetents of Holyrood. Scotland is going to suffer badly. Perhaps that will wake us up to the left-wing opium that has dulled our sensibilities for too long.

    • Sam Mitchell

      obviously you lead a very sheltered life….. why would the pro wm media be reporting polling that is showing more & more Indy support??… why are the social media web sites showing a magnificent growth…. especially since the Smith proposals … that are merely proposals… that would take wm to agree to them… given that the Calman commission had some of the same proposals in 2009 and GUES WHAT??… so please go on in your complacency…. its not a problem….

      • scotchthistle

        Lots of people vote SNP (because of the incompetence of Labour) but still vote NO when it comes to Referendum. The SNP is whipping up more and more support from its base, but sensible people are still treating this independence nonsense with the contempt it deserves

        • Sam Mitchell

          so there are 1.5 million citizens in Scotland who are not “sensible” ???.. are you related to johann by any chance?… as she & her labour colleagues seem to feel that Scots are incapable of thought other than blindly following what wm dictates is good for us… so you seem to be implying that this union is as good as it gets??… that all these other Independent countries are somehow struggling without the benevolence of wm rule??… that Scotland could not manage it’s affairs outside of this unequal union..

          • scotchthistle

            Not “as good as it gets” – but certainly the chance to participate in the best country on the planet – and best by a wide margin. However, the evidence to date, since 1997, is that devolution has been a disastrous and costly mistake. These “additional powers” being granted to the dimwits in Holyrood are a recipe for disaster. I would rather see Holyrood bulldozed into the ground.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Of course you would.rather see Holyrood bulldozed… .. as it is miles ahead of “”” the best country on the planet “””…. you certainly have a sense of humour …. to bad about your common sense… so.. do I need to mention the corruption… the cover ups… the lords a leaping.. or should that be sleeping… the complete lack of forward planning… aided by a civil service who openly admit that the dim are promoted whilst the rest toil hardly at all… the head of which has a regular feature in Private Eye on his junketing… no… there is so much golden treasure of corruption & ineptitude that it’s a pity to go over all again as its too embarrassing… … “””the best country on the planet “””” obviously you’ve never been further than Cheam…

          • scotchthistle

            Hi Sam
            Many thanks for your comments. I have travelled throughout Europe, Asia, North America, South America – though admittedly never to Africa, Australasia (which I leave to my family, who for some strange reason are enamoured with Australia), or Antarctica. I read extensively, with great interest in both history and geography, and have come to the conclusion that Great Britain is by far the best. That of course does not mean it is perfect, but by comparison . . . it is streets ahead of the competition.

            Interestingly however, if you look into the history of these islands before we became one, there is precious little to write home about, save petty wars and petty kings. It was the fusion of the constituent parts of the UK that made us great and keeps us great. To disrupt that would be the greatest act of wanton vandalism in history.

            Best regards

  • Ed  

    ” industry should be nationalised, a republic declared, land ownership
    reformed, fracking banned, Nato left and a ‘people’s budget’ published
    that would offer an alternative to ‘austerity’.”

    That should be easy enough to pay for, with the shiny new McPeso.

    • Now that’s funny.

      • Ed  

        Well, since an independent Scotland would have neither the Pound nor the Euro, McPeso it is.

        • I said it was funny, not that it was right. If we can’t have OUR pound (the pound sterling) a principal asset of the Union, England can kiss goodbye to the £160 billion it claims Scotland “owes” it.

          Let me make it crystal clear so that there is no doubt: If Scotland does not get its fair share of the accrued assets that are the fruit of its 300 year union with England, it sure as hell isn’t going to assume the liabilities.

          Now is there anything about that equation you don’t understand?

          Always here to help those suffering a cognitive deficit, dear boy.

          • Ed  

            The frequent repetition of a falsehood doesn’t make it so. It’s clear that in the event of independence, Scotland’s economy will simply roll off the edge of the table.

            You won’t be able to apply for European membership because Italy and Spain, with their own separatism problems, won’t let you. You won’t be able to “keep” your EU membership because you’ll have forfeited it to England, you won’t be able to use the Pound or the US dollar or the Euro because those authorities won’t let you.

            McPeso it is.

            Sorry about the big words.

            Best of luck.

          • Sam Mitchell

            Ed… is that you Ed?… are you the “”leader “” of the party thats about to be crucified in May 2015???.. I claim my £10… ..unfortunately you need to take some advice on a simple EU law… a common law…. that states that over the last 40 years that Scotland has been a member of the EU… & is unfortunately by being part of the Uk that certain legalities… such as … this explanation from a friend of mine… Professor of Law… Scottish University… It is the EU legal principle of Continuity of Effect – which protects citizens of the EU – and we have been citizens for over 40 Years. I think if you look on Lawyers for Yes you may find some case law referred to in articles somewhere. In circumstances where citizens have exercised their democratic right for self determination in a referendum agreed to by the member state, as we have done, and these citizens wish to remain citizens under EU law – we are entitled to continuity of effect – so we can never drop off the end of the membership cliff to become members at a later date – this is just not how the EU works………. so I hope this helps you understand…. but I am sure after May you will have ample time to research….

          • Ed  

            No Labourite me. Perhaps you’re thinking of another Ed. And as I’ve already said, repeating a falsehood doesn’t make it so. Whatever Lawyers for Yes may argue, I just don’t see Spain and Italy agreeing, and I just don’t see the EU following it’s own rules when push comes to shove. That’s not what the EU is about, and it’s not what’s going to happen.

            Best of luck.

          • Sam Mitchell

            I have copied your reply to forward onto my friend… I am sure he will take your valued opinion seriously… and whether Spain or Italy or Belguim or Germany disagree is open to debate when the time comes… as it could all end up in court… BUT firstly we will have Scots MEP’s renegotiating on behalf of Scotland… as this may have escaped your extensive research…. Spain lands almost 48% of the fish caught in Scotland’s waters… & unlike Malta which has an EXCLUSIVE fishing zone extending to 120 miles .. Scotland has a miserable 15…. as that fishing zone was part of Malta’s entry into the EU… plus although it has less than the population of Edinburgh… it has the same number of MEP’s as Scotland… so… who agrees to what is a mute point… as there are LOTS to be discussed… & in or out Scotland will still be better of than remaining as part of a very unequal union… I personally would be more worried about rUk’s position if I was you…. as you seem to believe that all is rosy in the English garden…

        • Sam Mitchell

          Great… it will not bother me… as it will be without debt… unlike rUk where its rising by the second….

  • Paul Wilson

    Alex Massie should know that Scots treat the election of both labour and the Tories as equally dire. There is no difference between the Blue ones or the Red ones. The pundits and the politicians just don’t get it it has nothing to do with who is leader it is all about policies and both the Tory parties have nothing to offer Scotland unless you are wealthy.

  • Callum Henderson

    to headline Scotland as being ‘in danger’ because of the continued desire of a substantial proportion of her people to be a self-respecting self-governing people highlights why Scotland should be an independent nation. How can a nation be in danger because it believes it can self-govern? I’m afraid such deprecating views illustrates the continued arrogance of rUK that Scotland somehow will fall apart if it finally finds its own dignity and looks after itself.

    • The_greyhound

      Nonsense, as usual.

      Scotland doesn’t believe it wants to be apart from the United Kingdom. An imbecile minority do. The nationalists had their chance, and the fat windbag blew it.

      Try to come to terms with reality.

      • Well, when asked 52% said they would vote for independence if there were a referendum today*.

        When it comes to imbecility and an inability to discern what it real and what is not, you seem to be a representative case study of the fundamentalist extremist britnat cohort.

        * http://www.panelbase.com/media/polls/F6356tables.pdf

      • Callum Henderson

        Wow! Is this really a representation of your understanding of the situation? That is a shocking way to represent the many many wonderful intelligent people I know who voted Yes. If I sat an exam and got 45% I would think ‘I’m very nearly there, that wasn’t far from a pass – a very little more and I’m there!’. Can we please avoid the name-calling above – I also know intelligent caring people who voted no. To characterise almost half the population of your country in the way you do does not reflect well on your judgment or character. Let me also say that the ‘reality’ is that there is a growing and increasing recognition that the true state of a nation is as an independent self-governing state and one day that dream will be fulfilled.

  • Liz

    Thank you! This is an honest, balanced article which clearly sums up the current political situation in Scotland.

  • “This specifies that industry should be nationalised, a republic
    declared, land ownership reformed, fracking banned, Nato left and a
    ‘people’s budget’ published that would offer an alternative to

    With the possible exception of the ridiculous anti-fracking nonsense (this is a good means for us to rely less on foreign energy) and the fact that the SNP supports immigration, I can’t see what is really objectionable about these points on a Great Britain wide basis? Its no skin off my nose if the Normans have the land which they stole from Celts and Anglo-Saxons “reformed.” NATO is too dominated by American interests, which itself is a tinker toy in the hands of dual-citizen Israelis.

  • sabrina mark

    My husband has abandon me and the kids for the the past 8months now, and refuse to come back because he was hold on by a woman whom he just met, for that, my self and the kids has been suffering and it has been heel of a struggle, but I decide to do all means to make sure that my family come together as it use to, then I went online there I saw so many good talk about this spell caster whose email is onimalovespell@gmail.com so I had to contact him and in just 4days as he has promised, my husband came home and his behavior was back to the man I got married to.I cant thank the spell caster enough what what he did for me, I am so grateful. I even spoke to the spell caster over the phone, to confirm his existence. His email again is: onimalovespell@gmail.com

  • Sam Mitchell

    A quote for all the no people to consider whilst they gloat over the drop in Oil prices… Lang Banks from WWF Scotland hailed the news saying:

    “Renewables overtaking nuclear power to become the largest source of electricity is certainly historic, and represents a major step on the way to Scotland becoming a 100 per cent renewable nation. Last month, while nuclear reactors were forced to shut because of cracks, Scotland’s renewables were quietly and cleanly helping to keep the lights on in homes across the country. Wind turbines in Scotland alone generated enough electricity to supply three millions homes in the UK – equivalent to 126 per cent of the electricity needs of every home north of the border. Put simply, renewables work and are helping to cut climate change emissions and create jobs in Scotland.”

  • Patrick Joyce

    Just a wee point Fraser.You’re absolutely correct in saying Scotland isn’t Ulster.However neither is Northern Ireland. It’s only six counties of that province.

    • Uh, Patrick, doesn’t NI comprise just those six counties alone (Antrim, Armagh, Down, Fermanagh, Londonderry and Tyrone)? If it does, then Ulster IS Northern Ireland in its entirety?

      N’est-ce pas?

  • cmason

    With Salmond’s delusional budget calculations based on an oil price of 115 US per barrel Scotland has had a very lucky escape from going Independent. Brent crude is heading for 60 US or below. Had Scotland voted for Independence they would be rapidly heading for bankruptcy or massive personal tax increases across the board to keep Scotland solvent! Those that voted NO’ are the economic literates those voting YES’ are the illiterates in what makes a country economically viable!

    • Sam Mitchell

      Another unionist believing the bt prop….. so.. the drop in the price of oil would only affect Scotland… all these other WEALTHY OIL FUNDED nations who have considerable bank balances built from high & low priced oil sales count for nothing… the fact that Norway alone has over £300 billion tied up in major companies throughout the world through their planning ahead for such wavering … counts for nothing…. whereas the wonderful leadership that wm has given us led to over that same amount of ASSETS that Norway has being printed by the Uk to bail out it’s banks… so… try harder with the fear factor…. also… Scotland generates 132% of its energy from WIND POWER… and exports the majority of that power …. southwards… which will hopefully be under review once we leave this “union”.

  • cmason

    Why do the Scots want Independence,? They are already mollycoddled and each person in Scotland has a much larger allowance than those in the rest of the UK.
    Why are we down South subsidizing those too lazy to get off their butts with much higher allowances per Scot??

    • Scotland comprises 8.2% of the UK population but contributes 10% of UK GDP.

      Has it not occurred to you that were Scotland a net drain on England instead of a net asset, Cameron et al would have already shown us the door? What part of Scotland’s total contribution exceeds what it gets back, don’t you understand?

      Would suggest mason, that you take your own advice, get off your butt, and do your own research rather than allowing yourself to be spoon-fed this insidious $h1te that is turning you into an ethnic bigot.

    • Sam Mitchell

      poor boy… simply by reading your post you will have your answer… & please have a little drive through Hastings… or Brighton… Or… any of the Southern coastal towns & you will see huge evidence of those who prefer to be part of the cafe culture…

  • cmason

    Wright sorry no longer your delusional 10% of GDP with Brent Crude at US 69 and falling daily Scotland will be lucky to contribute 6%. Why when the World is becoming an increasingly dangerous place do you want to split the UK. Better together especially from a defense point of view, unless you are a CND, ban the bomb nutter’ that delusionally believes, will protect you from aggression.

  • Terence Wilkinson

    Instead if feeding Nationalists delusions about “change” shouldn’t this magazine be exposing the SNP’s empty rhetoric? It is easy for people to delude themselves about change ( just like at Mr Obama in America) but perhaps Mr Massie would care to read something other than an opinion poll and answer this question: with the price of oil in decline, how could the SNP afford all their expensive especially when their own White Paper (the full version with the footnotes to show they were putting a positive spin or downright lying about Scotland’s finances) showed Scotland’s budget deficit would be higher than Greece’s? Is that why Mr Salmond ingratiated himself with the Chinese over the Dalai Lama? So here is my challenge to al the Nasty Nats out there: how would you afford you change and prevent Scotland from becoming the next Greece, Spain or Italy? Or do you think that 50% youth unemployment actually serves social justice? And please reply with facts, not delusional assertions.

    • FF42

      Because they can always complain about what was is not going to happen. In fact Scotland would have ended up with unemployment levels at least similar to Ireland (but structural and long term) and somewhat disguised by emigration to the hated UK. But because independence was rejected, that possibility can now be ignored.

      Equally if all taxation had been devolved by the Smith Commission, the Scottish Government would find itself with less revenue or Scots would have to pay higher taxes to get the same services. Because that kind of “devo-max” was never on the table, they can complain about not being given a choice, even though most people, I suspect, would choose the status quo, as better value.

  • Alexander Cochrane

    The article mentions twice that along with the ‘union’ , Scotland is in danger also but fails to tell us what this danger might be. Could it be that we might get to see some of the wealth from our vast resources actually benefitting us or would that be too dangerous for us? We might sink under the weight of our own money. It could mean that Scots might have to decide what is in our best interests instead of Westminster doing it and completely ignoring us. I can see how dangerous that can be as we are too wee, too daft and too poor according to all the rich people who shout at each other everyday from their green leather seats and the even richer ones who sleep on the red leather ones. Maybe the author means we are in danger from being invaded by the bad Russians if we tell the bad British to remove their abominations from our country. They must be impatient for the British to depart so that they can do what they have done to Iceland, The Faroes, Rep of Ireland, Denmark……blah blah blah. I should think that most Scots prefer vodka to gin any day. These are just a few things that most of us have thought about but the worst and most dangerous thing that could ever happen to this country is for us to let things continue as they are and have been. Scotland has woke up to the lies and years of oppression and tyranny and most of us know from seeing the pathetic Smith report that Westminster does not give a damn about us…..only in what we have and what they can take from us. There is a very real anger here…..a feeling of being cheated and it is not going to subside. Absolutely no danger of that.

  • Hegelman

    Dropping oil prices will make Scots love England again.

    Besides, the SNP has no new answer to the currency question.

    • Sam Mitchell

      Isn’t it amazing that countries such as Norway… Kuwait.. Saudi Arabia… etc all have OIL FUNDS… built up when the oil price was High & Low… BUT.. what has wm got in the way of oil funds???… oh but if they want something like that the usual remedy is QE… thats the Brit way… not think ahead… not think of starting such a FUND… jeesus no… just print some more dosh…

      • HenBroon

        “BUT.. what has wm got in the way of oil funds???…”

        Phallic symbols in Canary Warf.

        Phallic symbols, (WMDs) on the Clyde.

        The hatred of every Muslim fundamentalist and terrorist on the planet who if they could would set London on fire.

        A load of posh rich gits, laundering tax payers money to their offshore accounts.

        A load of crooked politicians who drool on their every word.

    • Sam Mitchell

      The Snp has answered the currency question time after time… even your quisling leader has accepted it…. only you cave dwellers who don’t like the light prefer to ignore it… as we will continue to use the pound until it becomes too much of a burden with it’s debt burden….

  • OttoDog

    So much for respecting the referendum’s results, and the people’s decision, ey, Alex?

    • Sam Mitchell

      I do not respect a ref based on the lies and deceit and the dodgy practices before during & after the count… or…. as someone else to eloquently put it… It wasn’t that they were unconvinced – they were scared $hitless by the unrelenting doomsday propaganda carpet bombing them day and night month after month. THAT’S the reason NO prevailed, nothing else.

  • Roger Hudson

    Without the big bribe, now being reneged on as I expected, it would have been a small ‘yes’ majority, it definitely hasn’t been kicked off for a generation.

  • Of course, the Scottish question isn’t settled. At the heart of it all is the currency issue and its economic implications. With politicians having been panicked into “devo-max” to save their own skin, the situation was further destabilised and this, indeed, increased uncertainty. As a result, sterling is unlikely to stabilise in the near future (against the dollar, that is!). Sentiment has turned against sterling, especially as a EU exit could cause even more turmoil.

    Matthew Beesley of fund manager Henderson has pointed to similarities to the Quebec referendum in 1995 where the currency issue remained on the table and continued to affect corporate investment decisions. “Devo-max” could, indeed, create more uncertainty than complete independence. Further to this: Devil in the devo: http://pinkerspost.com/?p=391

  • paulus

    Reading your posts massie, reminds me of reading about the pastimes of the well to do in 18th century, London… for half a penny you could a purchase a stick and poke all the lunatics in the Bedlam hospital. A matinee session on a sunday included.

  • HenBroon

    In order to understand the Smith Commission Report, the conventional wisdom is that we must first understand the “Vow”, the interventions of Gordon Brown during and after the campaign, and the immediate reaction of the Westminster Government to the apparent threat of defeat in the Referendum. Take a step back; we should, rather contemplate the nature and purpose of the organisation set up to fight independence in the Referendum, because the existence of Better Together (which, at a stroke, has inadvertently almost destroyed the last decaying pretensions of the Labour Party to be an authentic mass movement in Scotland) tells us much, much more about the political forces actually at play in the Smith Commission; and that ensured the character of the Report that it would inevitably produce. It is, whatever is claimed for Smith in mainstream ploitics; for everyone else, back to the drawing-board.

    Better Together was essentially a front-organisation for what I will term the Westminster Cartel. What do I mean by the Westminster Cartel? I mean the operation of a political ‘price-fixing’ operation that serves the interests of it members (the principal political parties represented in, and which are principal beneficiaries of, the current Westminster Parliamentary system) and that presents to the public the appearance of being in competition to serve the political interests of the people, when in fact there is no substantive competition between the Parties to serve the politics of the people, but a real and broad agreement within the Cartel to preserve the primacy of the interests of the political parties.

    In order to understand the idea of the Westminster Cartel, which I have simplified and represented in stark primary colours here, the source for the concept is Katz and Mair (1992, 1995 and 2000), in what has become known as ‘The Cartel Party Thesis’. In their restatement of this seminal thesis in 2000, Katz and Mair usefully defined the concept:

    “political parties increasingly function like cartels, employing the resources of the state to limit political competition and ensure their own electoral success”.

    It is important to note that Katz and Mair’s thesis is not simply a purely theoretical model, or a speculative hypothesis; but arises from research and the analysis of data from the operation of modern political parties across the political spectrum, and across the world. In its restatement in 2000 the Cartel Thesis arises out of the data rather more than it is a search for verification of a hypothesis. Notably a key element missing in the original 1992 research was the effect of globalisation on political parties, and its perhaps unexpected collorary: a threefold transformation in politics, driven by the collapse of the left-right ideological divide after 1989; a transfer of power to a technocratic, non-partizan EU, and a general loss of power over inflation and employment by national governments; which together may be characterised as illustrating the phenomenon of “depoliticization”. This threefold transformation opened a new avenue for political parties to develop a new form of political action in order to retain power: “Collusion”.

    The Smith Commission was a public invitation for political parties to find common purpose; but from the critical perspective of the vested interests of the institution actually under threat, through Smith, of losing both power and influence; Westminster (and itherfore also the threat to Westminster’s key political beneficiaries, the parties); it was thus an invitation principally to collusion between the Westminster parties. Not surprisingly those parties not representing the Westminster Cartel (SNP, Greens) and which participated and agreed to the Smith Report findings, came out immediately thereafter with criticisms of the agreement. They have been widely criticised for this by the mainstream media (which incidentally are the principal communication organs that serve the interests of the Cartel). The Westminster Cartel thus objected to this critical response by signatories; but notably Lord Smith has made it clear (BBC Radio Scotland, 30th November, 2014) that he found nothing problematic in the SNP or Greens first signing up, but then in their post-Report response, being highly criticial of the extent of powers ceded.

    More important is the stange case of what was actiually agreed in Smith, who agreed it, and when it was agreed. Gary Gibbons (Channel 4 News) claimed that:

    “The Smith Commission thought it had agreement on powers for much more flexibility on Universal Credit in Scotland. Then, late in the day, Whitehall started a push-back.
    At Tuesday’s cabinet, when Alistair Carmichael read out the plans taking shape at the Smith Commission table, one after another English Tory cabinet ministers challenged the plans and their implications for their brief and their department…. …. The draft conclusions were diluted in the last 48 hours much to the irritation of the Smith Commission members. “There was panic” in Whitehall according to one Smith Commission source” (Gary Gibbon Blog, 27th November 2014).

    The Tory ministers who were said to object included Osborne, May, Javid, and Smith. This does not appear to be the view of Adam Tompkins (who was a Conservative member of Smith) about what happened within the Smith Commission hothouse (BBC Radio Scotland, 29th November, 2014). The Sunday Herald (30th November, 2014), has however also suggested that the Smith Commission was “rewritten at 11th hour”. There were also some reports of “leaked drafts” of the Smith Commission containing wider powers. Given the current political circumstances immediately post-Smith, this degree of confusion is profoundly unsatisfactory. There is a real need for the facts to be presented and the process to be open to scrutiny. The sensbilities or embarrassment of political parties are not a matter of the National Interest, or a special entitlement to privacy. Their ‘right’ to privacy is, indeed part of the very matter at stake.

    Let us turn from the uncertainties to the certainties. What we have in Smith is a series of random, haphazard, ad-hoc transfers of powers on (for example) income tax, with very little attempt to construct a connected, coherent and manageable system for the efficient govenrment of Scotland (still less a system that serves the economic or welfare aspirations of the Scottish people). The Income Tax powers, for example are isolated and in political terms, probably almost unusable; that, after all is their purpose. The powers over Income Tax serve only to play back into the banalities of Westminster political ideology; providing opportunites for the hapless ‘knockabout’ debates between Labour and Conservative that are reduced to ‘tax the rich’ versus ‘ruin enterprise’; all in order to suck the Scottish government into agonising over the same old, pointless Westminster political guff.

    How do we list the haphazard, potentially counter-productive nature of Smith? Simple. Just write down a list of reserved powers to Westminster, post-Smith. This is the real list of things that matter – “business as usual” in Westminster. Below is the list of powers drawn up by Smith that will remain reserved to Westminster after Smith is implemented in full (and Smith does not even attempt comprehensively to list all Westminster’s reserved powers): nevertheless, it is quite a list, and it explains in part why the Smith Report runs to 28 pages: for it needed 28 pages only to explain just how little was being transferred. I have of course excluded the obvious broad fields of Foreign Affairs and Defence, which had no prospect of transfer within the current terms of reference:

    Reserved to Westminster after Smith is implenented:

    All aspects of the state pension are reserved
    Universal Credit (UC), save for “administrative power to change the frequency of UC payments“ and “the power to vary the housing cost elements of UC, including varying the under-occupancy charge and local housing allowance rates” is reserved
    “Conditionality” and sanctions within UC are reserved
    Bereavement Allowance, Bereavement Payment, Child Benefit, Guardian’s Allowance, Maternity Allowance, Statutory Maternity Pay, Statutory
    Sick Pay and Widowed Parent’s Allowance are all reserved
    The National Minimum Wage is reserved
    The Equality Act (2010) is reserved
    Access to all benefits delivered by DWP, Jobcentre Plus are reserved
    Responsibility for ”designing and implementing” supplier obligations with regard to Energy Efficiency and Fuel Poverty is devolved; but setting “the way the money is raised” is reserved
    The Special Immigration Appeals Commission and the Proscribed Organisations Appeals Commission are reserved (and Para. 63, Tribunals also reserved: “the laws providing for the underlying reserved substantive rights and duties”)
    Other than rates and thresholds of Income Tax, all other aspects of Income Tax are reserved
    Other than the VAT receipts raised in Scotland by the first 10 percentage points of the standard rate of VAT which will be assigned to the Scottish Government’s budget, all other aspects of VAT are reserved
    The licensing of offshore oil and gas extraction is reserved
    All aspects of Fuel Duty and Excise Duties are reserved
    In pursuit of managing UK economic ‘risk’, the UK Parliament the power to levy an additional UK-wide tax “in the UK national interest” is reserved.
    The “health and safety legislative framework” is reserved
    All aspects of Corporation Tax are reserved
    All aspects of Inheritance Tax and Capital Gains Tax are reserved
    All aspects of National Insurance Contributions are reserved
    All aspects of the taxation of oil and gas receipts are reserved
    All aspects of Fuel Duty and Excise Duties are reserved
    The Block Grant, operated through the Barnett Formula, is reserved
    The devolution of xenotransplantation; embryology, surrogacy and genetics; medicines, medical supplies and poisons and welfare foods are reserved (but should be subject to “without prejudice” discussions)

    Smith, in short, has failed. I rest Scotland’s case. By John S Warren


  • Adam Page

    The referendum may have opened a box of dreams but it’s Pandora’s box. With the fringe left advocating “industries to be nationalised, a republic declared, land ownership reformed, fracking
    banned, Nato left and a ‘people’s budget’ published that would offer an
    alternative to ‘austerity’” we shall all be grateful that to see any second referendum crushed by an even wider margin. Salmond wisely refused to flesh out his plans because he knew doing so was to write his own obituary. Fortunately the rest of the nationalists aren’t so canny.

  • Tamas Marcuis

    This week the English controlled government in London had an opportunity to reform the UK It could have created a new arrangement that might have removed the or lessened the desire for independence for the foreseable future.
    It chose instead to a sham, a con job piece of propaganda. Most surprising is that it is being sold primarily to the English population by publications such as this.
    You dear English readers are being told that everything is fine and dandy. That it is those nasty Unter Menchen Scots that are causing all the problems and should be punished. Now the Spectator is feeding you lines about the IRA priming you to believe that you need to deal with the Scots in a violent and oppressive manner. Of course you are not there yet but they’ll get you there step by little step. May be next year of in a few more.
    During the referendum I heard every threat imaginable. Theft of assets, partition and annexation of Scottish territory, blockade and trade embargo. As well as the efforts to get other European countries to treat Scotland like a European Cuba. Your government threw away the notion that there is a Union, now there is only an Occupation. Why do I believe this? I have no Scots blood. No ethnic axe to grind with the English population. I’m basing it on the atmosphere of the morning after the 18th. The glum faces of the NO voters. Frightened ashamed and after the NeoNazis ran amock around Glasgow and the BNP and UKIP declared they win big in Scotland, I saw humiliation.

    • scotchthistle

      Sorry – you have read it wrong. If there were any glum No voters, it was that they were ashamed that 55% of their countrymen voted to break up their country. The humiliation of Scotland was the work of Alex Salmond and his nat supporters. Salmond has done more to humiliate a proud people than anyone else in history

      • Sam Mitchell

        A.S & N.S have NEVER let Scotland down…. Never…. others… especially the branch membership of the wm parties… now they are a group of self centered money orientated quislings… not one can hold their heads up…. they and their quisling no supporters didn’t vote with their hearts… or their heads….. it was with their wallets..

        • scotchthistle

          Sorry – I hold my head high and proudly proclaim that I had nothing whatsoever to do with the wretched, negative, divisive campaign that tried to dismember my country. I am British and proud of it.

          The self-centred and the quislings were these scurrilous politicians who hoped to build a fancy carer for themselves in a fancy Scottish parliament by leeching money from the working people of Scotland. These so-called nationalists were either dupes or parasites

          Best regards

  • Harryagain

    Intelligent Scotspersons fled Scotland years ago leaving behind a very poor gene pool.
    You can tell, the Sturgeon woman is brain dead.
    It was socialism destroyed the Scottish economy, not the English or the Tories.
    The Jocks will be eating grass after a few years of Scottish Nazi Partei rule.
    We English must be strong and not bail them out.
    So that they remember the lesson.

    Socialism always fails, has failed everywhere it has been implemented.
    The latest cases being France and Venezuela.
    The next of note will be the EUSSR.

    • AtMyDeskToday

      It has been said that any Scot that moves to England improves the gene pool of both countries.

  • Fraziel

    Any truth to the rumour i wonder that they were considering calling the paper Pravda?

    • Sam Mitchell

      No… the daily mail already holds that title…as you well know…

  • john

    The Scots are gone – get used to it! They can keep on pushing till the dam breaks.

  • Antigravity

    I can only dream of the day we nationalists and republicans in Wales get this sense of momentum and real strides towards independence. Cer amdani Albanwyr, we’re behind you all the way!

    • Richard Ferguson

      Just keep looking inwards. You’ll find it might happen.

  • Dr John N Sutherland

    Smith invented that total dog’s breakfast The University of The West of The Scotland (perhaps there are fewer the’s). An establishment so horrible and disfunctional it defies any logic. Worst university in Scotland by far. Smith’s track record showed that his report would be still born.

  • sulbernick

    “…it is difficult to imagine circumstances in which London could deny the clearly expressed will of the Scottish people.” Strange isn’t it then that London (Westminster) has no problem in denying the clearly expressed will of the English people. But let’s face it, most MP’s have difficulty recognising the existence of the ‘English people’.