A sense of priorities
The papers, as you’d expect, take some differing views today of John Swinney’s draft Scottish Government budget, delivered in the Holyrood chamber yesterday. But two articles in particular caught our eye.
This is the Daily Record, in a comprehensive and balanced piece on the bedroom tax announcement, accurately headlined “SNP to ease bedroom tax pain of affected Scots with £20m fund.. but Labour say it’s not enough”:
It seems fair to describe that as a pretty positive reaction from the housing charity, who’d asked for the £20m figure and received it in full. The Herald’s report, entitled “Budget sparks row over £20m to ease pain of ‘bedroom tax'” and written by Magnus Gardham, focused mainly on Labour’s complaints and so sadly didn’t have quite enough room for the entire quote. In fact, just ten words of it made it into the story:
Sales of the Daily Record, which has been admirably outspoken on welfare cuts and the bedroom tax in particular, actually went up slightly last month, bucking a long-term trend of decline. The Herald’s, well, not so much. We wonder if anyone in Scotland’s media will get the message before it’s too late, if it’s not already.
Well done for heralding the Record there ( gettit!), especially after that Pat Kane piece of nonsense. Seems its
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they come to fight you, and then they misquote you, and then you win.”
Is that a recent picture in the Record because the Rev looks about 19 in it?
Left Foot Forwards response to the budget was pretty much a copy paste of the Labour press release.
Apologies for the OT but I’m listening to the Referendum Bill debate and I need to say something…
Truly breathtaking behaviour from James ‘drone’ Kelly who said in the chamber that all pro-independence organisations were just part of Yes Scotland so they should be treated as one for the referendum. He was called out by Patrick Harvey and several other members of the chamber but refused to recant his words. Somehow United with Labour and Friends of Conservatives seem to be separate, though. I would love to know what brass polish he uses to get such a shine on his neck.
As an aside, anyone watch the Convener committee where they were talking to the FM? It was a very interesting session and it should be how FMQs operates. Unfortunately, Duncan McNeil could not contain his visceral tribal hatred for all the session although but did manage for most of it.
Is double OT a cardinal sin?
…………. and then there is;
Concern raised in Holyrood over Scottish government land deal
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24067411
Here we have a crude attempt by Johann Lamont to deflect any scrutiny of Labour’s own inaction on welfare by smearing a Scottish businessman in OUR parliament.
You couldn’t make it up, but someone at Labour HQ did. Time to take these people to task.
I know I might be tempting fate here but are the recent articles in the Daily Record further signs that at least this newspaper has seen the light and is at least prepared to treat independence related topics with slightly more of an even keel than certain other ‘notable ‘ papers?
Is that a recent picture in the Record because the Rev looks about 19 in it?
That story will not do any harm to the page view stats for Wings over Scotland.
Gillie, I agree, Johann Lamont has previous in this regard, and I do hope that the business man in question can take it further, especially when you consider some of the deals Labour politicians have been involved in in the past!
@Gillie
and then there is;
Concern raised in Holyrood over Scottish government land deal
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24067411
Here we have a crude attempt by Johann Lamont to deflect any scrutiny of Labour’s own inaction on welfare by smearing a Scottish businessman in OUR parliament.
You couldn’t make it up, but someone at Labour HQ did. Time to take these people to task.
She smeared the head of the civil service in Scotland last week as well. It appears SLAB have embarked on a scorched earth strategy. The businessman in question wants to met her after hearing about her remarks (Glenn Campbell said he in away from Scotland at the moment). He supports independence as well. All elements of the independence movement will be under attack by these smearing clowns. They know they have nothing positive to say about the Union. They will attempt to destroy in chance of a debate on independence. We say that last week with Sarwar’s attempt to disrupt the TV debate.
As far as I’m aware Parliamentary Privilege protects Johann Lamont from any defamation proceedings those she smears would wish to take. It is somewhat an abuse of the privilege but there’s nothing that can be done.
@Adrian B:
“That story will not do any harm to the page view stats for Wings over Scotland.”
Got a link please, Adrian?
Well this is interesting.
I’ve just read this over on Twitter, makes Lamont look an even bigger idiot than she normally appears to be.
What is it with Labour politicians, they seem to be so inept.
Why are they so focused on constantly attacking SNP that they are incapable of seeing how ridiculously stupid they make themselves look?
twitter.com/ScottishPol/status/378174840395411457/photo/1/large
While I’d love to see some real mature and considered political debate on any matter in current Scottish politics I am moderately heartened that labour can only resort to mud slinging and snide sniping as they have absolutely nothing constructive to say. The louder they wail the more I remember about empty vessels…
Vote YES 2014
i dont know how anyone can fail to be impressed by the outstanding bravery shown by iain gray on newsnicht last nite. to go on a live tv political show and put mr millibands case for the people of scotland and his own personal push for a knighthood, suffering from the worst case of mumps since i had them as a kid and excruciatingly painful abcesses on his left and right wisdom teeth beggars belief . the man deserves a medal. if he continues with the same courage he showed last night i can see him being taken almost seriously in time. maybe not
Lamont has decided to smear people without producing any evidence. She is very, very lucky politicians cannot be done for defamation. Make no mistake these people are getting dirtier and dirtier in their fight to keep their positions and power.
Off Topic (for which i am sorry Rev), but contrast and compare, two notices I received yesterday.
1st, Come along to our YES open meeting in Alloa Town Hall at 7.30PM on 22nd October.
Confirmed speakers are: Blair Jenkins YES Chief Executive, Jeane Freeman Women for Independence, Keith Brown MSP, Minister for Transport and Veterans and Dennis Canavan, Chair of Yes Scotland Advisory Board.
2nd the proud boasts of Better Together, who according to them have, set up 200 groups
Organised 1500 events
Delivered 4 million leaflets
Knocked on 350.000 doors
Recruited over 30,000 volunteers
+ 1500 callers
and over 300 youth reps.
I do wish someone we trust had the time to do some analysis on these figures, I think they might find the odd exaggeration in some of them.
O/T Regarding the land deal that Johann was trying to make something off .
I was just listening to the news on Smooth Radio and according to them the business man in question made a statement that the land was sold by public auction where anyone could have submitted bids for the land in question .
In any auction it is usually a question of some you win , some you lose , there are times where the item being auctioned will sell for far more than its worth and sometimes it will sell for a lot less , although in this case it seems that the land was bought back for a lot less than it was originally sold for .
Re ‘Jola’s land deal smear at today’s fmq – journalist Tom Gordon has just tweeted;
“Minute shows Labour-dominated SPT struck 2008 deal behind @JohnMcGlynn land sale, not SNP ministers “
@Jimbo
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/yes-campaign-distance-themselves-pro-independence-2266858
The picture is about 20 years old, from the Revs bookface.
From that Record article Stu linked to above:
“Labour finance spokesman Iain Gray said the budget should have “banished” the bedroom tax from Scotland entirely using a £50million plan they outlined last week.”
Labour’s big plan is:
“Holyrood would remove the threat of eviction from victims and ensure councils and housing associations don’t lose out.
Bedroom tax evictions would be banned under a new Member’s Bill put forward by Labour welfare spokeswoman Jackie Baillie.
The SNP Government would then need to find £50million to plug the gap in council and housing association funding caused by the rent arrears which would result.”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/labour-reveals-50million-plan-
beat-2252502
This is what Labour call a plan? More a case of abdicating responsibility for a policy they introduced themselves, and attempting to pass the buck onto others – in this case the Scottish taxpayers via the Scottish government. Jeez, the puerile utterances that these people spew every time they open their mouths really gets my dander up.
@jim mitchell
Jim, BT ‘events’ (doubtless just like their volunteers) are often ‘phantom’ ones, like the one they advertised at Bearsden Cross in May. There turned out to be absolutely no one there, including any BT reps. It stiil counts as an ‘event’ in BT arithmetic though.
Youth reps I’m more inclined to believe – the only two BT reps I’ve encountered were teenage NUS Labour wannabe types with what must be a combined semi-adult life experience of about 6 years. What leads them to their considered opinion that we’re ‘better together’, I wonder?
Apologies, but it’s all to do with public money and responsibility.
As usual, during FMQ Lamont struck again and yet again, as usual, her laments do not always have date and time frame references, but is it just remotely possible that the 840k squid land deal was done by the lib/lab shebang as they cleared the route for ‘the never to make a profit – but must have GARL’?
I don’t know the answer, but would not be in the least surprised if it was during their watch. Ian Grey, the then Labour head honcho, was pretty vehement in his unflinching support of the daft and ruinous scheme. But then what’s new from that source?
There’s probably a lot of disappointed speculators along that proposed route, who thought they were going to make a mint. Maybe they were even told by the usual suspects to get weighed in!
jim mitchell
Any indication of where these events were or where the volunteers are from?
I’m sure holding fund-raising dinners in the Home Counties, keeps quite a few of folk occupied. Or does that equate minimum wage with voluntarism?
The papers, as you’d expect, take differing views today of John Swinney’s draft Scottish Government budget,
Ha! I expected them all to take the same view!
Without unjustified smears against the SNP Government, and snide personal insults directed at the First Minister, Johann Lamont would have nothing to say each week at FMQs. She reminds me of what was once said of a younger Ian Paisley Senior in his ranting heyday, “If the word NO was removed from the English language, he would be struck dumb!”
Johann is an appallingly poor parliamentarian. She has no debating skills and cannot, even if her life depended on it think off script. Smearing, jibes, lies and bluster is all she can successfully deliver. I am not so much sure it is a strategy as simply she isn’t any better than that. Salmond must drop to his knees every night and give thanks to whatever powers listen that he has been blessed with such useless opposition leaders.
On BT’s claims I have never seen any of their leaflets through my door so I’m guessing their “army of workers” are shoving their entire quota through the first letterbox they come to. If they do have 30,000 volunteers how come they hardly ever have a stand at public events and if they do it is poorly staffed.
@ Adrian B:
Thanks, Adrian.
“We don’t have any direct contact with him. He is not part of Yes Scotland.”
Maybe not – but I would say he has campaigned more for a YES vote than many of our politicians.
Stu’s response was quite adequate, and at least they gave him the last word.
“The picture is about 20 years old, from the Revs bookface.”
Sadly they do not show the hair style which was a noteworthy tribute to studio line hair product.
With regard to Lamont’s protected status as she commits defamation on a weekly basis – does that protection also extend to those who report verbatim from the chamber?
Watching Glen Cambell after FMQ, he summed up the exchange in a much more detailed way than Lamont had delivered – was he defaming by broadcasting?
Parliamentary privilege does not extend to Holyrood. So Johann Lamont is out on a limb concerning this smear.
Further, she is subject Code of Conduct for Members of the Scottish Parliament.
Any member of the public can make a complaint to the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland.
http://www.publicstandardscommissioner.org.uk/make-a-complaint/overview/
Thought the Record piece was pretty even handed. Stu made it clear the smears were rubbish and he was unequivocal in his support for Manning. I think readers might wonder what the fuss was all about. Certainly good name recognition for Wings too. The stalker’s tactics backfiring a tad.
O/T the latest Fear Factor video’s released today, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaMw5GiXgWQ
Gillie says:
“Parliamentary privilege does not extend to Holyrood. So Johann Lamont is out on a limb concerning this smear.
Further, she is subject Code of Conduct for Members of the Scottish Parliament.
Any member of the public can make a complaint to the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland.”
I just hope that John McGlynn is made aware of this fact if he does not already know it. The time has passed for these intellectually corrupt Labour politicians to be brought to book. They walk about the place and treat the electorate like second class citizens. Time to put a stop to this once and for all!
Please Mr McGlynn sue the earse off of Lamont!
Do the whole of Scotland one huge favour, teach her once and for all that she can not recklessly abuse people or accuse them of wrong doing without at the same time offering up her evidence!
It would be funny to see Lamont finally get her comeuppance for all her smears. She does not bother to check to see if there is any evidence for her claims.
I think this may cost Johann Lamont her job.
Its no surprise that Gardham used to work for the Daily Record and continues his contempt unabated for anything SNP in the Herald, whilst trying but failing miserably, to cover for a Labour party so out of touch it doesn’t know if it’s New York or New year.
It wasn’t just Johann that felt the first ministers wrath today , it was great watching the first minister skewering Jackie Ballie , at one point her face looked as though she was hoping the floor of the chamber would open up and swallow her .
BBC obviously think Lamonts on shaky ground. As soon as she made the remark. It was the lead story. McGlynn’s rebuttal with the facts have seen it reduced to 4th and now 5th story. Whats the betting it is gone by the end of the day from the BBC website.
The Tree of Liberty says:
I think this may cost Johann Lamont her job.
Normally I’d agree with you ToL but in this instance I hope not.
As others regularly comment Lamont is probably the most incompetent leader Labour have ever had, and this is saying something considering some of her predecessors.
The other problem Labour have is the big question about who will replace her. The leadership of Labour in Scotland is a poisoned chalice and no politician worth their salt would touch this post with a barge-pole!
I suspect Lamont is in the post for the long haul, many more open goals for the SNP and YES campaign to come in the coming months I think.
I see Lamont’s attempt at telling the truth is top story on BBC (dis)Reporting Scotland.
I don;t know who writes Johann Lamont’s scripts, but I don’t think they are on her side.
Misreporting Scotland now covering the land deal ‘story’ in perjorative terms.
Arbroath 1320, Yes i believe your right, any change to the Scottish Labour leadership before the referendum, without something like ill health being used as the reason, would be an open door to the SNP and the YES campaign.
CameronB, c’mon what are you expecting from that lot, the truth? No details, as usual folk are just expected to believe their ‘facts’.
Seems like their not only telling lies but that they have decided to go in for the big ones, which as someone once suggested are the best, on the principle that folk wouldn’t believe anyone would tell a lie of such magnitude, so it must be the truth.
As someone who is relatively new to the world of politics I find it deeply disturbing indeed that much of the media are or have been involved in one way or the other with Labour.
It would be true to say that Labour in Scotland have been and still are afforded carte blanche to do and say what they like to the people of Scotland with complete impunity.
There will still be some people who believe what they say to be gospel but It’s diminishing fast.
I fully expect them to ramp up their lies and spin to the point that it’s just flat out rejected by the entire nation. That should be their real worry, not independence.
Their rhetoric is becoming more and more irrational as the tide turns to Yes. Labour in Scotland would appear to be at the event horizon of their own embittered black hole. They are on the cusp of being consumed to the point of singularity.
I do hope they wake up fast and embrace change like the rest of us because it’s coming whether they like it or not.
Scotfree1320, it may be for the best if the BBC and others keep pushing the story, if the facts are again wrong, could make the gentleman in question more determined to do something about it.
Here’s hoping!
I dont think it would have mattered how good John Swinneys budget was SLAB, Scottish Tories and Scottish Lib/Dem castigated him and berated him, on every little datum, that didnt meet their very very high standards, not because they care about the allocations of the monies, but because their Westminster masters have ordered them to do so.
Mr Swinney stood his ground remarkably well against the ferocious mob calling for blood not only at Holyrood but on BBC Radio Scotland.
Roll on independence
The Scottish government later clarified that the land was bought in 2008 from the Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, which had responsibility for purchasing all the land needed for the rail link project.
A spokesman added that it had been obliged to sell the site, under Treasury rules which prevented the Scottish government holding on to land as a means of speculating on land values.
The above is from the BBC news site, a part of the story that I had not noticed before, now if that is correct then surely Johann Lamont new or should have known about the rules governing speculation on land values, which means she should at least apologise not only to the business man concerned but to the whole chamber, which would be interesting because as we know Labour do not do humble pie
For anyone who didn’t see FMQ’s live today then don’t forget that it is on again tonight on BBC Parliament channel at 23:30.
From posts/Tweets I’ve read today Lamont is not the only individual who ends up on the receiving end of a roasting from the First Minister. I’m thinking this could be the best FMQ’s to be aired yet. Only time will tell. 😆
@jim mitchell
It’s the usual story: Push the headline, ‘Salmond accused…’, promote the accusers for three quarters thirds of the story and in the final minute, state the minimum of facts. E.g. They stated that SPT bought the land then passed it on to the Scot Gov, but didn’t say that SPT was (and likely remains) Labour dominated.
They did say that the deal was pre-2008 but linked that only to the land prices collapsing after start of the economic crisis, but not that since the deal was pre-2008, it was during London Lib/Lab rule.
They are really p*ssing me off. Come a Yes vote, I hope that one of the first acts of the new Scottish Government will be to scrap the British Brainwashing Corporation, Scotland Branch.
They motivate me to campaign more vigorously.
Just home, and haven’t heard any news since this morning.
Has JL actually defamed someone?
Wow! the just off the SNP site :
http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2013/sep/lamont-must-apologise-smear-after-basic-errors
It wouldn’t be a surprise to find that Lamont, when a teacher, was one of those who enjoy chiding the children in their charge, belittling them with sarcasm, intimidating them with steely stares.
I once had to do a series of workshops with primary-school weans, all about knights and dragons, castles, damsels etc. In one school (in an extremely deprived area) I went to the classroom, the teacher (a woman in her late 50s) was expecting me. She told the children to clear away what they’d been doing, and as they did so, she said ‘They’re a bit thick this lot, but if you repeat it often enough they’ll get it eventually.’
I should’ve just walked out, and still sometimes wonder what those seven-year olds had to put up with on a day-to-day basis from a person who clearly despised them.
Anyway – Lamont’s not in a classroom anymore, and she may be about to find out that the ‘chiding’ of big hairy grown-ups who can answer back sometimes carries a cost.
Caught a comment on radio earlier that the land was sold in an open auction.
Did JL not break some kind of rules in Holyrood today ?
Thanks for that post, Jim. I’ve now got the drift.
Surely there must be a few Yes folk in Labour HQ that are feeding her this shite? 🙂
A picture of Johann Lamont and the very talented Humza Yousaf
http://munguinsrepublic.blogspot.co.uk/
Lamont under growing pressure to apologise.
http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2013/sep/lamont-must-apologise-smear-after-basic-errors
The Presiding Officer should force Johann Lamont to make an apology.
Is it possible for a person publicly defamed by a person in parliament to have redress?
surely JL cannot make a spurious allegation which could very well affect this mans business without legal protection?
Is there any term which covers the process whereby a person who is unhappy in a job tries to ‘constructively dismiss’ themselves?
The official spokesman for the Labour party in Scotland seems to be none other than Glen Campbell. He appeared after FMQ to summarise Lamont’s claim, which accused AS of ‘gross incompetence’, which he did not repeat, but did fill in a few holes she missed from her script. He then appeared at 6.30 to give Lamont’s explanation that she was not intending to smear any private individual (John McGlynn), but to highlight the poor performance of the FM in the matter. If that explains her heavy emphasis on John McGlynn’s political affiliation and leanings, something was missed in the translation!
He kindly volunteered the information that it was indeed the Scottish Government (ie, SNP) who paid the 840,000 for the land, but no mention it was a done and dusted deal by SPT that was controlled to the hilt by Labour previous to the 2008 purchase.
Although this is quite the norm for the BBC in Scotland, we’re well use to it, but it looks like the sh*t has hit the proverbial fan with this guy McGlynn who doesn’t seem to be a happy chappy and he’s got plenty of dosh as well as indignation
So another job done, damage limitation, yet another big banana skin – wooopps -a-daisy!
@Rabb
As someone who is relatively new to the world of politics I find it deeply disturbing indeed that much of the media are or have been involved in one way or the other with Labour.
It would be true to say that Labour in Scotland have been and still are afforded carte blanche to do and say what they like to the people of Scotland with complete impunity.
Yes, I am sure there are ‘stories’ to be told…
Not entirely O/T but well worth watching Channel 4 news repeated at 8 pm plus How paedophile MP Cyril Smith got away with it at 11 pm .
It transpires that there was a cover up a the highest level and that Labour Government pressed the Director of Public Prosecutions not to proceed with charges against Cyril Smith (once a Labour councillor) in the late 1970s as they didn’t want a by election during the Lab / Lib coalition and lose an MP for Callaghan’s fragile majority.
@Linda’s Back
I saw that. Special Branch, MI5, and others were protecting him.
It gets worse for Labour as Trinity Mirror is now embroiled in phone hacking with four court cases ongoing and more to come. Expect universal condemnation by Labour politicans.. NOT.
“Is there any term which covers the process whereby a person who is unhappy in a job tries to ‘constructively dismiss’ themselves?”
Wankess?
In the unlikely event that Lamont goes beyond a surly faced mumble by way of an apology, I think Campbell should conduct his next TV piece with his underpants on his head.
Parliamentary privilege does not extend to Holyrood. MSPs are subject to a code of conduct.
But who is the real guilty party in all this? Perhaps Glasgow Labour councillor Alistair Watson who was the chair of the SPT board can provide the answers that Johann Lamont seeks. Mr Watson is, as it happens, a good friend of Me Lamont’ s partner Archie Graham.
http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/councillorsandcommittees/member.asp?id=45&t=Councillor+Alistair+Watson
Here’s another picture of Johann:
http://www.soberatheist.com/storage/atheist%20toast.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1305089425821
Is there any term which covers the process whereby a person who is unhappy in a job tries to ‘constructively dismiss’ themselves?
Are you suggesting someone is playing the benefits system? 🙂
@Juteman
Like this one!
http://derekbatemandotnet1.wordpress.com/
How is it that I can be incandescent with rage about a government I did not vote for, because of its deceitful, duplicitous and deadly effects upon my fellow citizens, and proud of the attempts being made by the government of the country I live in to mitigate that? (Don’t need an answer)
@CH.
Superb! 🙂
Cant see any link to Jo La’s smear at Fmqs on the state broadcasters site. Theres a wee link with McGlynns statement, heavily edited but no other obvious FMQs story to be seen. Looks like damage control has kicked in so we must must make it our priority to make sure the story is kept alive on all forums.
‘…it breaks your heart in two, to know she’s been untrue…it’s over‘
O/T, sorry. On the other thread there was much talk about bias in the Herald’s online moderation policy (or bias in the moderation team), and the way that unionist trolls are apparently spared pre-moderation and allowed to run riot, while independence-supporting posters increasingly rarely see their comments allowed through.
I don’t post over there, but sometimes upvote folk I agree with and try to downvote the OBEs of the world (but I never can, since I don’t have an account). Just wondered if anyone else has ever had this happen to them….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxC6sQOC4kc
BB – I used to read the comments in The Herald but when I try to click on, usually pro-indy comment ^ up arrow, I got a message saying ‘you have to be signed in to vote this coment down’, or somesuch phrase, but the up arrow total, after my click – reduced in numbers, sometimes by more than my one click, to a ^ lower number than came up in the wee box saying who had voted up and how many guests – weird. Stopped even reading it now.
That’s happened to me too Jenny. I’d click to upvote a pro comment, and the upvote total would decrease by two. I’d like to think it’s down to the security software on my computer or browser, having Java disabled or something like that, because if they were honestly going to go to the lengths of manipulating up and down votes on news comments it would not bode well for the referendum itself.
But who is the real guilty party in all this? Perhaps Glasgow Labour councillor Alistair Watson who was the chair of the SPT board can provide the answers that Johann Lamont seeks. Mr Watson is, as it happens, a good friend of Me Lamont’ s partner Archie Graham.
The above an earlier post, Please dont bring Archie into this he has to handle her at home, thats enough problems for any man. Archie go to a quiet pub for a drink tonight. you will need it. Even I would listen to your probs, with sympathy.
I think we will be doing Project Fear’s job for them if we give this land-deal story more legs. Just like the fee for the academic’s article this is a non-story, but that is the point from a propaganda dirty-tricks perspective.
Both times the message is clear: if you are a high-profile-ish or professional person and go public in favour of Yes then you will probably be smeared in the media – the point being that they will be negatively reported on in the broadcast and print media whether there is any substance or not to a story about them, because the MSM are so pro-No compliant, if not actually orchestrating these smears themselves, feeding them to their Slab buddies.
This tactic, along with the myopic coverage of opinion polls, is all designed to prevent the normalisation of being pro-Yes. As soon as that happens No have lost. So Project Fear are doing all they can to slow the normalisation process down, and that includes publicly traducing all ‘respectable’ figures who support Yes, especially those who have, in their eyes, ‘switched sides’. It is, I reckon, primarily ‘pour encourager les autres’* , so the fact that the stories are so weak is actually a main part of the threat: the media will run with anything against you if you come out as pro-Yes…
*”The phrase ‘pour encourager les autres‘ is frequently used in the media whenever the official punishment for an act has seemed to be out of proportion to the act itself, or where the punishment has an element of political bias to it (in order to encourager les autres to shut up and keep their heads down).”
Beachthistle, disagree with you there regarding doing Project Fears work by showing an interest in this story, if JL is as far out as is suggested she should be pinned for it, it might just stop the other lot from attacking others just because they support a YES vote, beside there is such a thing as principle.
The businessman will hopefully consider his position as well.
@jim mitchell
I just think it is something to consider/be aware of. Smearing using non-stories is definitely a propaganda/dirty trick/intimidatory tactic and it is dependent on the debunking of the story and of that debunking to be disseminated amongst the Yes movement.
RE pinning JL, I reckon it is in Yes’ interests that she stays as SLab ‘leader’ as long as possible…
@beachthistle the business family is growing in confidence and numbers.
http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/pensions-investment-and-the-building-of-a-new-scotland/?goback=.gde_4385932_member_273122580#!
@beachthistle
Lamont did exactly the same last week though. She smeared the head of the civil service in Scotland, saying that he was protecting the SG (although for Lamont and co this means the SNP). I do not think these tactics are an accident either. I have a feeling that other people will be having an input into what she says. Lamont is clearly not leading SLAB in Scotland. I suspect that someone like Darling will be involved in her approach to FMQs. If he and others are not, then that would be a major surprise because she simply is not up to leading a party, whether in government, or even in opposition.
@beachthistle
A resignation and new branch Labour leader election would be far more beneficial to the Yes campaign as it would discredit the No camp by showing them to be willing to lie to get their way.
O/T but the content of this ‘Spectator’ piece will resonate well with readers of this site – more trouble for the BBC.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-week/leading-article/9019161/saving-the-bbc/
Cynical Highlander
I’m not sure that I get the Derek Bateman blog.
Is it all a wind up?
Dave
I think the Dotaman line is a give away if nothing else is
Who said there was no Scottish political satire?
@Seasick Dave
In my opinion Yes as he knows exactly what is going on in that dismal place.
I suspect there will be more and more of this over the next few weeks – the Dunfermline by-election is coming up, after all. They will be creating negative stories for their canvassing.
@cynicalHighlander
Whether JL staying is better or not for Yes is probably 50/50. What is crystal clear however is that Project Fear is happy for all political parties and branches of parties in Scotland to be portrayed as being incompetent and/or in disarray – even their own!
A unionist commenter on Newsnet has, to mind, just given their game/strategy away:
“The people of Scotland are beginning to see that there is NO political party fit to run our country.”
@beachthistle
Ah Mr Black the arch unionist, talks pifle.
Elizabeth says:
“Re ‘Jola’s land deal smear at today’s fmq – journalist Tom Gordon has just tweeted;
“Minute shows Labour-dominated SPT struck 2008 deal behind land sale, not SNP ministers ””
Worse still for Johann if Big Eye over at Newsnet is correct..
http://tinyurl.com/ou45ly3
If correct, Johann’s better together half was on the SPTE board that bought the land.
If that is correct then you really, really couldn’t make it up.
I hope Mr McGlynn takes her to task. Rofl!
Does anyone know if AS and his people are given prior sight of the questions being asked at FMQs? Are the questions ‘tabled’ with the Speaker etc? He always seems to have at least some of the answers prescribed, and the relevant details to hand.
If so, why didn’t he nail Lamont with the SPT connection? He could’ve up-ended her on the very first question. I don’t get it…
ianbrotherhood
Don’t interrupt your opponent when he/she is making a pigs ear of things?
IBH I believe he only has prior knowledge of the first question each party ‘leader’ asks i.e. what are the First Minister’s plans for the rest of the day etc. The same system works down in Westminster. This then allows the questioner to ask anything they like afterwards without the First Minister having advance knowledge.
Unbelievable! I mean, seriously …who the **** …is advising these people?
Is the Labour Party picking up stories from around the coffee machine, and then taking them as gospel?
Twice, Salmond tells her that it was nothing to do with the SNP, and that she should go and check her facts. And yet …on she goes …demanding answers!!
I see from the SNP site, that Mr McGlynn has put his side of the purchase to the BBC. Can’t see anything wrong with his statement. Explains the process and what happened very well.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24067145
Makes me wonder at the very end though when he says he would meet with Johann privately. I would love to be a fly on the wall at that one.
This could be another Bendy Wendy or an Iain Grey Subway moment. If this blows up into a serious row, then we could be looking for another new Labour leader!
Question is …who would we like? After all, we keep wondering if there is someone worse than the last Labour leader, and yet, the Scottish Labour Party …faithfully …keep amusing us by actually proving that they can!!! So folks …who would you like? I would like to see Anas Sarwar. He is probably a shoo-in, but I’m dying for this man to be put under the main spotlight, and battered with difficult questions …just as Nicola did to him last week!
I just wonder if we will eventually run out of Labour MSP’s!!!
re the Bateman blog-
http://derekbatemandotnet1.wordpress.com/
We’ve been crying out for a BBC ‘insider’ to give us the low-down on what’s happening in Pacific Quay. Is Bateman testing the waters with this craftily ambiguous piece? He could yet prove to be the Moses that many beleaguered BBC Scotland staff have been waiting for.
It looks very much to me that Iain Gray is being prepared for the leadership!
JLT
Seconded. Definitely Anas. (quack quack)
Here’s a wee song for Johann. Try not to greet.
Re the Bateman blog-
It’s quite strange. I am a big fan of Derek Bateman – I’m not convinced this is really him!
Elizabeth, I think it is a bit of satire from him.
I am quite convinced that Derek Bateman did not write that blog. It is either a spoof (poor humour) or a poor ‘Black ops’s’. Whatever, it is mince!
Johann’s lament is on Newsnight Scotland tonight. Hope her SPT train is on time and Archie paid for the ticket!
regarding the Bateman blog, it’s clearly satirical. Consider lines like:
“I confess now that, in order to damage the credibility of the BBC, I successfully lobbied the management to keep the Fred Macauley Show on air.”
and this gem:
“When research – jointly funded with the RSPCA – found that Newsnight Scotland was the nation’s cue to take the dog for a walk, I argued that only people over 70 were watching and they were reassured by a programme format they remembered from the fifties”
A veteran Scottish journalist referring to the RSPCA was a particularly nice touch, I think. Interesting – is Derek about to put a rocket up BBC Scotland’s arse?
24. Most democratic states have enacted some similar protection for free speech in legislatures, even where their legislatures are not sovereign – such as the Speech and Debate clause of the US constitution.4This is usually to be found within their codified constitutions, and often the model for that protection is Article IX of the Bill of Rights 1689. There is also protection for free speech
in the proceedings of the Scottish Parliament, National Assembly for Wales, and Northern Ireland
Assembly.5gov.uk/…/consultation.pdf————————-
What is the bets that Johann says she didn’t say what she said that she said something else… anyway it was nasty rough boys that did it and they ran away.
@ianbrotherhood
Is Bateman testing the waters with this craftily ambiguous piece?
Looks like “Moses” had a few stumbles before he blogged. This sentence from Bateman’s blog had me thinking “All of this delighted Salmond who said the less professional the BBC appeared, the less impact it’s pro-Unionist propaganda would have.” Isn’t that exactly what Lamont is doing to the Labour party? Someone mentioned The Manchurian Candidate recently; I’m beginning to think someone uses the trigger word on Johann just before FMQ.
I note that the derekbateman.net domain has been purchased by a proxy company in the USA so it might be difficult to find out if it is a spoof or not.
ON the Derek Bateman spoof/humorous blog:
“Next week: How I recruited Dotaman.”
🙂
It would be extraordinarily amusing if that was indeed written by Bateman, but hey, come on, get real.
@HandandShrimp
What is the bets that Johann says she didn’t say what she said that she said something else… anyway it was nasty rough boys that did it and they ran away.
She will blame it on Salmond and the SNP somehow.
@fitheach-
Got to say though, it’s a brilliantly written piece, and if it causes confusion, chatter, and some soul-searching in Pacific Quay? Result.
The derek bateman ‘blog’ is just verbal diarrhoea, in fact i have no idea why I started to read it, jeeez, just don’t bother with this tripe people.
Rev – can we have some more cute kittens?
Paula Rose
Is your bucket not full yet?
Oh fuck its James Kelly. He is refusing to apologise and is blaming Salmond! I warned you HandandShrimp! 😀 😀
Nice to see James Kelly not admitting there will be any apology from Labour but it must be SNP who apologises. This man is a laughable joke!
Hells bells the only thing that is patsy about Holyrood is James Kelly and his mob of lying cohorts!
Post – “a sense of priorities”, Bateman’s post, now on newsnight a silly story – need I say more?
“Patsy parliament” says James Kelly!! 😀 It is always the SNP’s fault. SLAB will never apologise for anything.
and what’s wrong with pussies, smiley,winky thing!
They’re gong to break t’internet, that’s whats wrong with them. 🙂
Interesting research-based article on the Gordon Brewer show tonight showing how positive English Geordies were on Scot’s ability to run their own affairs. If only we could do a population swap with some lamentable politicians on our side of the border.
James Kelly made it obvious that labours line will be we were/are checking on the correctness of these dealings on behalf of the people, that’s why he started mentioning an audit, those of us who heard JL today know that she never mentioned one, being content to try and muckrake.
He actually, from Labours point of view did not to badly, but only because he was allowed to, he was not put under the pressure to explain that he should have been.
Fortunately i think this story can keep going for a bit yet!
I faced a dilemma at 11pm there. Plough on with Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason or listen to James Kelly.
In the end old Immanuel gave way to ‘rat is exactly wur point’
Should have added that newsnight or some other organisation could ask the original buyers on to the screen to ask a few questions.
they could then try and work out how it could be possible for an auctioneer at a public auction to prevent folk from bidding, even if there was a reserve price, so that his preferred bidder could get it, clever that.
Interesting edit in tonight’s Newsnight Scotland, the clip used was part of the speech J.L made. In the transcript, when describing Mr McGlynn, she stated that he had been a Tory supporter and was now backing Yes Scotland, but in the edit it started right at the point, ” supporting Yes Scotland”. It is subtle but significant. BBC Editorial have decided to maximise the use of the fiasco, perhaps even as they realise that this story is murkier than they first assumed. They don’t want to mark their score card with the Tory side of BT and manipulated the clip to accomodate their dig at the SNP.(Must keep to the target numbers).
interesting too how little time was given to the article before heading off down to Newcastle for an unrelated article with no use by date. Not exactly crucial that it was broadcast tonight. Imagine if the shoe had been on the other foot, they would have cleared the schedule.
Perhaps an article exploring the SLAB/BBC connections, positions, influence and career trajectory of those behind the scenes would be a good idea as was suggested on an earlier thread.
Lanarkist.
Just read the Bateman blog and could not stop thinking this is April 1st.
Perhaps an article exploring the SLAB/BBC connections, positions, influence and career trajectory of those behind the scenes would be a good idea as was suggested on an earlier thread.
I’ve seen this done by an English blogger for Westminster and the BBC in London. It would really be worth a bit if RevStu’s time to research the up-to-date information for Scottish broadcasters and journalists.
Hetty & others,
I think Derek Bateman is giving the Unionist’s game away in a satirical format – but swapping the roles of the protagonists.
Note the paragraph:
Key among them is one of the best known faces in Scotland, a fixture on national television, who may now follow me into ignominy. Her nightly appearances on Reporting Scotland have undergone nuanced adjustments. From research conducted at the Poynter Institute of Journalism in St Petersburg, Florida, http://www.poynter.org I learned how to promote a subconscious message while broadcasting. If you observe closely you will hear a momentary pause before she says the words “Scottish Government” to give it emphasis and on completion, she will smile faintly to leave an optimistic sense in the mind of the viewer. When she mentions “Labour leader Johann Lamont”, her brow gently furrows and her timbre drops to indicate something sinister. It is by these tiny measures that public perceptions are formed.
Now; swap ‘Labour leader Johann Lamont’ for ‘Scottish government’ and vice versa. I’m not the only one to have noticed the ‘nuanced adjustments’ and subliminal (mis)reporting.
im in the US right now and due to the time difference, happily got comment number 1 past moderation on Gardhams contrived nonsense. Most upvotes i’ve ever had!
O/T Just watched Question Time (sad, I know), and in a discussion about Osborne’s handling of the economy, David Aaronovitch (of the Times) said (and I paraphrase) that Ed Balls was a numptie and Labour should bring back Alistair Darling.
Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel…
@Hetty, 10:46:
It”s certainly not “verbal diarrhoea”, it’s pretty good satire. And it’s either a good spoof of Derek’s style, or it’s Derek himself.
Here’s a tip: don’t read Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”
@morag @tamson
It is Derek Bateman himself.
You sure? How do you know?
In that case, he’s got a more subtle sense of humour than I realised.
@Morag
I am sure, we have a mutual friend.
If any of you guys have ever listened to Derek Bateman then I find it astonishing that you could doubt his sense of humour. Get real! get a grip! The man is brilliant!!
Or, better still. Read the blog again and apply a wee bit of intelligence! Believe me, there will be a lot of teeth gnashing at Pacific Quay and THEY will not find it funny. Good!
I’ll read it again, in that understanding. I’m probably too cynical – the first time I read it I just took it as read that it was a spoof. Too much BBC Scotlandshire, I suppose!
Morag.
Scotlandshire would be proud of it. Right up their street.
I see he’s got another one up today. Also very very cutting.
I think the trouble is, he’s too damn clever, in an intellectual sense, for most of the people who need to understand what he’s communicating. There’s even a rant in the comments from an indy supporter who seems to have swallowed it hook, line, sinker and rowboat. It’s going to whoosh right over the heads of the people who should be the targets.