Thursday, 02 February 2012 08:26
198 Comments
By Martin Kelly 
A Labour peer has called for legislation to prevent Scots from being given the opportunity to opt for devo-max in the independence referendum.
George Foulkes, former MP and MSP and now lord, has become the latest Unionist politician to try to amend the Scotland Bill in order to hijack control of the ballot.
The bid would see it become unlawful for devo-max to be included in any ballot paper alongside independence and no-change.
It would also prevent any question on devo-max to be put to the Scottish people for at least 35 days after the independence vote.
The Labour peer defended his move by claiming that both votes were separate and that Scots would need more time to consider the extra powers option.
He said some people were confused by too many questions and added: “We need a clear decision and my amendment would allow for the independence question to be decided and, in the case of a vote to stay in the United Kingdom, would allow time for a different campaign on more powers for Scotland.”
This week saw the launch of a campaign by Civic Scotland in order to argue for a third option to be included on the ballot. The campaign, backed by former Labour First Minister Henry McLeish along with Church and Union leaders, has called for devo-max to be presented as an option alongside independence and the status quo.
The campaign was launched days after the Scottish government published its referendum consultation document aimed at allowing all of Scotland to have their say on matters relating to the 2014 referendum. First Minister Alex Salmond has already indicated his willingness to allow the third option, saying that to disallow it would be undemocratic.
The attempt by Lord Foulkes is the latest by London based politicians to seize control of the referendum and comes barely a week after a Tory peer, Lord Caithness suggested that Orkney and Shetland be excluded from any Yes vote, leaving Westminster with the valuable oil and gas reserves.
Lord Caithness also attached an amendment that would render a Scotland only vote powerless unless a further UK wide ballot backed the Scottish result.
Comments
#
2012-02-02 09:22
"Do you want independence? If independence is not wanted by the majority, do you want Devo Max?"
Conversely,
"Do you want the Scottish Parliament to have Devo Max powers? On top of this, do you wish the SP to have the powers of an independent nation?"
So confusing having to think about more than one thing... Surprised I can even make breakfast! I am glad Lord Foulkes is here to help silly little us!
Conversely,
"Do you want the Scottish Parliament to have Devo Max powers? On top of this, do you wish the SP to have the powers of an independent nation?"
So confusing having to think about more than one thing... Surprised I can even make breakfast! I am glad Lord Foulkes is here to help silly little us!
#
2012-02-02 17:12
Quoting doctor_zaius:
One of the major advantages of an independendent Scotland is
No more George Foukes and his ilk to irritate us.
And we will save a lot of money from that too.
So confusing having to think about more than one thing... Surprised I can even make breakfast! I am glad Lord Foulkes is here to help silly little us!
One of the major advantages of an independendent Scotland is
No more George Foukes and his ilk to irritate us.
And we will save a lot of money from that too.
#
2012-02-02 09:30
What is George Foulke's version of devo max?
Is it to add legal drinking age limits powers to the Scottish Government's portfolio of airgun licence control, road speed limits and 10% tax raising powers where the equivelent sum will be cut from our pocket money.
Something fishy about Foulke's proposal especially if our state broadcaster, the BBC is headlining it.
He should spell out the full details first!
Is it to add legal drinking age limits powers to the Scottish Government's portfolio of airgun licence control, road speed limits and 10% tax raising powers where the equivelent sum will be cut from our pocket money.
Something fishy about Foulke's proposal especially if our state broadcaster, the BBC is headlining it.
He should spell out the full details first!
#
2012-02-02 09:53
Its certain that its not done in the interests of the people of Scotland.
Its all about protecting Westminster rule and the misappropriatio n of Scotland's assets.
Its all about protecting Westminster rule and the misappropriatio n of Scotland's assets.
#
2012-02-02 16:09
O/t but the tv licensig people are giving me a final warning and are threatening to come into my flat with a warrant. I do want to pay for this service as it is not an impartial broadcastor but I am getting a wee bit nervous. Are any others out there in the same boat?
#
2012-02-02 12:00
Quoting doctor_zaius:
The uncertaity may be will Foulkes be given a hard cardboard box to send his ermine robe back to whence it came..
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
In case his unanswered questions add "uncertainty"?
The uncertaity may be will Foulkes be given a hard cardboard box to send his ermine robe back to whence it came..
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
#
2012-02-02 10:41
"Something fishy..."? Why of course, peers with criminal convictions are under scrutiny. Need something to divert attention.
#
2012-02-02 11:03
Quoting Alx1:
Now that brings up a great thought. How about we start putting THAT idea about? It could effectively neuter the BBC Propaganda machinr. Let us say after all these reported scare/daft stories that it MUST be wrong as the BBC are highlighting it. Two spugs(sprugs), with one stone. It shoots down the story but also casts doubts on the BBC's veracity. If the Hoi Polloi begin to doubt the BBC, then the dependent Btitnats are lost.
Something fishy about Foulke's proposal especially if our state broadcaster, the BBC is headlining it.
Now that brings up a great thought. How about we start putting THAT idea about? It could effectively neuter the BBC Propaganda machinr. Let us say after all these reported scare/daft stories that it MUST be wrong as the BBC are highlighting it. Two spugs(sprugs), with one stone. It shoots down the story but also casts doubts on the BBC's veracity. If the Hoi Polloi begin to doubt the BBC, then the dependent Btitnats are lost.
#
2012-02-02 09:43
Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?
Do you agree that Scotland should have full fiscal autonomy within the union?
Do you agree that Scotland should maintain status quo within the union?
Anyone confused yet?
Do you agree that Scotland should have full fiscal autonomy within the union?
Do you agree that Scotland should maintain status quo within the union?
Anyone confused yet?
#
2012-02-02 11:01
My only confusion is why this objectionable creature is still being paid wads out of my taxes.
#
2012-02-02 13:38
Aye Morag, he is fairly grim to listen to. But we are looking at the finest trougher in Westminster. His excuse for the latest wheeze? We're too stupid to make judgements on more than one question. We'd get all confused. I'm all for one question myself, but if two or even three appear I think we'll manage to struggle through. :0)
#
2012-02-02 09:45
One of the many positive reasons for voting decisively for independence must surely be that we will never have to listen to the utterances of Flook and his likes again.
Life expectancy in our fair land will increase and light will flood into the darkest of dark rooms.
Marvellous.
Life expectancy in our fair land will increase and light will flood into the darkest of dark rooms.
Marvellous.
#
2012-02-02 09:45
What the Foulke's is he all about, self serving cretin of a man. As every day passes the Magnus Magnusson phrase becomes more and more relevant' "we've started! so we'll finish"
#
2012-02-02 09:53
Labour harped on about the cost of a referendum to the Taxpayer now Foulkes wants two of them!
They are trying every angle they can think of to try and keep the status quo.
On the independence referendum they cried out for the Electoral Commission to be involved. The SNP agreed and now they want the Electoral Commission to set the referendum question. Why no mention of this when asking for the EC to become involved?
They want to manipulate the referendum to suit them as much as they possibly can. As far as I'm concerned they had their chance when they were in power. We set the rules not them!
They are trying every angle they can think of to try and keep the status quo.
On the independence referendum they cried out for the Electoral Commission to be involved. The SNP agreed and now they want the Electoral Commission to set the referendum question. Why no mention of this when asking for the EC to become involved?
They want to manipulate the referendum to suit them as much as they possibly can. As far as I'm concerned they had their chance when they were in power. We set the rules not them!
#
2012-02-02 12:49
Thank you doctor, I've been meaning to bring that one up for ages!
Please, people:
The status quo is the status quo.
Status Quo are Status Quo.
Much as I admire Francis Rossi & co I'm not sure they have anything to add to the debate.
Carry on....
Please, people:
The status quo is the status quo.
Status Quo are Status Quo.
Much as I admire Francis Rossi & co I'm not sure they have anything to add to the debate.
Carry on....
#
2012-02-02 09:55
The fact that he is limiting the democratic process and the right of the people of Scotland to self determination is something that does not bother Foulkes.
He can make amendments to the Scotland Bill all day long - it is not going to be passed by the Scottish Parliament so amendments proffered by him are immaterial.
Seemingly the chief purpose of his ramblings is to illustrate what an utterly vile little man he is.
Foulkes is being Anti-Scottish and he is doing it deliberately, again.
He can make amendments to the Scotland Bill all day long - it is not going to be passed by the Scottish Parliament so amendments proffered by him are immaterial.
Seemingly the chief purpose of his ramblings is to illustrate what an utterly vile little man he is.
Foulkes is being Anti-Scottish and he is doing it deliberately, again.
#
2012-02-02 09:56
And our wonderful unbiased state broadcaster gives him a free run this morning.
Not only was there no political right of reply given but they didn't even take the trouble to make any journalistic comment.
What was broadcast was in fact a free party political broadcast on behalf of the Unionists.
Not only was there no political right of reply given but they didn't even take the trouble to make any journalistic comment.
What was broadcast was in fact a free party political broadcast on behalf of the Unionists.
#
2012-02-02 11:33
Quoting gus1940:
Correction A Party Political Broadcast on behalf of Himself, the Baron F, Eer, Foukes
What was broadcast was in fact a free party political broadcast on behalf of the Unionists.
Correction A Party Political Broadcast on behalf of Himself, the Baron F, Eer, Foukes
#
2012-02-02 09:59
Being selected to the House of Lords qualifies Lord Foulkes to speak on behalf of no-one whatsoever. It is typical Lord Foulkes' and unionist democracy, a wholly unelected peer in a house littered with time served criminals who wish to dictate the terms of Scotland’s constitution. I’m sorry but the sight of this man makes me vomit !
#
2012-02-02 10:09
Foulkes makes me vomit too along with Forsyth. It will be wonderful in the new Scotland when the people do not have to pay any share of the colossal sums claimed by the likes of these two in the House of Lords. Oh yes and the savings on travel for the likes of Brown and the family to London for who knows what but we do know it's nothing to do with honest labour.
#
2012-02-02 11:20
Talk about bringing the so-called honours system into disrepute. I'd take the whole job lot of them, but mainly himself and the poisoned dwarf (michael forsyth - the name he was given by the poor civil servants who worked with him at St Andrews House) and pit them in a bag and drop them into the North Sea. Oh, and I'm forgetting the other '*********, wee jimmy wallace
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
#
2012-02-02 11:34
Wansanshoo,
Here is his biography,
Baron George Foulkes of Cumnock, (Cumnock? How come(nock))? This English, “person”, (for want of a better description), is an Englishman who was born on 21 January 1942, at Oswestry in Shropshire. He is a Labour Party Life Peer. He was once a member of the House of Commons the House of Lords and the Scottish Parliament Up to May 2011 he was a member of both the Lords and the Scottish Parliament. He stood down for the Scottish Parliament for the 2011 Scottish Parliament election. Often described by the media as an "ultra loyalist" to the Labour Party he is a strong supporter of ID Cards and other Labour Party British Government proposals. Regularly speaking in favour of former British Government proposals. He claims to be a supporter of Scottish devolution and was one of those involved in the drafting a Claim Of Righs for Scotland, in 1988. So, he is actually just a yesterday's (English)man.
Here is his biography,
Baron George Foulkes of Cumnock, (Cumnock? How come(nock))? This English, “person”, (for want of a better description), is an Englishman who was born on 21 January 1942, at Oswestry in Shropshire. He is a Labour Party Life Peer. He was once a member of the House of Commons the House of Lords and the Scottish Parliament Up to May 2011 he was a member of both the Lords and the Scottish Parliament. He stood down for the Scottish Parliament for the 2011 Scottish Parliament election. Often described by the media as an "ultra loyalist" to the Labour Party he is a strong supporter of ID Cards and other Labour Party British Government proposals. Regularly speaking in favour of former British Government proposals. He claims to be a supporter of Scottish devolution and was one of those involved in the drafting a Claim Of Righs for Scotland, in 1988. So, he is actually just a yesterday's (English)man.
#
2012-02-02 18:45
Why do you feel it necessary to highlight his Englishness? Does Foulkes identify himself as English? Do you also emphasise Mike Russell's Englishness, or is it only English-born unionists who aren't allowed to become Scottish?
#
2012-02-02 10:01
Listening to Foulkes this morning mostly he referred to the Scots as 'they'. Once upon a time he was very nearly Scottish - I wonder if at that time he would have appreciated being referred to as a 'they'...
With a visible lurch, he suddenly stopped saying 'they' when even he must have realised what a pompous git he sounded.
Bring on a republic!
With a visible lurch, he suddenly stopped saying 'they' when even he must have realised what a pompous git he sounded.
Bring on a republic!
#
2012-02-02 10:41
I was going to bring this up too Lamplighter. He consistantly referred to "they" and "them". And, as you say, in sudden realisation he changed to "we".
If anyone wondered about our fight being "us" and "them" Ffoulkes left us in no doubt. I hope someone has this on tape and can youtube it. It should be widely distributed.
If anyone wondered about our fight being "us" and "them" Ffoulkes left us in no doubt. I hope someone has this on tape and can youtube it. It should be widely distributed.
#
2012-02-02 11:44
Talking about, "They", I'm very sick of hearing such as, "The country", The whole country",, "Everyone in the country". Just what country is the question that must follow all such usage. This is because, as the UK is composed of four countries, no one but the speaker/writer knows if the speaker/writer is meaning "A" country, (if so which one), or mistakenly calling the UK, or Britain, "A Countery". Perhaps the biggest offender is David Cameron. How do I know this, "Because everyone is talking about it"? Grrrrr!
#
2012-02-02 10:05
Don’t want it anyway, it will only serve as a distraction.
Cameron has said no more powers for Scotland. So the choice is clear either Independence or the Status Quo. If you don’t want the Status Quo there is only one alternative - Independence!
Cameron has said no more powers for Scotland. So the choice is clear either Independence or the Status Quo. If you don’t want the Status Quo there is only one alternative - Independence!
#
2012-02-02 10:44
There won't be a status quo, Westminster will hammer us to prevent this from happening again. We will lose powers, and funding and things like free prescriptions will be a thing of the past. Once folk realise this, they will be more likely to vote for independence.
#
2012-02-02 12:17
How do we get that message out the the Scottish folk? It's not enough to tell one another about it here.
#
2012-02-02 13:20
I have a link from my website to here under the link from the NewsNetScotland logo:
[NewsNetScotlan d logo] A Pro Scotland news and discussion site - See the news BBC Scotland won't report
Also, anybody discussing Scottish politics/Independence, I refer them to here as well. It isn't much, but every little helps I suppose.
[NewsNetScotlan d logo] A Pro Scotland news and discussion site - See the news BBC Scotland won't report
Also, anybody discussing Scottish politics/Independence, I refer them to here as well. It isn't much, but every little helps I suppose.
#
2012-02-02 10:11
I also think the Devo Max will serve as a complicated, confusing distraction - certainly the unionists and media will make it so.
Independence - eh or nutt (Dundonian)
Independence - eh or nutt (Dundonian)
#
2012-02-02 17:03
It's relevance is that it isn't irrelevant.
Just because Cameron said he won't accept it, and note, "won't accept" not "won't allow" doesn't mean devo max can't be there a a viable option.
Its now really just an easier way to vote for independence for some.
Just because Cameron said he won't accept it, and note, "won't accept" not "won't allow" doesn't mean devo max can't be there a a viable option.
Its now really just an easier way to vote for independence for some.
#
2012-02-02 10:17
The 1997 referendum sets the precedent for a 2 question referendum in 2014.
A two-question 2014 referendum could be based on the following questions;
1. Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?
2. Do you agree that the Scottish Parliament should recieve all taxes levied in Scotland?
Where;
A Yes-Yes or a Yes-No would mean a vote for independence.
A No-Yes would mean a vote for Fiscal Autonomy/Federalism/DevoMax.
A No-No would mean a vote for the status quo.
This is so simple even Lord Foulkes could understand it.
A two-question 2014 referendum could be based on the following questions;
1. Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?
2. Do you agree that the Scottish Parliament should recieve all taxes levied in Scotland?
Where;
A Yes-Yes or a Yes-No would mean a vote for independence.
A No-Yes would mean a vote for Fiscal Autonomy/Federalism/DevoMax.
A No-No would mean a vote for the status quo.
This is so simple even Lord Foulkes could understand it.
#
2012-02-02 10:21
This man bad mouthed the First Minister in the HoL along with other
" respected!" lords,messrs Forsyth ,Steel and Liddell.Spite and s£ite in lengthy widths and repeated on the Daily Politics with glee.
Nothing any of them say should in any way be an influence on any question of independent Scotland.
" respected!" lords,messrs Forsyth ,Steel and Liddell.Spite and s£ite in lengthy widths and repeated on the Daily Politics with glee.
Nothing any of them say should in any way be an influence on any question of independent Scotland.
#
2012-02-02 10:23
Unionist manipulation and tampering getting desperate?
Oh, dear!
Is that Father Jack saying "fook off, Foulkes' I hear?
Oh, dear!
Is that Father Jack saying "fook off, Foulkes' I hear?
#
2012-02-02 10:28
Wikipedia entry on Mr Foulkes. I wonder if he edited it himself?
"George Foulkes has been attacked on many occasions for asking for evidence for the SNP Devolved Government on their economic claims. citation needed In response to these requests he has often been attacked by online faceless CyberNats, who refer to those who disagree with them as Anti-Scottish, as the SNP drifts ever more away from Centrism towards Isolation Politics. citation needed"
"George Foulkes has been attacked on many occasions for asking for evidence for the SNP Devolved Government on their economic claims. citation needed In response to these requests he has often been attacked by online faceless CyberNats, who refer to those who disagree with them as Anti-Scottish, as the SNP drifts ever more away from Centrism towards Isolation Politics. citation needed"
#
2012-02-02 10:41
That entry needs challenged. What nonsense. People will lose respect for wikipedia if that kind f pejorative nonsense is allowed.
#
2012-02-02 10:45
I'll go in and edit it myself later today, unless someone wants to beat me to it. Just wanted to get it out there! Wiki does not stop anyone from changing entries; everything you read needs to be verified independently.
en.wikipedia.org/.../...
OUCH!!!
"Mr Foulkes has several business interests in the Caribbean and is well respected amongst Caribbean business circles."
en.wikipedia.org/.../...
OUCH!!!
"Mr Foulkes has several business interests in the Caribbean and is well respected amongst Caribbean business circles."
#
2012-02-02 11:05
"several business interests"?...only one non-financial Carribean interest is mentioned in the Foulkes Register of Interests.
#
2012-02-02 11:13
The last paragraph was particularly 'balanced' Put in a challenge to Wiki about it.
#
2012-02-02 11:18
"...does not stop anyone from changing entries..."
unless you're trying to correct the statement that the English (now UK) crown jewels are the oldest in Europe (or whatever; not sure of exact statement now). I corrected that statement pointing out that the Scottish crown jewels are older, and provided original sources for it, but my edit kept getting reverted, presumably by some British nationalist with a chip on his shoulder.
I note now that the articles on crown jewels now state that the Scottish jewels are the oldest in UK, so I guess I must have succeeded.
I am a fan of Wikipedia, and can get stuck on it for hours, but people need reminded of the need for multiple sources (and not just cut and pastes from Wikipedia!).
unless you're trying to correct the statement that the English (now UK) crown jewels are the oldest in Europe (or whatever; not sure of exact statement now). I corrected that statement pointing out that the Scottish crown jewels are older, and provided original sources for it, but my edit kept getting reverted, presumably by some British nationalist with a chip on his shoulder.
I note now that the articles on crown jewels now state that the Scottish jewels are the oldest in UK, so I guess I must have succeeded.
I am a fan of Wikipedia, and can get stuck on it for hours, but people need reminded of the need for multiple sources (and not just cut and pastes from Wikipedia!).
#
2012-02-02 10:56
He says it on twitter repeatedly, every time anyone questions him he claims he is being attacked by cybernats, if you ask him who attacked him and what they said he disappears for a few hours
#
2012-02-02 11:51
Quoting farrochie:
Oh! I'll edit that for him, "The unelected and now unelectable, George Foulkes has beenattacked laughed at on many occasions for asking for evidence for the SNP Devolved Government on their economic claims".
Wikipedia entry on Mr Foulkes. I wonder if he edited it himself?
"George Foulkes has been attacked on many occasions for asking for evidence for the SNP Devolved Government on their economic claims. citation needed In response to these requests he has often been attacked by online faceless CyberNats, who refer to those who disagree with them as Anti-Scottish, as the SNP drifts ever more away from Centrism towards Isolation Politics. citation needed"
Oh! I'll edit that for him, "The unelected and now unelectable, George Foulkes has been
#
2012-02-02 11:57
I think that Lord Foulkes may have been tired when he wrote about online faceless CyberNats.
What he meant to say was the voting public, many of them ex Labour voters, like myself, who have become disgusted by Labour's love affair with nuclear weapons, foreign misadventures resulting in the needless deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people and of their pursuit of financial rewards and grand titles, all at the expense of the voiceless taxpayer.
To be a hated CyberNat, all that is required is an Internet connection and a desire to see your country free of the gross mismanagement from Westminster that has characterised all of our lives.
Lord Foulkes, Scotland's Independence is coming and I hope that you are around to see it.
Roll on 2014.
What he meant to say was the voting public, many of them ex Labour voters, like myself, who have become disgusted by Labour's love affair with nuclear weapons, foreign misadventures resulting in the needless deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people and of their pursuit of financial rewards and grand titles, all at the expense of the voiceless taxpayer.
To be a hated CyberNat, all that is required is an Internet connection and a desire to see your country free of the gross mismanagement from Westminster that has characterised all of our lives.
Lord Foulkes, Scotland's Independence is coming and I hope that you are around to see it.
Roll on 2014.
#
2012-02-02 10:33
Quote:
Only those in the House of Lords and partaking of too much laughing ginger doesn't help either.
mind you I'm glad of m'Lord's intervention, teeling us what we should and shouldn't think is only alienating more and more folk who were once undecided.
He said some people were confused by too many questions
Only those in the House of Lords and partaking of too much laughing ginger doesn't help either.
mind you I'm glad of m'Lord's intervention, teeling us what we should and shouldn't think is only alienating more and more folk who were once undecided.
#
2012-02-02 10:33
I think if folk have a simple choice of take it or leave it, then they are more likely to go for the independence option.
What we need to do is collate all the devious attempts the unionists are employing to either dilute or remove powers from the Scotland Bill and what it actually means. To people on this site, it is obvious, but it is amazing how many people are totally unaware of the tactics of the unionists and what the Scotland Bill actually means.
Then we need to run the [scare] story that if this is what they are doing before the independence vote, think what they will do to us after it if we don’t vote for independence and paint as bleak a picture as possible. People seem to think the status quo is the default option and don’t realise that powers will be removed from us or that the Barnett Formula could be revised and we will be considerably worse off. Although I said scare story, it is only scary in that it will be true.
What we need to do is collate all the devious attempts the unionists are employing to either dilute or remove powers from the Scotland Bill and what it actually means. To people on this site, it is obvious, but it is amazing how many people are totally unaware of the tactics of the unionists and what the Scotland Bill actually means.
Then we need to run the [scare] story that if this is what they are doing before the independence vote, think what they will do to us after it if we don’t vote for independence and paint as bleak a picture as possible. People seem to think the status quo is the default option and don’t realise that powers will be removed from us or that the Barnett Formula could be revised and we will be considerably worse off. Although I said scare story, it is only scary in that it will be true.
#
2012-02-02 14:26
Areed,Highland Tiger, but bide a wee. Has lot our SNP party been right on the button so far? I, for one, trust their judgement 100%. They have been unerring in reading the signs and always been at least two or three jumps ahead of the home parliament dependency parties, The Commons lot and their Lordships too. If the SNP are not making those moves yet then the game is they await the right time to bring it on. It could be the wrong time to peak too soon.
#
2012-02-02 10:34
I think his true view came through in the interview - He kept saying "If THEY want...." then realised and changed it to "if WE want....".
Do not listen to a word this man says. Every suggestion is a trap or mis-direction.He has no interest in the people of Scotland.
Do not listen to a word this man says. Every suggestion is a trap or mis-direction.He has no interest in the people of Scotland.
#
2012-02-02 10:34
Yeah right sounds like it's a "neverendum" that he wants, his boss Cameron, has already ruled this out as well as any further powers to Scotland!
Personally I wouldn't trust him or his dodgy party to deliver on this or anything else, it sounds like a 1979 type promise, destined to be kicked into the long grass in the event of a 'No' vote, followed by a clampdown on Scotland to ensure that a referendum never takes place again, the re-adjournment of the Scottish parliament and the continued suppression of the Scots until the oil runs out so that would be for another 100 years.
Personally I wouldn't trust him or his dodgy party to deliver on this or anything else, it sounds like a 1979 type promise, destined to be kicked into the long grass in the event of a 'No' vote, followed by a clampdown on Scotland to ensure that a referendum never takes place again, the re-adjournment of the Scottish parliament and the continued suppression of the Scots until the oil runs out so that would be for another 100 years.
#
2012-02-02 12:20
Then why did the hold onto Scotland before we had oil? Mind you the Oil Industry started in Scotland, in the Lothians by James, "Paraffin”, Young.
Here is a wee ode I wrote years ago.
RID BINGS O LOTHIANS.
There's a feature O' the countryside that's seen aboot these pairts,
The "Big Rid Bings" roond Pumpherston an' Cawther and thone airts,
They're relics O' an industry that Scotland gave the nation.
When Yanks claim they discovered ile I'm filled wi' indignation,
Fir roord aboot the Lothians a' biddy kens the tale
O' hoo it startit when a man got "Paraffin" frae shale.
An' hoo throughoot the Lothians the monuments that sprung,
Gie testimony tae the fact it startit up bi' "Young".
Yon Yanks micht ca' it "Kerosene", bit I'll tell you the tale
O' hoo the oil industry wis startit wi' the shale,
And many were the benefits that "Paraffin" did bring
Braw candles, lamp oil and, of course, the famous, - - "Big Rid Bing"
Many things came frae the shale, candles and medication,
Lamp oil, polish an' sich like, an' fir your education,
Detergents and the fuel oil then became a michty factor,
Tae fuel the stoves an' blawlamps,aye, an' even fuel the tractor.
In many airts aroond the world they did its praises sing,
Bit roond aboot the Lothians we got the - - "Big Rid Bing"
The "Paraffin" brocht jobs and wealth to places roond aboot,
Prosperity gaed han' in han' wi' "Rid Bings" there's nae doot.
Winchburgh, Oakbank, Pumpherston, the names roll aff the tounge,
Aw cam tae life and prospered frae the industry O' Young.
Broxburn, Bathgate and Upha', the Cawthers and Dalmeny,
I canna' name them a' because there are sae afu many.
Bit a' guid things come tae an' end, the shale wis nae exception,
The shale ran oot, and so did work, there could be nae decepion.
The work at Pumpherston ran on processing ither things,
Bit ither airts got left wi' naethin' bit thae "Big Rid Bings".
Still yit, that's no' the end O' things, the industry lives on,
They'll spread the rid blae on the roads 'til the "Rid Bings" are a' gone.
Bi Robert, “Auld Bob), Peffers.
Here is a wee ode I wrote years ago.
RID BINGS O LOTHIANS.
There's a feature O' the countryside that's seen aboot these pairts,
The "Big Rid Bings" roond Pumpherston an' Cawther and thone airts,
They're relics O' an industry that Scotland gave the nation.
When Yanks claim they discovered ile I'm filled wi' indignation,
Fir roord aboot the Lothians a' biddy kens the tale
O' hoo it startit when a man got "Paraffin" frae shale.
An' hoo throughoot the Lothians the monuments that sprung,
Gie testimony tae the fact it startit up bi' "Young".
Yon Yanks micht ca' it "Kerosene", bit I'll tell you the tale
O' hoo the oil industry wis startit wi' the shale,
And many were the benefits that "Paraffin" did bring
Braw candles, lamp oil and, of course, the famous, - - "Big Rid Bing"
Many things came frae the shale, candles and medication,
Lamp oil, polish an' sich like, an' fir your education,
Detergents and the fuel oil then became a michty factor,
Tae fuel the stoves an' blawlamps,aye, an' even fuel the tractor.
In many airts aroond the world they did its praises sing,
Bit roond aboot the Lothians we got the - - "Big Rid Bing"
The "Paraffin" brocht jobs and wealth to places roond aboot,
Prosperity gaed han' in han' wi' "Rid Bings" there's nae doot.
Winchburgh, Oakbank, Pumpherston, the names roll aff the tounge,
Aw cam tae life and prospered frae the industry O' Young.
Broxburn, Bathgate and Upha', the Cawthers and Dalmeny,
I canna' name them a' because there are sae afu many.
Bit a' guid things come tae an' end, the shale wis nae exception,
The shale ran oot, and so did work, there could be nae decepion.
The work at Pumpherston ran on processing ither things,
Bit ither airts got left wi' naethin' bit thae "Big Rid Bings".
Still yit, that's no' the end O' things, the industry lives on,
They'll spread the rid blae on the roads 'til the "Rid Bings" are a' gone.
Bi Robert, “Auld Bob), Peffers.
#
2012-02-02 17:48
Auld Bob
"Then why did the hold onto Scotland before we had oil?"
Well a long time ago Scotland had a thriving heavy industry, mainly developed during the war and if you take a look at John Jappy's blog of the other day you may notice this;
Quote:
Obviously these heavy industries have now been decimated, mostly by Thatcher, with Labours permission, however at that time we seemed to be very profitable mainly due to hard work.
Things are a bit different now, with the British empire reduced by such an extent that we are just about the last part.
PS I used to live next to a bing in Penicuik, I remember it just from my childhood :-)
"Then why did the hold onto Scotland before we had oil?"
Well a long time ago Scotland had a thriving heavy industry, mainly developed during the war and if you take a look at John Jappy's blog of the other day you may notice this;
Quote:
As a civil servant in London, and being part of the establishment, I always accepted the general view that an independent Scotland would not be able to survive on its own without financial help from the London Exchequer.
However, when in 1968 I was able to examine the so-called "books" for the first time, I was shocked to find that the position was exactly the opposite and that Scotland contributed much more to the UK economy than its other partners. This was, of course, before the oil boom.
Obviously these heavy industries have now been decimated, mostly by Thatcher, with Labours permission, however at that time we seemed to be very profitable mainly due to hard work.
Things are a bit different now, with the British empire reduced by such an extent that we are just about the last part.
PS I used to live next to a bing in Penicuik, I remember it just from my childhood :-)
#
2012-02-02 10:39
Interesting point being raised on twitter, - perhaps today would be a good day to divert attention from peers with criminal convictions?
#
2012-02-02 10:40
The whole democratic world needs to know what Westminster is doing right now, in 2012, with regards to Scotland.
In Westminster a bunch of unelected political has-beens are literally removing powers from the Scottish parliament via amendments to the Scotland bill.
It is an affront to democracy. Each and every single amendment made by the UNELECTED people in Westminster is designed to limit or reduce the power and authority of the Scottish parliament, the Scottish Government and the Scottish legal system (which incidentally is NOT under the control of Westminster).
The list of amendments being made is huge, and all encompassing. It is beyond credibility what is being done in the unelected house of Lords.
For the record, the following people are at present involved in the wholly undemocratic and systematic removal of powers and authority from the Scottish Government. They should be held on criminal charges. Maybe one day they will, before an international court.
They are in no particualer order of gerrymandering of democracy;
LORD FOULKES OF CUMNOCK,
THE EARL OF CAITHNESS,
BARONESS TAYLOR OF BOLTON,
LORD FORSYTH OF DRUMLEAN,
LORD SELSDON,
LORD WALLACE OF TANKERNESS,
LORD SEWEL,
LORD STEEL OF AIKWOOD,
LORD LANG OF MONKTON,
LORD MCCLUSKEY,
LORD BARNETT,
LORD DAVIDSON OF GLEN CLOVA,
LORD BROWNE OF LADYTON,
LORD BOYD OF DUNCANSBY,
VISCOUNT YOUNGER OF LECKIE,
The DUKE OF MONTROSE,
LORD SELKIRK OF DOUGLAS,
BARONESS KENNEDY OF THE SHAWS,
LORD TANLAW,
THE EARL OF SHREWSBURY,
Not ONE of the above has a democratic mandate at all. The world needs to know what London and Westminster is doing to Scotland and its Government.
In Westminster a bunch of unelected political has-beens are literally removing powers from the Scottish parliament via amendments to the Scotland bill.
It is an affront to democracy. Each and every single amendment made by the UNELECTED people in Westminster is designed to limit or reduce the power and authority of the Scottish parliament, the Scottish Government and the Scottish legal system (which incidentally is NOT under the control of Westminster).
The list of amendments being made is huge, and all encompassing. It is beyond credibility what is being done in the unelected house of Lords.
For the record, the following people are at present involved in the wholly undemocratic and systematic removal of powers and authority from the Scottish Government. They should be held on criminal charges. Maybe one day they will, before an international court.
They are in no particualer order of gerrymandering of democracy;
LORD FOULKES OF CUMNOCK,
THE EARL OF CAITHNESS,
BARONESS TAYLOR OF BOLTON,
LORD FORSYTH OF DRUMLEAN,
LORD SELSDON,
LORD WALLACE OF TANKERNESS,
LORD SEWEL,
LORD STEEL OF AIKWOOD,
LORD LANG OF MONKTON,
LORD MCCLUSKEY,
LORD BARNETT,
LORD DAVIDSON OF GLEN CLOVA,
LORD BROWNE OF LADYTON,
LORD BOYD OF DUNCANSBY,
VISCOUNT YOUNGER OF LECKIE,
The DUKE OF MONTROSE,
LORD SELKIRK OF DOUGLAS,
BARONESS KENNEDY OF THE SHAWS,
LORD TANLAW,
THE EARL OF SHREWSBURY,
Not ONE of the above has a democratic mandate at all. The world needs to know what London and Westminster is doing to Scotland and its Government.
#
2012-02-02 11:14
The peers are living high on the hog, earning good "expenses", wining and dining and "working hard" at the trough, supported by the self-serving honours system, funded by the public purse. What elected politician can seriously question the system when membership of this exclusive club beckons in future years?
Step forward Alex Salmond!
Step forward Alex Salmond!
#
2012-02-02 12:37
Without a doubt, there needs to be something that these crims fear and not just the removal of a gong or bit of fur.If fear tactics is their stock in trade then so must they also be made to fear. The door swings both ways or should.
#
2012-02-02 12:42
I understand that peers get 300 pounds a day so your examples are costing us 6000 to rubbish Scotland.
#
2012-02-02 14:31
That £300 is just for attending. They get to claim for other things like offices, phonebills, travel and so on.
"Nice work, if you can get it,
And you can get it if you try."
To quote an old song.
"Nice work, if you can get it,
And you can get it if you try."
To quote an old song.
#
2012-02-02 19:29
Borrowed for Facebook Robert. Hope you don't mind, but put like this, it's a compelling case on it's own for independence.
#
2012-02-02 10:45
Foulkes, best recruiting sergeant for the S.N.P. does it again, however he did say something intriguing," if Scotland becomes independent and as a result, automatically becomes a member of the E.E.C., students from England would then be eligible for free tuition in Scotland."
#
2012-02-02 10:47
O/T
A union dividend,
We have gone from having Nimrod aircraft capable of patrolling the seas to cover defence,search and rescue and to assist in fisheries protection,to one slow Hercules and a couple of almost comical Cessna aircraft based in England,and they say the SNP are deluded.
A union dividend,
We have gone from having Nimrod aircraft capable of patrolling the seas to cover defence,search and rescue and to assist in fisheries protection,to one slow Hercules and a couple of almost comical Cessna aircraft based in England,and they say the SNP are deluded.
#
2012-02-02 10:51
This from the man who brought Vlad the Impaler to Tynecastle ....
Spent £500,000 of our money asking stupid questions at Holyrood when a list MSP...
Now in cahoots with that other political failures in Scotland - Lord Forsyth and Tankedootness ...
The reality is Westminster's political nerds have decided that the SNP are running scared of a 'Yes / No' option in the referendum and need devo-max on the referendum. They hope by polarising the debate they can get the 'nasty nats' label to stick and win the no vote.
It is time to stop taking umbrage at the announcements of the 'numpty nats' and start laughing at them instead - with every assinine scare story, Lardian pronouncement and belittling of Scotland they do our job for us. We should be graceful and thank them for all the free canvassing they do for us.
I can see it now, the vote of thanks on Independence day: "... and we would especially like to thank the English Lords Foulkes, Forsyth and Tankedootness for all their generous help in ensuring this day would come."
Spent £500,000 of our money asking stupid questions at Holyrood when a list MSP...
Now in cahoots with that other political failures in Scotland - Lord Forsyth and Tankedootness ...
The reality is Westminster's political nerds have decided that the SNP are running scared of a 'Yes / No' option in the referendum and need devo-max on the referendum. They hope by polarising the debate they can get the 'nasty nats' label to stick and win the no vote.
It is time to stop taking umbrage at the announcements of the 'numpty nats' and start laughing at them instead - with every assinine scare story, Lardian pronouncement and belittling of Scotland they do our job for us. We should be graceful and thank them for all the free canvassing they do for us.
I can see it now, the vote of thanks on Independence day: "... and we would especially like to thank the English Lords Foulkes, Forsyth and Tankedootness for all their generous help in ensuring this day would come."
#
2012-02-02 17:12
MJM:
You might consider that Nicola Sturgeon pretty much stopped all these efforts in their tracks last week - they're just soundbites now, not much else.
She also intentionally shackled Holyrood while taking the constitutional irons of the legs of the electorate.
Got my vote.
You might consider that Nicola Sturgeon pretty much stopped all these efforts in their tracks last week - they're just soundbites now, not much else.
She also intentionally shackled Holyrood while taking the constitutional irons of the legs of the electorate.
Got my vote.
#
2012-02-02 10:55
For younger readers. Foulkes' Lawyer argued against the use of the word "drunk" and said: "it was merely that his client was attending a whisky party "as befits an MP concerned with the blending industry".
#
2012-02-02 10:55
Need a reason to vote for independence to get out of this rotten, stinking union?
heraldscotland.com/.../...
heraldscotland.com/.../...
#
2012-02-02 11:09
Another amendment to the Scotland bill being made, is that instead of the Barnett formula, a 'needs based assessment' will be done by whatever Chancellor of the Exchequer happens to be in London. So, in effect Scotland would get whatever budget a London Tory Chancellor thinks is suitable. Their would be no statutory safeguards at all.
This would be the equivalent of Scotland as a nation being on 'means tested' benefits, which can be cut on the whim of a London Chancellor, and regardless of the revenue actually coming from Scotland.
The REAL solution to Barnet is fiscal autonomy. Instead of that, these unelected nobodies are running around in Westminster making stupid amendments, each and every one of which is to the detriment of Scotland.
Oh, and just for the record, it would seem the unelected George Foulkes is also trying to introduce tuition fees for Scottish students in the Scotland bill.
This would be the equivalent of Scotland as a nation being on 'means tested' benefits, which can be cut on the whim of a London Chancellor, and regardless of the revenue actually coming from Scotland.
The REAL solution to Barnet is fiscal autonomy. Instead of that, these unelected nobodies are running around in Westminster making stupid amendments, each and every one of which is to the detriment of Scotland.
Oh, and just for the record, it would seem the unelected George Foulkes is also trying to introduce tuition fees for Scottish students in the Scotland bill.
#
2012-02-02 12:03
Yes Robert completely agree.
The only logical solution to the Barnett Formula and the West Lothian Question is Independence (or possibly FFA, I prefer independence so indulge me). Anything else is tinkering round the edges which will not produce a lasting solution and in a few years time we would be having the same debates over again.
Also strongly believe that you cannot tackle either the Barnett Formula, the West Lothian Question or the constitutional arrangements in isolation.
The three are inextricably linked
The only logical solution to the Barnett Formula and the West Lothian Question is Independence (or possibly FFA, I prefer independence so indulge me). Anything else is tinkering round the edges which will not produce a lasting solution and in a few years time we would be having the same debates over again.
Also strongly believe that you cannot tackle either the Barnett Formula, the West Lothian Question or the constitutional arrangements in isolation.
The three are inextricably linked
#
2012-02-02 12:24
I agree. Independence is the solution overall.
It is frankly bizarre the lengths that Westminster will go to in order to make Scotland dependant upon them.
Barnett formula - solution: independence
West Lothian question - solution: independence.
It is frankly bizarre the lengths that Westminster will go to in order to make Scotland dependant upon them.
Barnett formula - solution: independence
West Lothian question - solution: independence.
#
2012-02-02 14:37
Scotland being subsidised by London - solution: independence
Scotland subsidising London - solution: independence
Scotland getting free this, that and the other - solution: independence
Scotland "forcing" Labour governments on England - solution: independence
Scotland being forced to have Tory governments - solution: independence
Scotland providing unpopular PMs and a Scottish Raj - solution: independence
Scotland causing resentment in England - solution: independence
Scotland subsidising London - solution: independence
Scotland getting free this, that and the other - solution: independence
Scotland "forcing" Labour governments on England - solution: independence
Scotland being forced to have Tory governments - solution: independence
Scotland providing unpopular PMs and a Scottish Raj - solution: independence
Scotland causing resentment in England - solution: independence
#
2012-02-02 11:20
Snowthistle raises a very interesting point above. This 'controversy', which is no worse in fact than many of the other amendments George Foulkes has already made to the Scotland Bill, is an excellent diversion from the very valid question of why any honorary peers with criminal convictions should retain their peerages.
#
2012-02-02 14:39
Indeed. Fred Goodwin is not currently a criminal, as far as I'm aware and he lost his honours, so why not various criminal Lords?
#
2012-02-02 11:36
The House of Lords has no powers
The House of Commons has no powers in Scotland in Scotland when it votes for Independence.
Do not vote Devo Max, all you will get is illegal wars and Trident, exactly what Scotland does not want.
If you want Scotland to be approx £40Billion a year better off, vote for Independence.
Don't drive your grannie to the polling station. Get everyone you know out to vote for Independence. The Referendum will be decided by non voters.
The House of Commons has no powers in Scotland in Scotland when it votes for Independence.
Do not vote Devo Max, all you will get is illegal wars and Trident, exactly what Scotland does not want.
If you want Scotland to be approx £40Billion a year better off, vote for Independence.
Don't drive your grannie to the polling station. Get everyone you know out to vote for Independence. The Referendum will be decided by non voters.
#
2012-02-02 11:37
Two Referendums, what a complete waste of time and money. Just another Labour ploy to sell out the Scotland.
#
2012-02-02 11:46
Looking at RL's list I am reminded that we still have a parcel of rogues working diligently for their own survival at the expense of their own country.
Roll on 2014, their days are numbered.
Roll on 2014, their days are numbered.
#
2012-02-02 13:11
A useful comparison is a group of Turkey farmers being put in charge of the decision to scrap christmas.
Each time a 'lord' opens his gob about the Scotland Bill, another Scots person moves further toward acceptance of independence.
Long may they continue.
Each time a 'lord' opens his gob about the Scotland Bill, another Scots person moves further toward acceptance of independence.
Long may they continue.
#
2012-02-02 13:15
You'd think the democratic thing to do would be to remove yourself from any debate in which you have a personal, financial interest in the outcome. But what would the Lords know about democracy?
#
2012-02-02 11:56
I think if the SNP can get the message across to the majority of the Scottish public, that an Independent counrty will still keep the queen and pound (which might be a concern for some) and gain all the benefits of Independence, then I believe that most reasonably minded people would be happy to take the step to stand on their own two feet.
#
2012-02-02 12:03
That's very true.
We have 2 years to get that message out there, and have to keep repeating it so it is engrained in folks minds, so they don't have any doubts about it.
The same is true about the negatives of staying in the union, we have to get that story out there as well.
We have 2 years to get that message out there, and have to keep repeating it so it is engrained in folks minds, so they don't have any doubts about it.
The same is true about the negatives of staying in the union, we have to get that story out there as well.
#
2012-02-02 12:08
Scottish taxpayers are still funding students from elsewhere, who are not paying the fund costs of their University education, a full University of them.
Scottish taxpayers are also paying to fund loan companies to educate students from elsewhere who pay not a penny into the Scottish education system.
Scotland is losing some of its best talent, who cannot afford a University course because loans are means tested on household income, on a sliding scale.
Scottish taxpayers are also paying to fund loan companies to educate students from elsewhere who pay not a penny into the Scottish education system.
Scotland is losing some of its best talent, who cannot afford a University course because loans are means tested on household income, on a sliding scale.
#
2012-02-02 12:10
O/T but i would like too see an snp party broadcast from norway, about their oil wealth and how it has benefited their whole society.It could show their standard of living, differance in wages in the same type of jobs as here eg how a chambermaid in norway earns about £1500 a month etc.Also they could show the norwegian defence forces as an example of what we can aspire too for us.
#
2012-02-02 12:21
That would be a good idea.
When you see the infrastructure Norway has built for itself with the oil money, it really shows how Scotland has lost out.
When you see the infrastructure Norway has built for itself with the oil money, it really shows how Scotland has lost out.
#
2012-02-02 12:28
If I recall correctly, there was a very good film made by a group from Ireland, regarding the sell off of Irish oil. They basically went around Norway, asking people if they thought it a good idea to give their oil away for nothing. The startled looks and laughter from Norwegians really made a very, very compelling message.
The SNP should do the same. It would be very, very powerful.
Norwegians cannot fathom why a country such as Scotland doesn't get any money from its huge oil reserves. I think they might rightly tell Scots they are stupid to put up with such a situation.
The SNP should do the same. It would be very, very powerful.
Norwegians cannot fathom why a country such as Scotland doesn't get any money from its huge oil reserves. I think they might rightly tell Scots they are stupid to put up with such a situation.
#
2012-02-02 12:41
Quoting the wallace:
Here is the film I was thinking about. i think it would be dynamite to do the same in reference to Scotland, but looking at Norway.
www.youtube.com/.../
Warning, this film might get you a bit angry at the current situation in Scotland.
O/T but i would like too see an snp party broadcast from norway, about their oil wealth and how it has benefited their whole society.It could show their standard of living, differance in wages in the same type of jobs as here eg how a chambermaid in norway earns about £1500 a month etc.Also they could show the norwegian defence forces as an example of what we can aspire too for us.
Here is the film I was thinking about. i think it would be dynamite to do the same in reference to Scotland, but looking at Norway.
www.youtube.com/.../
Warning, this film might get you a bit angry at the current situation in Scotland.
#
2012-02-02 14:41
Perhaps the Weirs from Largs would like to take a holiday to Norway with their lottery winnings and make such a programme? Mr Weir has experience of this and is a retired TV cameraman.
I'll come with them and help!
I'll come with them and help!
#
2012-02-02 12:14
Somebody really needs to take the gun away from Foulkes, he just keeps on shooting himself in the foot.
As for, "would need more time to consider the extra powers option"... up until a couple of months ago, they were wanting the referendum brought forward.
As for, "would need more time to consider the extra powers option"... up until a couple of months ago, they were wanting the referendum brought forward.
#
2012-02-02 13:21
Shooting himself in the foot yes he is a lousy shot maybe wit a bit more practice.
#
2012-02-02 12:30
Not sure if this has been posted but IPSOS MORI out:
Holyrood intention certain to vote:
SNP = 49%
Lab = 23%
Con =13%
Lib = 10%
Other = 5% (Greens gain mainly)
ipsos-mori.com/.../...
Labour continue to decline. SNP holding within error. Dave C satisfaction rating continues to decline. Johann, Willie and Ruth have pretty negative satisfaction ratings. May elections will be interesting.
Holyrood intention certain to vote:
SNP = 49%
Lab = 23%
Con =13%
Lib = 10%
Other = 5% (Greens gain mainly)
ipsos-mori.com/.../...
Labour continue to decline. SNP holding within error. Dave C satisfaction rating continues to decline. Johann, Willie and Ruth have pretty negative satisfaction ratings. May elections will be interesting.
#
2012-02-02 12:39
What I fail to understand is that there are still 46% prepared to vote for the unionist parties. Have their senses failed? Are they being bribed? I can only assume most of them are part of the establishment.
There is obviously still a lot of work to do before the referendum.
There is obviously still a lot of work to do before the referendum.
#
2012-02-02 12:46
There are supporters of independence among voters of all parties, notably Labour (at least 20%) and even the Tories (at least 10%).
This is a very good poll; all the anti-SNP guff is having no real impact within error (~3% for this sample size).
This is a very good poll; all the anti-SNP guff is having no real impact within error (~3% for this sample size).
#
2012-02-02 12:45
Quote; "While SNP supporters remain firmly behind the First Minister (94% satisfied), levels of dissatisfaction
among supporters of other parties has grown considerably in the last two months; among Labour supporters, dissatisfaction
with the First Minister has risen by 10-points (to 47%), while 70% of Conservative supporters and 48% of Liberal Democrat supporters are now dissatisfied (up by 14-points and 8-points respectively)."
I guess Alex will consider the increase in dissatisfaction
of staunch unionist supporters, as an endorsement of his performance...
I certainly would, if it were me :)
among supporters of other parties has grown considerably in the last two months; among Labour supporters, dissatisfaction
with the First Minister has risen by 10-points (to 47%), while 70% of Conservative supporters and 48% of Liberal Democrat supporters are now dissatisfied (up by 14-points and 8-points respectively)."
I guess Alex will consider the increase in dissatisfaction
of staunch unionist supporters, as an endorsement of his performance...
I certainly would, if it were me :)
#
2012-02-02 13:17
snp.org/.../...
Quote:
A damning indictment on the 'Scottish' Labour party.
Quote:
A Holyrood election based on these figures would result in Labour retaining just one constituency MSP, while among the constituencies which would be won by the SNP are those of current and former Labour leaders Johann Lamont and Iain Gray.
A damning indictment on the 'Scottish' Labour party.
#
2012-02-02 15:49
I helpfully posted the results of this poll on Labourhame.
For some reason, my post was modded off...
For some reason, my post was modded off...
#
2012-02-02 12:31
I posted on this on another thread NNS could look into it maybe.
Outcry at student loan boss's tax dodge
Ed Lester's £182,000 package is paid gross to his private company
The terms and conditions of the contract were negotiated by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the final salary was signed off by Chief Secretary for the Treasury, Danny Alexander.
Did Alexander sign this off without checking it or closed his eyes thinking it would not come into the public domain.
Outcry at student loan boss's tax dodge
Ed Lester's £182,000 package is paid gross to his private company
The terms and conditions of the contract were negotiated by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the final salary was signed off by Chief Secretary for the Treasury, Danny Alexander.
Did Alexander sign this off without checking it or closed his eyes thinking it would not come into the public domain.
#
2012-02-02 12:34
Regarding 'the Wallace' and his suggestion for an SNP political broadcast from Norway is one of the best I've heard.
I'd also like to hear the SNP getting the boot into the whole issue of these Lords etc. deciding on and pontificating about Scotland's future when they haven't even been elected by the people. Going on and on about wealth after independence etc can only take us so far. We really have to open the eyes of the average Scottish voter as to what is happening regarding those Peers and their ridiculous expenses. Alex and Nicola have both had their chances during their appearances on TV. Why haven't they just gone for the jugular of the House of Lords and torn their throats out?
I'd also like to hear the SNP getting the boot into the whole issue of these Lords etc. deciding on and pontificating about Scotland's future when they haven't even been elected by the people. Going on and on about wealth after independence etc can only take us so far. We really have to open the eyes of the average Scottish voter as to what is happening regarding those Peers and their ridiculous expenses. Alex and Nicola have both had their chances during their appearances on TV. Why haven't they just gone for the jugular of the House of Lords and torn their throats out?
#
2012-02-02 12:52
They do have to maintain relations until the day comes. Experience teaches us that we should never burn bridges, at least until you no longer have to cross the river. I suspect the same is applying to the beeb. Their time will come.
Good idea about the Norwegian programme.
Good idea about the Norwegian programme.
#
2012-02-02 13:47
See thon birkie caad a lord, wha struts an stares an aa that,
Tho hunners worship at his word, he's but a couf for aa that,
For aa that an aa that, his ribband star an aa that,
The man o independent mind, he looks an laughs at aa that!
Tho hunners worship at his word, he's but a couf for aa that,
For aa that an aa that, his ribband star an aa that,
The man o independent mind, he looks an laughs at aa that!
#
2012-02-02 12:50
Just to remind that FMQ's will be starting in 10 mins
Currently General Questions
scottish.parliament.uk/.../...
Currently General Questions
scottish.parliament.uk/.../...
#
2012-02-02 15:07
Been there done that. Nearly laught my socks off. Anyone know what FMQs The Tangerine Mr. Blobby attends? It's not the same one I watched. Lamont was her usual daft self. Questioned the FM about the English Bank that isn't. Asked about how the English Government would be controlling interest rates, Eck put her straight on that one too. Lamont must have said seperation 20 times. Has no one told her it cannot be done? England is far too (Top),heavy to mover. I think she meant independent, but, Who knows.
#
2012-02-02 12:59
OT: A friend of mine who has recently taken an interest in the independence debate (he went from apathy to voting YES) said something in jest that could be used on the staunch Unionists.
In an independent Scotland the SG will protect both the old firm clubs from ever going into administration. :-)
In an independent Scotland the SG will protect both the old firm clubs from ever going into administration. :-)
#
2012-02-02 13:22
Quoting Highland Tiger:
The status quo will never last, the unionists dont seem to realise that Devo max is there one way of manipulating a the possibility of the union staying together, but then I think they re too stupid to realise that.
I wouldnt trust the electoral commision after the ballot papers misteriously dissappeared after Glenrothes.
There won't be a status quo, Westminster will hammer us to prevent this from happening again. We will lose powers, and funding and things like free prescriptions will be a thing of the past. Once folk realise this, they will be more likely to vote for independence.This is what worries me, there will be another Culloden if we loose the referendum.
The status quo will never last, the unionists dont seem to realise that Devo max is there one way of manipulating a the possibility of the union staying together, but then I think they re too stupid to realise that.
I wouldnt trust the electoral commision after the ballot papers misteriously dissappeared after Glenrothes.
#
2012-02-02 13:43
If memory serves me correct - postal votes increased by 75% at the Glenrothes by election and yet there was a decrease in the overall number of voters.
The whole thing stank.
The whole thing stank.
#
2012-02-02 13:26
You're all forgetting the absolute mess that was the 2007 Scottish elections; tens, if not hundreds of thousands of wasted ballots due to the breakdown of counting machines. I worry for a ballot that contains two questions, I still maintain that the AV referendum was lost in Scottish regions because people were bombarded with the 'it's so confusing' line from Westminster, and ended up just answering with a big fat NO.
I have no doubt whatsoever that the Lords have ulterior motives, but I support this amendment in principal. If it is to be a NO vote, I would far prefer a situation whereby the Government was legally obliged to ask the devo-max question a month later. Imagine it....who in their right mind would vote against devo-max in that situation? When knowing that at that point another chance for independence may not come about for a generation.
I understand that you are all massively confident that we will push ahead and secure the all-out YES vote for independence, and that's a great attitude to have, but if it falls on its ****, none of us will see even a hint of further devolution for years.
One initial single-issue ballot that we can push all effort into, free of having to defend devo-max, with the knowledge that a devolved referendum would only come into play if we lost....in theory I really don't see the issue with that?
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
I have no doubt whatsoever that the Lords have ulterior motives, but I support this amendment in principal. If it is to be a NO vote, I would far prefer a situation whereby the Government was legally obliged to ask the devo-max question a month later. Imagine it....who in their right mind would vote against devo-max in that situation? When knowing that at that point another chance for independence may not come about for a generation.
I understand that you are all massively confident that we will push ahead and secure the all-out YES vote for independence, and that's a great attitude to have, but if it falls on its ****, none of us will see even a hint of further devolution for years.
One initial single-issue ballot that we can push all effort into, free of having to defend devo-max, with the knowledge that a devolved referendum would only come into play if we lost....in theory I really don't see the issue with that?
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
#
2012-02-02 13:39
O/T Lamentable Lamont still reading from her prepared scripts and talking about Fred Goodwin, ignoring the fact that it was Joke McConnell that put Fred up for a knighthood or that it was Brown who was actually responsible for the finance regulations (or the lack of them) in the UK
The we had wee Ruthie coming out quoting people like Goerge Robertson and that Tory colonel (cant recall the name) attacking the First Minister on defence plans.
But sadly no Willie Rennie (was he there?)
Both Ruth Davidson and Lamont quite pathetic in their questions
The we had wee Ruthie coming out quoting people like Goerge Robertson and that Tory colonel (cant recall the name) attacking the First Minister on defence plans.
But sadly no Willie Rennie (was he there?)
Both Ruth Davidson and Lamont quite pathetic in their questions
#
2012-02-02 14:03
In the latest IPSOS MORI poll, more Scots are satisfied with David Cameron (32%) than Johann Lamont (27%). Ooch - that has to hurt.
#
2012-02-02 14:08
I see that at the bottom of First Ministers Questions there is the opportunity to comment.
bbc.co.uk/.../...
Has anyone ever tried this? Where do the comments appear?
bbc.co.uk/.../...
Has anyone ever tried this? Where do the comments appear?
#
2012-02-02 14:13
haven't tried it jim but I've just been over there submitting a complaint about the 'who's who' graphic on the Democracy Live page, which makes it look for all the world as if Labour actually have a majority at Holyrood, and that the Tories aren't doing so bad either:
news.bbc.co.uk/.../default.stm
Anyone care to join me?
news.bbc.co.uk/.../default.stm
Anyone care to join me?
#
2012-02-02 16:34
Don't think it is jim, I think it's the right results but the graphic is deliberately skewed the way the weather map used to be, to give a skelly perspective. I'll let you know what response I get.... don't hold your breath!
#
2012-02-02 16:12
I have noticed this but the BBC don't seem to want to change it,its been there since the election I mentioned it in a survey I did for Democracy Live.
#
2012-02-02 16:32
Aye, 2007 results... I might have a wee go at a photoshop of the resulting graphic for the 2011 Scottish election results... just to see what it looks like through curiosity of course!
*:o)
*:o)
#
2012-02-02 22:54
Looking forward to seeing your version! I've just looked again, of course it's the old results, I was being kind with my 'skelly perspective' assumption. Now I'm really mad... bad enough to try to make it look wonky, but even worse that they didn't even bother to update it.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr r.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr r.
#
2012-02-02 14:27
Quoting jim288:
Next door, probably.
Has anyone ever tried this? Where do the comments appear?
Next door, probably.
#
2012-02-02 14:07
O/T again folks and still to do with my last point,i think i am correct in saying that the actor and film director david hayman is an snp supporter?.Shouldnt he take charge of filming PPB?if so and i were him, i would start of by making one from all over scotland showing the poverty deprevation and hopelessness that stalks our land as a result of the union,and where all our oil and gas wealth ends up,and who benefits from it.Then i would show them the one from norway about how it should be,and if any of my fellow posters out there know david hayman they should tell him his country needs him forthwith.
#
2012-02-02 14:22
Pace the wallace
O/T again folks and still to do with my last point,i think i am correct in saying that the actor and film director david hayman is an snp supporter?.Shouldnt he take charge of filming PPB?if so and i were him, i would start of by making one from all over scotland showing the poverty deprevation and hopelessness that stalks our land as a result of the union,and where all our oil and gas wealth ends up,and who benefits from it.Then i would show them the one from norway about how it should be,and if any of my fellow posters out there know david hayman they should tell him his country needs him forthwith.
Excellent suggestion all round. I would recommend that every SNP PPB from now until the referendum should be filmed in Norway.
Get the message out there.
The contrast in standards of living and quality of life would be stark, and quite frankly, if the citizens of Scotland don't vote YES for Independence then they do not deserve it.
O/T again folks and still to do with my last point,i think i am correct in saying that the actor and film director david hayman is an snp supporter?.Shouldnt he take charge of filming PPB?if so and i were him, i would start of by making one from all over scotland showing the poverty deprevation and hopelessness that stalks our land as a result of the union,and where all our oil and gas wealth ends up,and who benefits from it.Then i would show them the one from norway about how it should be,and if any of my fellow posters out there know david hayman they should tell him his country needs him forthwith.
Excellent suggestion all round. I would recommend that every SNP PPB from now until the referendum should be filmed in Norway.
Get the message out there.
The contrast in standards of living and quality of life would be stark, and quite frankly, if the citizens of Scotland don't vote YES for Independence then they do not deserve it.
#
2012-02-02 14:23
Why do we elevate people to positions of power, who find the concept of answering two simple questions psychologically terrifying and mentally impossible?
No offence but its as if Labour are going through the schools and grooming the bottom 5% for Government...
No offence but its as if Labour are going through the schools and grooming the bottom 5% for Government...
#
2012-02-02 14:28
a wee bit O/T but EVERYONE who hasn't read this piece should do so, even if aware of how such things work, It's good to reinforce your knowledge of how the Unionists are playing this, especially as we've got another 2 and a half years of it to go.
.../the-black-arts
Norway idea spot on btw for a PPB, if the BBC would show it uninterrupted
Foulkes woke me up this morning on GMS, what a start to a day, not even the "we'll be hearing from the SNP in an hour" add-on today .... f*nnies
.../the-black-arts
Norway idea spot on btw for a PPB, if the BBC would show it uninterrupted
Foulkes woke me up this morning on GMS, what a start to a day, not even the "we'll be hearing from the SNP in an hour" add-on today .... f*nnies
#
2012-02-02 14:39
Yup, sneekyboy's been busy posting that lot on the Guardian site. Scratch up another three converts in the workplace as well. Its been a good lunchtime.
#
2012-02-02 14:39
1. Doubt if the Norwegians would allow the SNP to make a PPB on their soil because they probably wouldn't wish to appear to be showing any bias.
2. Lamont and the kickboxer both asked utterly ridiculous questions today or did they? Both were aimed at creating more uncertainty over key issues. Negative campaigning perhaps but these issues - finance and defence - really need to be put to bed sooner rather than later.
2. Lamont and the kickboxer both asked utterly ridiculous questions today or did they? Both were aimed at creating more uncertainty over key issues. Negative campaigning perhaps but these issues - finance and defence - really need to be put to bed sooner rather than later.
#
2012-02-02 14:59
That's the bit I don't understand. Are they simply trying to make sure Holyrood don't pass the bill? If so, well done. But what's the point in all these other amendments to a bill that's already doomed?
If it's for publicity only, I question their sanity even more than I did before. They really have no clue.
If it's for publicity only, I question their sanity even more than I did before. They really have no clue.
#
2012-02-02 15:13
but would they be able to force it through?
Stewart Maxwell tried to get the SoS to answer that question during the Scotland Bill Committee and he would not answer.
Lord Forsyth tried to get Jim Wallace to answer it in the HoL and again he would not answer
Stewart Maxwell tried to get the SoS to answer that question during the Scotland Bill Committee and he would not answer.
Lord Forsyth tried to get Jim Wallace to answer it in the HoL and again he would not answer
#
2012-02-02 15:17
Quoting Jim1320:
Nah! They know it's a dead duck. They are just getting as much propaganda time out of it before it goes bang in their faces.
Does Foulkes really think Holyrood is going to pass this dog's breakfast?
Nah! They know it's a dead duck. They are just getting as much propaganda time out of it before it goes bang in their faces.
#
2012-02-02 15:03
This guy Foulkes is a real fool. What does he mean, confusing? Three questions are confusing? This useless politician should step back into the dark, where he belongs.
#
2012-02-02 15:05
If you want to see confusion, try explaining to an American how Lord Foulkes came to govern us.
#
2012-02-02 15:09
Willie Rennie's maniacal questions about a third option polling most votes, yet coming in second place, is simply to allay the confused members of his party who believed the LibDems always stood for Devo-Max.
This is how he offers justification for his party dumping thier manifesto promises of May 2011.
Labour have not even offered any such a pathetic excuse for supporting this Thatcher Parliament and as has been said here already, there is no such beast as Status quo because London has already made restrictions to Scotland's law, Scotland's infrastructure, Scotland's social and welfare bills and further cuts to Scotland's budget. Why is the media so reticent in informing the Scottish people of the facts yet so eager to repeat known untruths, obvious lies and nonsense on stilts?
O/T
Congrats to the Scottish Government on winning their battle against the litigious Tobacco industries failed attempts to overturn the ban on Fag advertising and open displays at the Sweetie counters of newsagents and the doorways of TESCO.
This is how he offers justification for his party dumping thier manifesto promises of May 2011.
Labour have not even offered any such a pathetic excuse for supporting this Thatcher Parliament and as has been said here already, there is no such beast as Status quo because London has already made restrictions to Scotland's law, Scotland's infrastructure, Scotland's social and welfare bills and further cuts to Scotland's budget. Why is the media so reticent in informing the Scottish people of the facts yet so eager to repeat known untruths, obvious lies and nonsense on stilts?
O/T
Congrats to the Scottish Government on winning their battle against the litigious Tobacco industries failed attempts to overturn the ban on Fag advertising and open displays at the Sweetie counters of newsagents and the doorways of TESCO.
#
2012-02-02 15:10
Quoting Angus:
Angus, "Just who do you suppose the Loyal Orange Lodge is loyal too?
I think non old firm supporters would be delighted to let them sink
Angus, "Just who do you suppose the Loyal Orange Lodge is loyal too?
#
2012-02-02 15:11
A vote for Devo Max is a vote for illegal wars based on a lie and Trident
Vote for Independence
Vote for Independence
#
2012-02-02 15:33
Its strange that on the one hand the Unionists are now calling for the referendum to be brought forward due to their fabricated business uncertainity about the delay yet on the other hand we have uber Brit nationalist Lord Foulkes saying we now need a couple of months more to weigh up the option of further powers such as devo max. What one is it Foulkes now or never? I bet its the latter as in 300 years you Unionists still didnt want the Scots to have a democratic say in their future. If it was up to this so called Lord and the rest of them, we would have to wait another 300 years to give us the referendum. Devious max indeed...
It seems to be the Lords and the Wastemonster mps that are screaming the loudest. Wonder why! The time must be approaching for the Scottish Government to kick this anti Scotland bill into touch once and for all, explaining to the people that this nasty piece of legislation is actually taking away more powers than it is giving out. Let the Unionists be in no doubt as to who is in control of this independence campaign. Action is required now to take us forward and leave the Unionists trailing even further in our wake.
A good idea about an SNP broadcast from Norway telling it like it is to the population. Time to show how independence is the normal state of affairs to the people. We should leave no stone unturned in doing this. The future of generations of Scots is at stake.
It seems to be the Lords and the Wastemonster mps that are screaming the loudest. Wonder why! The time must be approaching for the Scottish Government to kick this anti Scotland bill into touch once and for all, explaining to the people that this nasty piece of legislation is actually taking away more powers than it is giving out. Let the Unionists be in no doubt as to who is in control of this independence campaign. Action is required now to take us forward and leave the Unionists trailing even further in our wake.
A good idea about an SNP broadcast from Norway telling it like it is to the population. Time to show how independence is the normal state of affairs to the people. We should leave no stone unturned in doing this. The future of generations of Scots is at stake.
#
2012-02-02 15:45
If a question on DevoMax does not appear on the Independence Referendum ballot paper, there is a high possibitiy that many supporters for DevoMax will vote for Independence instead as they have not wish to remain with only the Status Quo. Foulkes feels that he can avoid this by ensuring the supporters of DevoMax say No to Indpendence, knowing that in just over a months time they will be able to say Yes to DevoMax. However, I doubt that would work unless they knew exactly what was meant by DevoMax. If it is anything other than a few crumbs from the table, Foulkes's move will be vetoed by the Government. The only way to ensure proper DevoMax is to vote Yes to Independence. Otherwise you will be sold down the river.
#
2012-02-02 15:47
After independence who owns the Scottish titles of these "Lords"?? Foreigners?
Do we have to ask QE2 to give them back to us for re-issue and who would be worthy of them??
Do we have to ask QE2 to give them back to us for re-issue and who would be worthy of them??
#
2012-02-02 15:48
Dougie Douglas 2012-02-02 08:55
“The fact that he is limiting the democratic process and the right of the people of Scotland to self determination is something that does not bother Foulkes.”
Self-determination is the principle in international law that nations have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no external compulsion or external interference. The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, or what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or even full assimilation. Neither does it state what the delimitation between nations should be — or even what constitutes a nation. In fact, there are conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination. Moreover, self-determination is just one of many principles applied to determining international borders.
As I see it the problem we presently have during this consultation is that the political PARTIES are squabbling not debating or informing.
So far no one party has come up with a form of words for a single question to cover the principle of self-determination.
The SNParty are trying to be clever with “Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country” and tries to ignore the alternatives. They say they promised a referendum on independence only and the alternatives need to be put forward by others.
Who in their right mind would say no if that was the only option offered?
No one is going to argue that Scotland is not a nation and therefore they are entitled to self determination, be it independence, federation etc. etc.
“The fact that he is limiting the democratic process and the right of the people of Scotland to self determination is something that does not bother Foulkes.”
Self-determination is the principle in international law that nations have the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no external compulsion or external interference. The principle does not state how the decision is to be made, or what the outcome should be, whether it be independence, federation, protection, some form of autonomy or even full assimilation. Neither does it state what the delimitation between nations should be — or even what constitutes a nation. In fact, there are conflicting definitions and legal criteria for determining which groups may legitimately claim the right to self-determination. Moreover, self-determination is just one of many principles applied to determining international borders.
As I see it the problem we presently have during this consultation is that the political PARTIES are squabbling not debating or informing.
So far no one party has come up with a form of words for a single question to cover the principle of self-determination.
The SNParty are trying to be clever with “Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country” and tries to ignore the alternatives. They say they promised a referendum on independence only and the alternatives need to be put forward by others.
Who in their right mind would say no if that was the only option offered?
No one is going to argue that Scotland is not a nation and therefore they are entitled to self determination, be it independence, federation etc. etc.
#
2012-02-02 16:06
Quoting exel:
Apart from those devious Nats, eh?
Quoting exel:
No one. So what's your problem exactly, other than wanting political parties to both butt out and tell you what you're allowed to vote for?
So far no one party has come up with a form of words for a single question to cover the principle of self-determination.
Apart from those devious Nats, eh?
Quoting exel:
Who in their right mind would say no if that was the only option offered?
No one. So what's your problem exactly, other than wanting political parties to both butt out and tell you what you're allowed to vote for?
#
2012-02-02 16:43
Jiggsbro 2012-02-02 15:06
Quote = “No one. So what's your problem exactly, other than wanting political parties to both butt out and tell you what you're allowed to vote for?”
Butt out, certainly! But I would like to see the political PARTIES discuss the alternatives to the lengthy (and expensive) process of secession.
I think we have agreed previously, self determination is the objective
Self determination!!
Quote = “No one. So what's your problem exactly, other than wanting political parties to both butt out and tell you what you're allowed to vote for?”
Butt out, certainly! But I would like to see the political PARTIES discuss the alternatives to the lengthy (and expensive) process of secession.
I think we have agreed previously, self determination is the objective
Self determination!!
#
2012-02-02 21:03
Quoting exel:
What alternatives did you have in mind?
I would like to see the political PARTIES discuss the alternatives to the lengthy (and expensive) process of secession.
What alternatives did you have in mind?
#
2012-02-02 17:55
What the hell is being clever in asking a simple question? By The Way, they do offer two alternatives as there are two tick boxes. It thus equates to two questions.
Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country - YES.
Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country - NO.
Remember that those set upon Devo any bloody thing have the option to tick, "NO", in the full and certain hope that David Cameron will provide whatever the commons passes in the Scotland Bill - Which, if it passes the Commons will be the official, Wastemonster, "Scotland Act".
Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country - YES.
Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country - NO.
Remember that those set upon Devo any bloody thing have the option to tick, "NO", in the full and certain hope that David Cameron will provide whatever the commons passes in the Scotland Bill - Which, if it passes the Commons will be the official, Wastemonster, "Scotland Act".
#
2012-02-02 20:48
Exel, the present Westminster government used a 'do you agrre' question in the consultation document on the High Speed rail link. Contary to popular belief this did not lead to the YES answer that they wished. Two thirds of respondents said NO. Needless to say the views of those who responded were ignored and they have ploughed ahead anyway.
I think you will find in the Independence referendum, the Scottish people will vote exactly how they think, not to please any political party.
I think you will find in the Independence referendum, the Scottish people will vote exactly how they think, not to please any political party.
#
2012-02-02 21:01
The Manchester Congestion Charge referendum used a "do you agree..." question too, and it was defeated. I'm not sure what exels point is here, but the basic premise appears to be that "do you agree..." is a rigged question and leads to a yes answer. Clearly untrue.
#
2012-02-03 02:19
# exel
The SNParty are trying to be clever with “Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country” and tries to ignore the alternatives. They say they promised a referendum on independence only and the alternatives need to be put forward by others.
“Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country” that is not the question proposed by the Scottish government.
Are you saying that anyone coming to answer for themselves the question
Do you agree Scotland should be an independent country? YES or NO
would not be aware that YES would mean YES and NO would mean NO? What a load of drivel about the question. The unionists got what they demanded... a clear question I think they are more worried about the answer than they are about the question.
The SNParty are trying to be clever with “Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country” and tries to ignore the alternatives. They say they promised a referendum on independence only and the alternatives need to be put forward by others.
“Do you wish Scotland to be an independent country” that is not the question proposed by the Scottish government.
Are you saying that anyone coming to answer for themselves the question
Do you agree Scotland should be an independent country? YES or NO
would not be aware that YES would mean YES and NO would mean NO? What a load of drivel about the question. The unionists got what they demanded... a clear question I think they are more worried about the answer than they are about the question.
#
2012-02-02 16:08
just because foulkes has politicians memory,does not mean the rest of us do.
been there, got the t-shirt George
we might of fell for it the last time, we will not fall for it this time and you know where you can shove your jam tomorrow sob story's this time.
Sid
been there, got the t-shirt George
we might of fell for it the last time, we will not fall for it this time and you know where you can shove your jam tomorrow sob story's this time.
Sid
#
2012-02-02 18:03
Do you know the origins of that phrase, Sid?
It is from Lewis Carroll's, "Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There".
'I'm sure I'll take you with pleasure!' the Queen said. 'Twopence a week, and jam every other day.'
Alice couldn't help laughing, as she said, 'I don't want you to hire ME - and I don't care for jam.'
'It's very good jam,' said the Queen.
'Well, I don't want any TO-DAY, at any rate.'
'You couldn't have it if you DID want it,' the Queen said. 'The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday - but never jam to-day.'
'It MUST come sometimes to "jam to-day,"' Alice objected.
'No, it can't,' said the Queen. 'It's jam every OTHER day: to-day isn't any OTHER day, you know.'
Lewis Carroll, could have had the Treaty Of Union as his inspiration.
It is from Lewis Carroll's, "Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There".
'I'm sure I'll take you with pleasure!' the Queen said. 'Twopence a week, and jam every other day.'
Alice couldn't help laughing, as she said, 'I don't want you to hire ME - and I don't care for jam.'
'It's very good jam,' said the Queen.
'Well, I don't want any TO-DAY, at any rate.'
'You couldn't have it if you DID want it,' the Queen said. 'The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday - but never jam to-day.'
'It MUST come sometimes to "jam to-day,"' Alice objected.
'No, it can't,' said the Queen. 'It's jam every OTHER day: to-day isn't any OTHER day, you know.'
Lewis Carroll, could have had the Treaty Of Union as his inspiration.
#
2012-02-02 18:42
Re Ipsos Mori: Thanks for the link. Other interesting factoids from the figures are:-
The rich support ConLibDems
AS and the SNP has/have a real problem with his/their appeal to women
An independence question was included and got 43% for 57% against
The rich support ConLibDems
AS and the SNP has/have a real problem with his/their appeal to women
An independence question was included and got 43% for 57% against
#
2012-02-02 20:50
43% in favour of independence is good at this stage of the game. With over 2 years to go and lots of work being done by SNP, we can easily pass the 50% mark.
We will be an independent country.
We will be an independent country.
#
2012-02-02 16:12
The latest Ipsos Mori Poll gives
SNP 49%
Labour 23%
The Rest Also rans
That will do nicely with Lopcal Elections coming up in a couple of months!
SNP 49%
Labour 23%
The Rest Also rans
That will do nicely with Lopcal Elections coming up in a couple of months!
#
2012-02-02 16:16
A bit O/T
I missed first ministers questions earlier and have just watched it here....
news.bbc.co.uk/.../9689595.stm
I have to say that if I was a supporter of 'Scottish Labour' I would be hanging my head,not in shame, but in desperation. Is that REALLY the best they have to offer.....Johan Lamont was , I thought about this and the only word to describe her performance is, pathetic. Words fail me ..I have just watched it again and it is even worse. If that is all that labour has to offer Scotland after Independence then they are truly dead as a political force in Scotland.
P.S.
Johan Lamont said it took seven days to get the answer to a question you could have got in seven minutes on Wikipedia...
Begs the question why did she not just try google for her answer.
I missed first ministers questions earlier and have just watched it here....
news.bbc.co.uk/.../9689595.stm
I have to say that if I was a supporter of 'Scottish Labour' I would be hanging my head,not in shame, but in desperation. Is that REALLY the best they have to offer.....Johan Lamont was , I thought about this and the only word to describe her performance is, pathetic. Words fail me ..I have just watched it again and it is even worse. If that is all that labour has to offer Scotland after Independence then they are truly dead as a political force in Scotland.
P.S.
Johan Lamont said it took seven days to get the answer to a question you could have got in seven minutes on Wikipedia...
Begs the question why did she not just try google for her answer.
#
2012-02-02 17:03
I think she was trying to sound computer literate, unfortunately she is just reading notes provided by her adviser, who is trying to be smart.
Unfortunately everyone listening to her probably wondered the same thing, why dont you just google it yourself you dumb.....
So in reality she made herself look out of touch
Unfortunately everyone listening to her probably wondered the same thing, why dont you just google it yourself you dumb.....
So in reality she made herself look out of touch
#
2012-02-02 18:08
We Cyber natterers have been talking about that for some time. Even before AS mentioned it. So just how do the depentents think we found the answers?
#
2012-02-02 17:29
That's what I thought. Also, what was AS to apologise for? sending a letter of support to RBS? I mean why wouldn't he wish him well? - a really pathetic performance by Lamont
#
2012-02-02 18:29
Quoting Massacre1965:
Aye! But it went further than that. She chuntered on about the, "foreign", country of England setting Scotland's interest rates. Quite obviously she had no idea the Bank of England was a United Kingdom asset having been nationalised, she had no idea the Wastemonster no longer sets interest rates and thus no longer that the BofE is also an independent company or that an independent Scotland already would have a share in it. The woman is as thick as they come. Leader - Sheeesh!
That's what I thought. Also, what was AS to apologise for? sending a letter of support to RBS? I mean why wouldn't he wish him well? - a really pathetic performance by Lamont
Aye! But it went further than that. She chuntered on about the, "foreign", country of England setting Scotland's interest rates. Quite obviously she had no idea the Bank of England was a United Kingdom asset having been nationalised, she had no idea the Wastemonster no longer sets interest rates and thus no longer that the BofE is also an independent company or that an independent Scotland already would have a share in it. The woman is as thick as they come. Leader - Sheeesh!
#
2012-02-02 17:16
O/T - Just e-mailed complaint to BBC Scotland :
Regarding the BBC Scotland news coverage of the removal of the knighthood of the now Fred Goodwin.
An explanation is due from the BBC as to how no question have been put to the Labour Pier : Lord McConnell who was Scottish First minister at the time and the previous Labour Prime Minister : Gordon Brown. Both were directly involved in advising and putting forward the knighthood for the former RBS boss. Yet, no BBC Scotland reporter has put any questions directly to the current Scottish MSP Labour Leader; Joanne Lamont, The former Labour Prime Minister; Gordon Brown MP, The former Scottish Labour First Minister Jack McConnell or any other Scottish Labour MSP's that have subsequently appeared on Newsnight Scotland over the previous days.
The very fact that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made a statement on the issue and the current First Minister of Scotland has even expressed regret pertaining to prior correspondence on the matter only serves too highlight; a bias soft touch and avoidance of tough questioning of Scottish Labour MSP's and MP's on matters and where they [ The Labour Party ] have been directly responsible.
Regarding the BBC Scotland news coverage of the removal of the knighthood of the now Fred Goodwin.
An explanation is due from the BBC as to how no question have been put to the Labour Pier : Lord McConnell who was Scottish First minister at the time and the previous Labour Prime Minister : Gordon Brown. Both were directly involved in advising and putting forward the knighthood for the former RBS boss. Yet, no BBC Scotland reporter has put any questions directly to the current Scottish MSP Labour Leader; Joanne Lamont, The former Labour Prime Minister; Gordon Brown MP, The former Scottish Labour First Minister Jack McConnell or any other Scottish Labour MSP's that have subsequently appeared on Newsnight Scotland over the previous days.
The very fact that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made a statement on the issue and the current First Minister of Scotland has even expressed regret pertaining to prior correspondence on the matter only serves too highlight; a bias soft touch and avoidance of tough questioning of Scottish Labour MSP's and MP's on matters and where they [ The Labour Party ] have been directly responsible.
#
2012-02-02 18:06
I sometimes think the SNP are too quick to apologise. Salmond should have said something along the lines of:
"I simply wished RBS the best, and offered my support like I would do with any Scottish company."
And the obvious answer the BBC will give for why Pigsty McConnell and the Son of the Manse, Father of the Iraq War are not under pressure is that they are no longer political leaders.
"I simply wished RBS the best, and offered my support like I would do with any Scottish company."
And the obvious answer the BBC will give for why Pigsty McConnell and the Son of the Manse, Father of the Iraq War are not under pressure is that they are no longer political leaders.
#
2012-02-02 17:29
Let's add a bit of logic here.
Lord Foulkes has said that;-
A referendum is run for yes/no to independence.
And on the no response a second referendum is run asking about DevoMax yes/no
Okay so far?
Well taking that the question and the definition would have to be agreed by both Holyrood and Westminster before the referendum, that means that we've got 30 months for someone to do a draft, get it ammended by a Parlimentary Committee in Holyrood, have it presented as a white paper, debated in Holyrood with ammendments and finally given the rubber stamp. At this point it would go to Westminster for debate, then if okay it would go to the House of Lords for debate, ammendment, and possibly even thrown out, then the whole process starts again.
What you are looking at here is a terribly long winded procedure. I'm not saying it couldn't be done just that it looks unlikely.
If they (say the Labour Party) could do it and get it ratified then and only then would it be fit to put on the ballot paper. There would be absolutely no need to run a second referendum costing another £10 Million as the only reason for running the second referendum would be to put time between the first vote and the second vote. Why would you do that? Put it on the same ballot paper and a few seconds would do the trick and save £10 Million.
If Lord Foulkes is trying to say that to get a question on Devo Max would take just 35 days after the first referendum then he's a couple of skunks short of a gown.
This is logically another trick carried out by someone who wants to trick his own people. He wont be the first will he?
Lord Foulkes has said that;-
A referendum is run for yes/no to independence.
And on the no response a second referendum is run asking about DevoMax yes/no
Okay so far?
Well taking that the question and the definition would have to be agreed by both Holyrood and Westminster before the referendum, that means that we've got 30 months for someone to do a draft, get it ammended by a Parlimentary Committee in Holyrood, have it presented as a white paper, debated in Holyrood with ammendments and finally given the rubber stamp. At this point it would go to Westminster for debate, then if okay it would go to the House of Lords for debate, ammendment, and possibly even thrown out, then the whole process starts again.
What you are looking at here is a terribly long winded procedure. I'm not saying it couldn't be done just that it looks unlikely.
If they (say the Labour Party) could do it and get it ratified then and only then would it be fit to put on the ballot paper. There would be absolutely no need to run a second referendum costing another £10 Million as the only reason for running the second referendum would be to put time between the first vote and the second vote. Why would you do that? Put it on the same ballot paper and a few seconds would do the trick and save £10 Million.
If Lord Foulkes is trying to say that to get a question on Devo Max would take just 35 days after the first referendum then he's a couple of skunks short of a gown.
This is logically another trick carried out by someone who wants to trick his own people. He wont be the first will he?
#
2012-02-02 19:57
Judging by what Foulkes says, and the amendments he has tabled in the Lords for the Scotland Bill, he just strikes me as the kind of person who thinks he's clever, clever.
His latest wheeze, is to use an amendment to the Scotland Bill in the Lords in order to take control of tuition fees away from the Scottish Parliament and make it a reserved matter. This would of course then allow the Tories who are currently in power, to inctroduce tuition fees for Scottish students against the wishes of the people of Scotland and the democratically elected Government of Scotland.
How on earth does Foulkes think that such actions are the work of somebody trying to do the best for Scotland???
Frankly, I find it and some of his other many, many amendments to the Scotland bill, bizarre.
His latest wheeze, is to use an amendment to the Scotland Bill in the Lords in order to take control of tuition fees away from the Scottish Parliament and make it a reserved matter. This would of course then allow the Tories who are currently in power, to inctroduce tuition fees for Scottish students against the wishes of the people of Scotland and the democratically elected Government of Scotland.
How on earth does Foulkes think that such actions are the work of somebody trying to do the best for Scotland???
Frankly, I find it and some of his other many, many amendments to the Scotland bill, bizarre.
#
2012-02-02 17:29
O/T
Some clowns want work stopped on the new Forth Crossing, because they are not using steel from the well known Scottish company TATA Steel
scotsman.com/.../...
Some clowns want work stopped on the new Forth Crossing, because they are not using steel from the well known Scottish company TATA Steel
scotsman.com/.../...
#
2012-02-02 17:56
Far be from me to support anything that a Labour MSP says but in my mind it should be Scottish steel workers who get this work and it doesn't matter who owns the company.
Over the next decade we'll see many firms come from abroad to set up here and the important thing will be the new jobs for Scots.
What is the point in saving money on the steel, adversly having an effect on the balance of payments and having the possibility of Tata closing these works in Motherwell and having to pay dole money to all these Scottish workers?
I hate to say it but I agree with the article. I'll go and wash my keyboard out with Dettol now.
Over the next decade we'll see many firms come from abroad to set up here and the important thing will be the new jobs for Scots.
What is the point in saving money on the steel, adversly having an effect on the balance of payments and having the possibility of Tata closing these works in Motherwell and having to pay dole money to all these Scottish workers?
I hate to say it but I agree with the article. I'll go and wash my keyboard out with Dettol now.
#
2012-02-02 18:21
Saltire Groppenslosh 2012-02-02 16:56
“Far be from me to support anything that a Labour MSP says but in my mind it should be Scottish steel workers who get this work and it doesn't matter who owns the company.”
Bravo SG, sycophantically following the party line gets us nowhere, for the good of Scotland should be the benchmark.
“Far be from me to support anything that a Labour MSP says but in my mind it should be Scottish steel workers who get this work and it doesn't matter who owns the company.”
Bravo SG, sycophantically following the party line gets us nowhere, for the good of Scotland should be the benchmark.
#
2012-02-03 01:13
There must be more to this. Salmond said as much today in FMQs. As many contracts as had been possible had been allocated to Scotland.
#
2012-02-02 19:51
Totally agree,
Although it is an Indian company, it would secure work for Scottish workers.
Although it is an Indian company, it would secure work for Scottish workers.
#
2012-02-02 17:47
Quote:
Eh!
I thought they wanted the referendum like yesterday but now they think we need extra time to consider DevoMax!
Nonsensical rubbish as usual.
The Labour peer defended his move by claiming that both votes were separate and that Scots would need more time to consider the extra powers option.
Eh!
I thought they wanted the referendum like yesterday but now they think we need extra time to consider DevoMax!
Nonsensical rubbish as usual.
#
2012-02-02 18:05
A bit O/T, but google translation of (long) report of Alyn Smith's support of FFA in Europe today: elpuntavui.cat/.../...
The European Parliament supports economic system. "Fiscal federalism" implies "greater economic efficiency" and "could be a useful tool for responsible regional government". "An amendment adopted on Thursday reinforces Catalan demands for a better funding model," says MEP CiU Ramon Tremosa
The full European Parliament voted Thursday in favor of this economic system. MEPs Catalans, Basques, Scots and Flemish have obtained the approval of an amendment which states that "fiscal federalism implies greater economic efficiency" and "could be a useful tool for responsible regional governments for management of taxes." CiU MEP Ramon Tremosa celebrated the adoption of the amendment because it "endorses Catalan demands, responding to a desire not only of self and sense of identity but also effective management of public money." The amendment was adopted by 516 votes in favor, 113 against and 8 abstentions.
Just the day after the first meeting between Artur Mas and Mariano Rajoy, the European Parliament includes "fiscal federalism" as an example of good practice in its annual report on Taxation. The amendment, included in paragraph 11 of the report of Swedish Liberal Olle Schmidt, is a joint initiative of Tremosa (CIU), Romeva (ICV), Oriol Junqueras (ERC) Izaskun Bilbao (GNP), Alyn Smith (Scottish SNP) and Frieda Brepoels (Flemish N-VA). The European Parliament also asks the Commission to promote the economic agreement in future EU legislation. The Committee of Economy and Finance of the European Parliament had already supported on 20 December, the popular vote, liberals and greens.
"Europe shows sensitivity, again, towards a policy of fiscal federalism as already implemented in many countries such as Germany or Sweden," which "reduces the flow between territories" and "greatly improves the efficiency of the fight against tax fraud and management of public money," said Tremosa. The CiU MEP said that the vote on Thursday "reinforces the demand for Catalonia to get better funding than the current model, which treats the Catalan governement as an agency of the central Government with decentralized public spending but keeps tax collection (and poloicy) in the monopoly hands of the Spanish government. "
"Incentives for uncontrolled spending"
By fiscal federalism, the European Parliament not only understands the decentralizatio n of expenditure (as is currently happening in the regions of Spain, with the exception of the Basque Country and Navarre) but also the collection of major taxes, which is what gives power to regional governments in negotiations with the state. Tremosa criticizes the common system of Spain that "provides incentives for regional governments to spend in any way" because they "only spend" and do not have to raise.
In Germany, for example, the 17 federal states have 17 tax offices to collect all the major taxes, regional governments pay the federal government in Berlin for its services and fund their own local councils. This system adds Tremosa, has proved "very effective to avoid excessive government deficits at regional and local level."
The European Parliament supports economic system. "Fiscal federalism" implies "greater economic efficiency" and "could be a useful tool for responsible regional government". "An amendment adopted on Thursday reinforces Catalan demands for a better funding model," says MEP CiU Ramon Tremosa
The full European Parliament voted Thursday in favor of this economic system. MEPs Catalans, Basques, Scots and Flemish have obtained the approval of an amendment which states that "fiscal federalism implies greater economic efficiency" and "could be a useful tool for responsible regional governments for management of taxes." CiU MEP Ramon Tremosa celebrated the adoption of the amendment because it "endorses Catalan demands, responding to a desire not only of self and sense of identity but also effective management of public money." The amendment was adopted by 516 votes in favor, 113 against and 8 abstentions.
Just the day after the first meeting between Artur Mas and Mariano Rajoy, the European Parliament includes "fiscal federalism" as an example of good practice in its annual report on Taxation. The amendment, included in paragraph 11 of the report of Swedish Liberal Olle Schmidt, is a joint initiative of Tremosa (CIU), Romeva (ICV), Oriol Junqueras (ERC) Izaskun Bilbao (GNP), Alyn Smith (Scottish SNP) and Frieda Brepoels (Flemish N-VA). The European Parliament also asks the Commission to promote the economic agreement in future EU legislation. The Committee of Economy and Finance of the European Parliament had already supported on 20 December, the popular vote, liberals and greens.
"Europe shows sensitivity, again, towards a policy of fiscal federalism as already implemented in many countries such as Germany or Sweden," which "reduces the flow between territories" and "greatly improves the efficiency of the fight against tax fraud and management of public money," said Tremosa. The CiU MEP said that the vote on Thursday "reinforces the demand for Catalonia to get better funding than the current model, which treats the Catalan governement as an agency of the central Government with decentralized public spending but keeps tax collection (and poloicy) in the monopoly hands of the Spanish government. "
"Incentives for uncontrolled spending"
By fiscal federalism, the European Parliament not only understands the decentralizatio n of expenditure (as is currently happening in the regions of Spain, with the exception of the Basque Country and Navarre) but also the collection of major taxes, which is what gives power to regional governments in negotiations with the state. Tremosa criticizes the common system of Spain that "provides incentives for regional governments to spend in any way" because they "only spend" and do not have to raise.
In Germany, for example, the 17 federal states have 17 tax offices to collect all the major taxes, regional governments pay the federal government in Berlin for its services and fund their own local councils. This system adds Tremosa, has proved "very effective to avoid excessive government deficits at regional and local level."
#
2012-02-02 18:25
The socialisation of the bank debt coupled with the desire by many for self-determination is a natural aspiration.
Add to this mix, millions out of work with absolutely no hope for a future and the tinder box is waiting to ignite this summer.
Those countries with already extant major social problems and especially in their inner cities had better be on their guard. Any city planning major sporting and national celebrations could ignite and burn to the ground.
This is a revolution in the making by any other name !.
Add to this mix, millions out of work with absolutely no hope for a future and the tinder box is waiting to ignite this summer.
Those countries with already extant major social problems and especially in their inner cities had better be on their guard. Any city planning major sporting and national celebrations could ignite and burn to the ground.
This is a revolution in the making by any other name !.
#
2012-02-02 19:46
Anent the idea of using Norway as a "what if / we could" in future SNP broadcasts. Great idea which I think could have a higher impact if we also include a focus on certain wealth generators in Scotland as well. My concern is that only showing Norway off points our opponents back to "its Scotland's oil" and allows a line of attack with the usual lies and distortions about oil to be aired. Better to incorporate local success stories to let our people know what's going on and what we are capable off regarding renewables, whisky, food, engineering, the law, science, health, civic Scotland etc. Show them what we can do now but point out what little control we have and where the benefits generated usually goes. Contrast by panning back to successful rich Norway and finishing with "We can do that, if........"
Stop, stop, I'm writing the script - I was getting carried away then.
Stop, stop, I'm writing the script - I was getting carried away then.
#
2012-02-02 21:14
The real story is to clear up the mess Wastemonster has used to hide where the bodies are buried. Since 1707 they have been muddying the waters deliberately to hide the true financial standing of the four home countries. The time when this could have been sorted out by a good forensic accountant, (Niall Aslan, springs to mind), are long gone. They have done so good a job the picture will probably remain out of focus forever. The West Lothian Question was grabbed with both hands by those who would keep at least three countries in financial chains but was in fact incredibly badly worded and incredibly muddled in its thinking. The real question was not, “Why should Scottish Members be allowed to vote on English only issues ,when English Members cannot Vote on Welsh, N. Irish and Scottish Issues”? It should have been, “What is being hidden by the Government by not allowing England her own domestic Parliament like everyone else”? This is the reason that Wastemonster is terrified that the truth will out and the bodies will be found. With three countries all with different levels of devolved government and one masquerading as if it were the United Kingdom there must be dark deeds just awaiting that good Forensic Accountant with full access to the books, all the books. Why else do they want to do anything else than put England on the same financial set-up as the rest of us? What dark secrets does an England financed as the whole United Kingdom hide? Are the Tories, ably assisted by both Labour and LibDem parties, really so desperate to hide the bodies they are ready to lose the undoubted wealth that is Scottish people's birthright?
#
2012-02-02 20:37
Tata Steel Europe will be the most expensive and will not have the capacity for the full job. They will be importing the steel as well, as no steel is produced in the UK, sinc Thatcher closed down Ravenscraig.
Don't let Labour/Unionists anywhere near it. Or else it will end up in a situation reminiscent of the Trams or Holyrood fiasco. Totally over budget and overtime.
Leave the experts to get on with the job. Don't let Labour/Unionist anywhere near it.
Don't let Labour/Unionists anywhere near it. Or else it will end up in a situation reminiscent of the Trams or Holyrood fiasco. Totally over budget and overtime.
Leave the experts to get on with the job. Don't let Labour/Unionist anywhere near it.
#
2012-02-02 21:17
Your average lord racks up around £50,000 per year; take away 20 of them and the public purse would be £1 million better off per year - every year. Perhaps most of them would claim to be below average, but most of us would claim they are all below average.
We are all in this together.
We are all in this together.
#
2012-02-02 21:20
O/t had a brilliant conversation about the referendum with two guys from work, got talking about when the full story about the union will come out I was amazed when both of them had the opinion that "Salmond will tell us when the times right" people are starting to wake to it makes me smile.
#
2012-02-02 23:16
Not sure that Foulkes has got the power he thinks he has. It's probably more about stirring up the population and keeping his name in the 'papers than anything substantive.
Also, watching Forsyth in the Scotland Act debate convinced me that he has an air of imbalance about him.
Also, watching Forsyth in the Scotland Act debate convinced me that he has an air of imbalance about him.
#
2012-02-03 01:45
I met Foulkes once in The Baillie in Stockbridge. He was with two young sycophantic aides.
Once too many. He was quite rude to my Welsh, English and Australian guests. Not a good example of the Scottish glitterati?
Once too many. He was quite rude to my Welsh, English and Australian guests. Not a good example of the Scottish glitterati?
#
2012-02-12 20:26
Sunday Express 12/02/2012.
"Descendant of "Rogue" defends union and the parts his forebears played in it"
This was the Duke of Montrose whose descendants signed the Act of Union.
he rattles on, but here in my opinion is what most people would boil it down to.
His main justification was that after all his family had lost a lot of money in the Darrian Scheme.
So his wealthy family made a bad judgement, they took compensation from England and along with others like them, sold a NATION down the river.
Wow.
Rabbie wrote the song about these folk ( many of these families are wealthy to this day according to the article )seems he was actually very accurate after all.
"Descendant of "Rogue" defends union and the parts his forebears played in it"
This was the Duke of Montrose whose descendants signed the Act of Union.
he rattles on, but here in my opinion is what most people would boil it down to.
His main justification was that after all his family had lost a lot of money in the Darrian Scheme.
So his wealthy family made a bad judgement, they took compensation from England and along with others like them, sold a NATION down the river.
Wow.
Rabbie wrote the song about these folk ( many of these families are wealthy to this day according to the article )seems he was actually very accurate after all.
Donate to Newsnet Scotland
Latest Comments
- East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Really? Apart from the 1945-50 governme... - The 'Great Debate' isn't just ...
Lesley says, “Deprivation for example is... - Late, Late appearance for Salm...
Thanks for this. I viewed the Alex Salmo... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
bbc website first minister questions! bb... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
Ha ha, I know that - no worries. Just aw... - Conservatives at war over Came...
They should have gone with Murdo ! - Conservatives at war over Came...
"cannot stand the sight of each other" I... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Was just listening to that in the radio ... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
On another thread I remarked I was stopp... - Conservatives at war over Came...
Probably because they are. - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Nice to see the labour leader wearing a ... - Conservatives at war over Came...
What's this? A junior party member from ... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
exel: They lose the referendum vote? OR,... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
That wasn't meant as a a dig. I was jus... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
' What may I ask will happen if the part... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
From BBC Scotland "As-it-happened":- 122... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
Found it here: bbc.co.uk/.../... (http:/... - Scottish Independence: The Dar...
I promise I won't mention it again every... - East Lothian: Labour ally with...
OT on FMQs today .. BBC bias naturally w... - The 'Great Debate' isn't just ...
And the considerable danger in following...