The less-deserving pro-independence website

Wings Over Scotland


More questions than answers

Posted on February 24, 2017 by

We were very pleased to hear Gary Robertson challenge Kezia Dugdale on the curious matter of Scottish Labour’s membership and income figures on today’s Good Morning Scotland. Dugdale flapped and dodged and waffled for as long as she could before diverting the topic onto federalism, and eventually managed to wriggle away from the subject without any sort of proper answer (through no fault of Robertson’s).

(Good Morning Scotland, BBC Radio Scotland, 24 February 2017)
.

But what she said just made the situation MORE confusing, not less.

After repeating the flat-out lie that the SNP was funded by “lottery winners and bus tycoons” – and we’re not sure what’s wrong with being a lottery winner – Dugdale told Robertson that the regional branch office had around 20,000 “members and registered supporters” in 2016.

Registered supporters are a special category of non-party-members who pay a one-off fee (currently £25) in order to be able to vote in a leadership election. As far as we’re aware that status is only available when there’s a leadership election on – the window for signing up in 2016 was just 48 hours long, and to all intents and purposes the status ends when the leadership election is over.

It’s actually very hard to find anything out about the scheme from Labour’s website – the only options offered are to either join up as a full member or donate money with no mention of receiving anything in return. By Googling you can find a page offering the chance to “sign up as a supporter”, but it makes no mention of cost or voting rights, and you have to already be a member of an affiliated organisation.

labsupporter1

If you say you’re not one of those you get redirected to the normal Join page asking you to become a full member for £48 a year. If you tick one of the organisations you get an email saying that they’re going to check up on you and make sure that’s true.

labsupporter

(The subject line explicitly mentions “Labour Leadership Election”.)

So if Dugdale is including such people in her claim, those people aren’t “members” in any real sense. They were temporarily classed as supporters – explicitly NOT actual members – but that status expired after the leadership election last September.

More importantly, it still doesn’t explain the income figures, because if they paid £25 for temporary registered-supporter status in 2016, that’s actually slightly MORE than the £24 they would have paid if they were a full member at the discounted rate for young people, the unemployed, pensioners and trade unionists.

slabfees

It’s notable, incidentally, that Dugdale’s claim in the interview of a £1 rate for students appears to be another lie. The student rate is three times that according to Scottish Labour’s own website.

(Nor can we find much in the way of evidence for her assertion that other parties have £1 membership – the SNP’s cheapest option is £5 for the unemployed (£12 for working members), the Scottish Lib Dems’ minimum is £6 (students/unemployed) with an eye-watering £75 as the “recommended” sum, and the Scottish Tories have no fixed minimum but ask for £20, and the Greens’ concession rate is £5.)

We were trying to find out how many “registered supporters” had signed up in Scotland for the 2016 leadership election when we stumbled across something interesting.

In September 2015, right after the first Corbyn leadership election, Dugdale gave an interview to the Scotsman in which she claimed, in a helpfully detailed manner, that the party’s total all-categories membership was almost 30,000.

slabreg

Popular activist and BBC pundit Duncan Hothersall reiterated the same figures early in 2016 on the party-approved Labour Hame blog.

duncmembs

And that tells us a whole lot of stuff.

Firstly, it suggests that if Dugdale is now saying 20,000 is the total figure for all kinds of full/affiliated membership, then Scottish Labour has LOST a third of its members in 13 months, rather than being at the highest level since 1997 as she claimed.

Secondly, it suggests that if the June 2016 numbers for registered supporters were anywhere in the same ballpark as the September 2015 ones, then the income from those alone would have been 3,285 x £25 = £82,125.

(That would be a very conservative estimate, as around 140,000 people in the whole UK successfully signed up as registered Labour supporters for the 2016 leadership vote, and a pro-rata Scottish share of that would be just under 12,000. But we know it has to be under 5,000 or they’d have paid more money by themselves than Scottish Labour have declared as total membership income for the entire year.)

Given that we know total membership income for the year was £120,000 that would leave just £38,000 in fees from the other 17,000-odd members Scottish Labour claim to have – an average of just £2.24 per member, less than even the £3 student rate.

Alternatively, if we were to theorise for the sake of argument that all of the proper full party members were paying the discounted £24 rate then that total remaining income of £38,000 would equate to just 1,583 members.

Or if half were on the £3 student rate and the other half were on the £24 discount rate, that would give Scottish Labour a total of 2,815 members.

If you take an average, assuming an equal three-way split between £48 full members, £24 discount members and £3 student/armed forces members, that comes out almost the same as everyone being on the half-price rate – exactly £25, or 1,520 members.

If you divide the 17,000 pro-rata according to Dugdale’s 2015 figures – which if true suggest 2.4 full members to every trade union member – that would give you 5000 union members at £24 and 12,000 full members at £48. Those figures ought to deliver £696,000 in membership income rather than £38,000 or even £120,000.

What all this tells us is that however you slice it there’s basically no plausible way of squaring Scottish Labour’s claim to have 21,000 “members” with its own declared revenue from that membership. The numbers can only be made to add up if at least 87% of its membership are students and soldiers paying £3 a year and everyone else is on the half-price discount rate, with not a single full-price member.

87% at £3 rate = 18,270 members = £54,810
15% at £24 rate = 2,730 members = £65,520

Total = £120,330

That calculation assumes NO registered supporters at £25. If there were even 3,000 of them in 2016 in among that 21,000 – and if so the figures would be dishonest anyway, since those people are in no conceivable sense “members” now – then it’s literally impossible to make the figures add up, because even every single remaining member being a student would produce more money than the party has actually declared as its membership income.

We’re grateful that Gary Robertson raised the issue on the radio this morning. But the mystery of Scottish Labour’s membership remains an unsolved and deeply suspect one. We can say with pretty much total certainty that the party is lying about either its membership or its income (or both). The only real question is which.

Print Friendly

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 24 02 17 13:56

    More questions than answers | speymouth

129 to “More questions than answers”

  1. Richardinho says:

    It feels like this is a case for Ockham’s razor: the conclusion is that Labour doesn’t have as many members as it claims. 120,000 / 48 is 2500 members by my reckoning.

  2. Bob MACK says:

    Reminds me of the Groucho Marx quote.

    “Please accept my resignation. I could not belong to any club that would have me as a member”

    Comedy gold—— like Labour.

  3. Jim Thomson says:

    And they cannae even spell BlAME.

  4. Sinky says:

    The Labour in Scotland branch office should not be allowed to call themselves Scottish Labour as they are the main subsidy junkies north of the border.

    It was an absolute car crash of an interview for Kezia who is clearly out of her depth when she doesn’t have a script to read or remember.

    However Labour weren’t sufficiently challenged on their half baked federal New Union Act as Labour MPs including Morningside’s red Tory voted against devolving numerous taxes and powers to Holyrood during the Scotland Bill.

    In fact I think they just abstained or voted for the Tory devolution proposals in House of Commmons.

  5. Jim Thomson says:

    or “BLAME” in all caps.

  6. fillofficer says:

    gonnae no…if you get her sacked, i’ll no be happy

  7. Thepnr says:

    We can say with pretty much total certainty that the party is lying about either its membership or its income (or both). The only real question is which.

    Who cares which. Lying is lying and it’s what Slabber does best.

  8. Hoss Mackintosh says:

    Pretty complicated Rev Stu.

    You can understand how poor Kezia gets so confused about how many members the Labour “twig office” now has in Scotland.

  9. Proud Cybernat says:

    The figures were worked out using JabaCalc II.

    Sorry, no image. Don’t want to frighten the weans.

  10. Paul says:

    The only reasonable explanation for the figures is that Labour in Scotland have 3000 members paying the £24/year reduced rate and the other 17,000 are “Members of British Armed Forces” paying £3/year.

  11. Robert Graham says:

    maybe someone will lead this poor demented soul out of the fog she is obviously trapped in ,then again perhaps its kinder just let her drift and go on her merry way, no one seems to be paying much attention anyway .

  12. Arbroath1320 says:

    As we all know Mr. Dundee United loves to attend all these party conferences across Scotland. I wonder if in his enthusiasm he would find a way to ask the poor hapless wee branch manager to explain what the actual number of Labour party members in Scotland actually are. In order that he does NOT appear to be regurgitating Gary Robertson’s attempts he could use the information provided by Stu here.

    I am sure that Mr. Dundee Utd can figure out that Labour have nowhere near 20,000 members as can we all. All we really need is for wee Kez to get the hint that this particular question is not going away and that at some point she WILL have to come clean.

    The longer she fails to supply a reasonable answer the more stupid she appears and more desperate Labour appear to be.

    Everyone knows Labour are dead or on the verge of death, everyone except that is Labour itself! 😀

  13. Dan Huil says:

    More proof that the tories are now the main enemy of Scotland – after the bbc of course.

  14. Bob MACK says:

    @Paul,

    Does Scotland have 17,000 citizens in the armed forces ? Army is only 80,000 strong

  15. sydthesnake says:

    Different day SAME OLD LABOUR LIES, for Independence to succeed the next time around it would be of great benefit for us if Kez to still be stumbling around in dark leading these Unionist losers.

    Syd

  16. Jacob1972 says:

    An interesting analysis, either the members are missing or the money is missing. While I respect your analysis, I have a different take on it.

    I tend to believe Kezia Dugdale on the numbers, give or take 10%.

    Recall that Scottish Labour is not an autonomous party but an accounting unit of the UK labour party.

    When you ‘join’ the Scottish Labour party you are in fact joining the UK Labour party, Scottish Branch. I believe that this money, is in fact paid into a bank account controlled by UK Labour and not the Scottish Branch. The UK Labour party finance department then makes an evaluation of how much the Scottish Labour branch should spend on activities. This money is then released to Scottish Labour as a Block Grant which is then shown in their accounting records as ‘income’.

    If this ‘income’ is less than the expenditure of the Scottish Labour Branch Office, then the appearance is created that it is running a deficit. This is consistent with what the figures released this last couple of weeks show.

    This then creates the belief within Scottish Labour that their own Scottish Branch is unable to be self-sufficient and that it (& by extension Scotland) are entirely dependent upon the UK central funds. This creates a bit of fear within the party that they couldn’t be autonomous and always require the help of the wider UK party.

    The reality is that the ‘deficit’ is created because of where the power lies, with the UK party.

    This situation is similar to the funding arrangements for the BBC and BBC Scotland – the money is paid centrally and then those persons who control the centre get to issue a block grant to the regions and nations.

    The parallels between Scottish Labour and BBC Scotland with the payment of taxes from the Scottish economy direct to the UK Treasury and the receipt by Holyrood of a Block Grant from Westminster are obvious.

    My final observation is that this is what is fundamentally wrong with Union and governance generally within the UK. All finance, and hence power, is controlled centrally. A federal arrangement would require that the taxes were collected at a lower level and paid upwards.

  17. galamcennalath says:

    Maybe it’s like the mafia – you can’t resign, you’re in for life. So when people stop paying their membership fee, Labour continue to count them as members, forever.

  18. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “120,000 / 48 is 2500 members by my reckoning.”

    It seems reasonable to allow that a pretty large proportion are either trade unionists/retired/unemployed on £24 or students on £3.

    If we split it equally between those two categories and assume NO full-price members or registered supporters at all, we get what’s surely an absolute best-possible-scenario figure of 8,888.

    But realistically it’s way lower than that, because there are at least SOME registered supporters and full-pricers.

  19. Paul says:

    @Bob MACK

    According to Jackie Baillie all 17,000 are based at Faslane and would be jobless if we got rid of the nukes!

  20. Jacob1972 says:

    An additional point. Someone, whether a journalist or an enquiring member of the Labour Party (Scottish Branch) should ask Kezia Dugdale whether every penny raised from the Scottish membership goes first to the accounts of the Scottish branch before it is sent to London, and who controls those accounts.

  21. Kevin says:

    When is this person going to stop lying to the ‘ordinary’ Scots she professes to represent? Honestly.

    If she can lie so readily (let’s be frank about this, she’s a lousy and unconvincing liar), then who would put these people in-charge of ballot boxes and voting processes? State-abetted charlatans. Get them out!

  22. Mike says:

    Again I can only imagine how voraciously the UK media would be on this case had it been the SNP.
    Every single political punter in the country would be queuing up to hassle and cajole any SNP official for an answer for weeks even months.
    Once again the media will allow another Labour scandal to go unreported uninvestigated and unexposed.
    Kind of getting really tired of the level of media corruption in this rogue State.

  23. HandandShrimp says:

    I would not have Kezia’s job at all at all. The reason she has to waffle so much is because there simply isn’t any good news in relation to anything that connects to Labour.

    I anticipate much posturing over the weekend, Kezia safe in the knowledge that there is zero chance of the electorate putting them in a position to deliver any of it.

  24. Truth says:

    Are there any tax implications for the party around this?

    Presumably political parties enjoy tax advantages, but that is surely on the basis that they report true and fair accounts.

    Perhaps a heads up to hmrc is the only sure way to get to they bottom of the situation.

    There’s more than adequate evidence to raise suspicion.

  25. Bob MACK says:

    @Paul,

    Just checked the MOD figures. There are exactly 17,000 military personnel stationed in Scotland, predicted to drop to just around 10,000 next year. This could mean that every member of the armed forces stationed here signed up to become a Labour member. Weird.

  26. Vronsky says:

    I can’t remember – was it the election of Kez? – when Labour wouldn’t release the voting numbers but are so fucking stupid that they released the percentages to 2 decimal places, making it possible to construct integer possibilities for their membership. Which I did, and posted here, but have lost. Anyone got those two-decimal place numbers and I’ll do it again?

  27. Sinky says:

    On the fact that Scottish Labour is subsedised from outside Scotland raises serious questions about the funding of a second referendum campaign which I maintain should only be funded by people who are registed to vote in Scotland.

    The revelation that a shadowy right wing unionist organisation channelled money through the DUP to spend on UK wide Brexit materials should raise alarm bells with all Scottish voters.

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/prounion-constitutional-research-council-named-as-dups-brexit-campaign-backer-35478882.html

  28. Tam Jardine says:

    So if slab income is £120,479 for the same year UK labour income from membership and affiliates was £9.53m then the branch office accounts for about 1.2% of the total.

    Representing about 8% of the population this screams out that membership, income, whatever is tremendously weaker in Scotland than elsewhere.

    Hardly surprising and in line with the party’s long, slow death rattle north of the border.

    Kezia’s talk of lottery winners belies the fact that the SNP is funded vastly more by its membership than any other major political party in the UK. Will find the stats from the commons library and post. So what she is saying is indeed the opposite of the reality.

  29. galamcennalath says:

    Obsessing on this apparently huge discrepancy between members and money might seem like nitpicking but it definitely isn’t.

    It’s a very important issue because it highlights exactly what is wrong with Labour in Scotland, and has been for a long time. This is a perfect metaphor for what they are,

    They say one thing, but the reality is different. They lie habitually. They reinvent history. They say what they think needs said regardless of validity. If the truth is embarrassing they ignore it, worse, they cover it up. They have no principles, only expediency. Their voters are at the bottom of their priority list.

    They only continue to survive because of friendly media.

    By hounding them on this discrepancy between members and income, we can bring more people’s attention to the way they behave in general.

  30. Capella says:

    @ Jacob1972 – good points. Labour clearly has very few members in Scotland. James Mackenzie ofthe betternation blog in 2014 estimated c 7,000 based on voting records from the Scottish branches during the Scottish leadership elections.

    So they are financed by London to act as agents in Scotland.

    I had a look at the BBC live Perth conference and it was dismal. Bored, unhappy scattering of attendees, a top table that resembled the cast of the Adams family, and a youth at the podium complaining about the right wing, populist, reactionary, SNP, Tory Party. Had to switch off after a minute.

  31. Bob MACK says:

    Did you know that Queens regulations compels senior officers to ensure that members of the military and their families get registered to vote. It is not a choice.

    They can be members of political parties but not activists.

  32. call me dave says:

    @galamcennalath

    Aye that’s it, something like Hotel California…

    “You can check out any time you like
    But you can never leave”!

    Actually went into Lidl shop a wee while ago and got some popcorn for the afternoon session of the conference. 🙂

    Looking forward to Big Brian asking that question again about membership.

  33. galamcennalath says:

    Sinky says:

    I maintain should only be funded by people who are registed to vote in Scotland.

    Morally, you are correct, of course. The debate, campaigns, and decision should be Scotland’s alone.

    However they would cheat and “shadowy right wing unionist organisations” would simply pay the money via someone in Scotland.

    What would be best is for us to attempt ferret out where money comes from before the vote and make the most of the fact that Scottish democracy is being undermined by dark forces outside Scotland.

    They got caught meddling in Northern Irish affairs. The reality might well be that they go to lengths to hide the external source of Yoon funding in Scotland anyway.

  34. Tam Jardine says:

    galamcennalath

    Agree 100%. They lie habitually. Kez’s reliance on the lottery winner/stagecoach line is a good example.

    The commons library gives stats on parties’ membership fees as a percentage of overall income:

    “In 2015 income from membership fees comprise 46% of the SNP’s income, 35% of the Green Party’s (England and Wales), 21% of Plaid Cymru’s, 19% of Labour’s, 18% of UKIP’s, 11% of the Liberal Democrat’s and 2% of the Conservative’s”

    That doesn’t suit her agenda – she wants to tell people that labour are the peoples party and the SNP are all about big donors with the implication that it is a few big donors who influence policy rather than the membership. It is an insult to each and every member of the SNP like myself who donate money to support our party because we believe in its values and purpose.

    The truth is that the SNP is the party of the people in Scotland by any conceivable measurement. If that is a sair yin for Kez then sobeit.

    http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05125

    (I have no reason to believe the Commons Library would falsify or distort these figures – they are unlikely to paint a rosier picture of the SNP income than is the case.)

  35. Frances says:

    Jamie Glackin over on LabourHame has an article re SLAB voting against triggering Article 50 in the Scottish Parliament. His article is interesting. However he ends:

    And that’s why Kezia Dugdale and Scottish Labour were right to oppose the triggering of article 50 yesterday.

    Firstly, because she was standing up for the Labour values that made us all join the Labour Party in the first place. Secondly, because in the Scottish Parliament, MSPs are supposed to be on the side of their electorate. And thirdly, if we had opposed it, or worse abstained, our potential voter pool in the future would have been even more precipitously tiny than it is just now.

  36. MrsF says:

    How many members do the Scottish Green Party have? Is it not above 20,000?

    FWIW I think Jacob1972 is spot on with his analysis…. that’s how Labour roll.

  37. Footsoldier says:

    All this talk about a new Act of Union is quite wrong it was a Treaty of Union in 1707 and treaties can be broken just like EU and UK. Would someone please tell this to Labour as I am not on Facebook.

    An Act could only be enacted by the Westminster parliament whereas a treaty can be ended by one of the signatories withdrawing. I don’t know why we do not hear more of this, it is the obvious way out of UK should the people vote for it.

  38. Proud Cybernat says:

    Jaba by numbers…

    http://imgur.com/a/khkB6

    (Note: Parental guidance advised)

  39. Semus says:

    I had a conversation with Jimmi Reid on the M.V.Saturn for Rothesay. Jimmi told me I was still a member of the Labour Party(which I had left after my 1st sighting of Tony Blair…long time ago) he said it keeps their numbers up,don’t be worried, according to them I(Jimmi) am still a member, and it is a sign of immortality, in fact our Grannies will still be in the Labour Party and will be voting for them in all future elections by corrupt Postal votes, even when they are 250 years old, as will we.

  40. Thepnr says:

    Lying continually to the Scottish electorate is what have brought SLab from a core support in excess of 40% in Scotland to 14% now.

    Yet they continue to lie day after day, you would think that someone would call a halt, say enough is enough and set them on a different path.

    Nope, they are now truly lost and cannot help themselves. Beyond redemption. That remaining 14% won’t be there for long either if what I listened to on radio shortbread this morning is anything to go by. Other than 1 person who I think was English and supported Corbyn the rest were Blairites through and through and came across sounding exactly like a good Red Tory would.

    I expect what’s remaining of Labour membership will jump ship in the not too distant future with most of what’s left joining the real Tory party where they truly belong anyway.

    The loss of Slab will be no great loss to Scotland. Good riddance and don’t let the door hit your arse on the way out.

  41. Proud Cybernat says:

    @ Vronsky

    This is what you wrote previously on this:

    “Based on those figures, the most likely membership is precisely 5,000 voting 3021, 1634 and 345. However any integer multiple of 5000 will also give a mathematically feasible result, so for example 10k, 15k, 20k are all possible. 5k is the number supported by other arguments.”

    From here: http://wingsoverscotland.com/inching-towards-the-truth/

    4:39pm

  42. orri says:

    There’s a single Treaty of Union signed by both parties. However there are two Acts of Union independently enacted by the previous English and Scottish Parliaments.

    Not entirely as confusing as some might make out. We have something similar in the EU. There the treaty expects members to enact a version of some laws in to fulfil its directives. But we don’t actually need a specific law to enforce the majority of our membership commitments.

    Often the Acts of union are quoted as not sounding like a treat so as to somehow invalidate or obfusticate the actual treaty. Replacing or amending the Acts of union doesn’t actually breach the Treaty of Union as long as the provisions of the Treaty aren’t broken.

  43. orri says:

    Given the branch status of Labour in Scotland there’s the remote possibility that the reported membership income is actually a fraction of the total raised in Scotland and they’re being severely short changed. All the cash going into central coffers then being doled out in a manner decided by high command might explain a lot.

  44. Doug Daniel says:

    I would have no trouble believing that the vast majority of Scottish Labour’s members are students, to be honest. Their activist base does seem to be overly reliant on little wannabe politicians.

  45. Dave Hansell says:

    As with everything else with the managerialist twelve year old ‘s, who have dominated the Labour Party since Saint Tony and his coterie of infiltrators were parachuted in by their CIA handlers, it will probably depend on some esoteric definition of “membership” which no sane and rational individual would ever conceive of.

    Perhaps the discrepancy with the subscription totals could be explained by counting as members all those who have been expelled during the past year or more in the Stalinist Witch Hunt conducted by Ian McNicol and his rag tag school playground level NEC sub committee which is continuing apace to this day?

    Given this continuing trawling of media trying to find ways of getting rid of those troublesome citizens who want to be genuinely engaged members and get off their backsides and do something useful, rather than belonging to some puerile top down cult who prefer to see the whole organisation fail rather than share or cede their eotistical control, perhaps it would be better to rephrase the question to them.

    Something along the lines of ‘how many members acceptable to the Triad of Blair, Mendeleson and Campbell does the Party have?’ Or maybe try cross referencing and matching up the membership list of the self aggrandising titled ‘Progress’ (sic) faction of careerist has beens and chancers?

  46. Jimbo says:

    Maybe it’s just simply a case of fraud

  47. Patrick Roden says:

    Maybe we are looking at the membership numbers/fees from the wrong angle.

    Is it possible the Labour are covering up something more dishonest than their embarrassing membership numbers?

    We’ve all saw how easily the ‘right honourable members’ of the Labour Party, have the nasty habit of ‘making the honest mistake’ of ‘loosing money’ (cough cough) so can it be that it’s not just Labour in Glasgow that needs investigated for ‘massive fraud’?

    Hmmm, this story may start growing arms and legs if labour don’t come clean, that’s if they can come clean!

  48. Macart says:

    Just incredible.

    Its not as if the world will come to an end if you say we have X amount of members right up front.

    It shouldn’t even matter what that number is. The problem they have, as with everything else, is honesty and transparency. They are terrified of looking weak, of being seen to lose popular opinion and the popular vote.

    In case any policy wonk is reading these threads? Have you looked out the window in the past decade? At all? Do you actually listen to the absolute state of your leadership, to what they say, or witnessing what they’ve been doing to people?

    FFS!

    Your numbers don’t matter. Labour could have the largest membership anywhere, but when you’re doing wrong, then you are doing wrong.

    And the ordinary voting public, however patient and trusting, over however long, WILL eventually and inevitably have their say about that.

  49. galamcennalath says:

    Semus says:

    … he said it keeps their numbers up ….

    @12:33 I suggested that they retain members for life. To be honest I was half joking, but it was an explanation.

    Your conversation with the Jimmy Reid implies it wasn’t such a far fetched idea after all!

  50. call me dave says:

    Conference link for the 14:45hrs afternoon session.

    From previous thread as I can’t find it on BBC Scotland website anymore probably is there but sort of tucked away somewhere.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39064704

    PS:

    Looks like there will be a shortage of ‘Oh look a squirrel’ stories soon if your a grey but red squirrels still OK.

    https://archive.is/Kby3U

  51. galamcennalath says:

    Eilidh Whiteford’s bill, Preventing & Combating Violence Against Women & Domestic Violence Bill , has passed. First SNP private members bill ever to pass, I believe!

  52. BBC Scotland Tells Lies says:

    Surely a curious member of Scottish Labour can demand to see the true membership books.

    If their is corruption at the top of the Scottish Labour Party then it wouldn’t be out of line with the rest of the Party, from their Councillors to dodgy Shop Stewards.

    And who paid for Kezia’s juants to the USA to man the phones for Hilary???

  53. Clapper57 says:

    galamcennalath says:
    24 February, 2017 at 2:03 pm

    “Eilidh Whiteford’s bill, Preventing & Combating Violence Against Women & Domestic Violence Bill , has passed. First SNP private members bill ever to pass, I believe”!

    Yes galamcennalath , and Fillup Rabies was the 1 against…surprised I am not.

  54. Liz g says:

    Orri @ 1.39
    I think that’s why Kez and the rest keep sayin “a new Act of Union”,they never, as far as I can see, mention a new TREATY of the Union.
    They try to make out that it’s the Acts of the Union that need “fixed” while knowing fine well the referendum is about keeping the Treaty or not!

    They try and avoid mentioning that there is a TREATY at all.
    We should take them at their word when those who know better deliberately try to confuse the Two.

    We should be asking who would sign for England this time?

    Scotland has reconvened her Parliament,but England fired theirs a wee while back.

    But mainly whom ever signed the new Treaty would have to have authority over Westminster to do so …… Which would mess up the Soverenty thing for them just a tad!!

    Each and every time they try to imply that an Act of Parliament is the subject, when it’s a TREATY that’s being debated they should be asked about the authority to change/replace this particular Treaty(That Westminster can change an act or any other Treaty after 1707 is not in dispute )before they get to their federal pish, because it’s the Treaty conversation they don’t want to ever have.

  55. Thepnr says:

    I think we can all agree that there are a few thousand Labour party members in Scotland including all their Councillors, MSP’s and 1 MP.

    All of whom appear to be cowards as they are too scared to speak up and tell the truth as to why Slabber are in the state the’re in. A seemingly endless downward spiral that can only end with a big splat when they hit the ground.

    There can be no big comeback now, the splat is inevitable. All remaining Labour supporters are welcome to come join the Yes side and have a chance once more of reviving your party.

    There’s no point trying to breathe life into a corpse.

  56. Jack Murphy says:

    OT.
    Regarding the shiny new BBC evening Telly Channel Scotland has been promised by Lord Hall.
    This is what his Lordship said in 2012 when appointed to his current post as 16th Director-General of the BBC:-

    “I care passionately about the BBC…it’s one of those extraordinary organisations which is an absolutely essential part of Britain, of the UK, of who we are.”

    Direct quote from The Telegraph.

    The message is loud and clear from his Lordship. 🙁

  57. desimond says:

    Woke up this morning to The Herald having story of Labour drafting in a 6 Council Election Lieutenants ( young dreamers in shiny vests on £20k apparently) as they are “up for the fight!” ( their words and go for a “final push” ( my words) to retain Glasgow City Council.

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15114380.Labour_hires___20_000_campaign_lieutenants_as_Glasgow__fightback__begins/

    Good to know that tax payer subsidy is going to something worthwhile then

  58. heedtracker says:

    Graun hucksters say,

    Scottish politics

    Labour expected to look at constitutional reforms including federal UK
    Scottish Labour sources confident Jeremy Corbyn will set up convention to study options such as abolishing House of Lords”

    Expected to look, is really sneaky, even for a sneak like Sevvy. There is a way of abolishing the House of Lords in Scotland too.

    Wonder what that could be:D

  59. Roger Hyam says:

    Scottish Labour party membership numbers have given me so much pleasure over the last couple of years. Before 2014 I’d never have predicted that this would have been a legitimate source of entertainment. I’ve even exchange emails with my MP (Ian Murray) on the subject and apparently he doesn’t know how many people are in Scottish Labour – I think that is called plausible deniability. What fun!

  60. heedtracker says:

    Graun’s vote SLab UKOK double whammy,

    Sucker punch,

    “Scottish Labour believes federalism will offer a potentially attractive middle way for Scottish voters who repeatedly support increased autonomy for the devolved parliament in Edinburgh. With support for independence at about 45%, Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish National party leader and first minister, is close to calling a second independence referendum in a final effort to keep the country in the EU.”

    Blammoh!

    “After the collapse in North Sea oil revenues, Scotland faces an immediate £15bn black hole in its public spending plans, significantly higher than the long-term £11bn estimated cost to the economy of leaving the EU.

    The union “allows for the redistribution of financial resources across the UK”, Murray said. “Dismantling this redistributive system would be financial[ly] disastrous for Scotland.”

    Easy as that. Worked 2014 at least.

  61. DW says:

    Using the 2015 membership fees:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20150906232326/https://join.labour.org.uk/

    Trying to get approx 18000 members to add up to £120,479
    My guess is:
    1300 members at £46.56 a year
    1300 members at £23.52 a year
    1300 members at £12.00 a year
    13775 members at £1.00 a year

  62. Jeff Todd says:

    The evasiveness of Ms Dugdale is not surprising.Labour has always been secretive about it’s funding.

    Whether it is cash for honours, MPs expenses, donations to local parties (Charlie Gordon), appeals for Scottish leadership elections (Charlie again), awarding of council contracts et al. They can’t help getting into a mess chasing money.

    As for the SNP, having spent many an hour manning jumble sales, running fundraising events, buying raffle tickets and the rest, I am proud to be a member of a members’ party.

    The Weir’s were supporters before their win, why wouldn’t they be now?

  63. Bob MACK says:

    We promise the biggest federalism in the world. Well at least till Parliament rips it apart like Smith.

    We mean it.

  64. Robert Graham says:

    Oh f/fk it’s comedy hour with Labour in Scotland, a whole parallel universe all complaining about stuff Labour has done and blaming the SNP , now some clown says shouldn’t we be proud of supporting the Union oh f/k this is tragic. Now it’s Alex the ex brickiie complaining about the Tory welfare reform that their MPs voted with the Tories to implement, oh I can’t watch anymore.

  65. heedtracker says:

    Awe. Graun at devo-max maxness again.

    “He told the conference that if Sturgeon called another referendum, Labour could insist that it included a third option of federalism, which Sturgeon’s predecessor Alex Salmond had actively considered in the early stages of the 2014 campaign.

    Thomson said the dangers of England dominating a new federal system could be offset by introducing a strict rule that major changes in UK policy, such as on foreign affairs or the economy, could only go through if all four parts of the UK agreed.”

    Who he? Some guy.

    Graun more or less destroyed Dr Nuttall in Stoke and now they’re back to destroy Scottish democracy too. Such is the UK zone in the 21st C.

  66. Bob MACK says:

    You can put Federalism on the ballot sheet, but we now all know that it still has to be presented to Westminster ,who will shred it completely.

    Fool me once etc comes to mind.

  67. MJack says:

    I think Jacob1972 @ 12.32 might have hit the nail on the head. All money goes to central and then SLab get some back just like BBC License and Scottish taxes.

  68. Arbroath1320 says:

    Just had a wee peek at the Labour Conference. I’m thinking that the claim in today’s National that they expected 1,000 members to be at the conference was ever so slightly OVER exaggerated. 😀

    Claims that they really should have considered using the phone box outside the Conference hall are NOT wrong. They really could use the phone box and STILL have room for some of their Tory mates to join them. 😀

  69. galamcennalath says:

    Labour in Scotland appear to be going full pelt for federalism. Therein could lie dangers for Indyref2.

    Labour won’t work with the Tories but will have their own campaign. It will be centred around federalism. UK Labour of course aren’t up for it all but will keep quiet and allow their Scottish branch to run with it. The BBC will love it. Gullible soft NOs could fall for it.

    The idea of federalism must be hammered into the ground and lost forever asap.

  70. Robert Graham says:

    Oh I was supposed to get on with things and not watch the loony Labour, but I have just listened to a Labour Msp make a truly baffling speech on the European Union when he constantly contradicted what he said previously, surely some clown should have read it before he proceeded to make a total arse of himself, as for the rest of the speakers better together seems to be the buzz word, I would have thought that slogan might have been dropped after their disastrous links with the Tories during 2014, This lot appear to believe we all have collective memory loss, because what they say and what we have acutely witnessed them doing is totally different, it’s truly beyond belief.

  71. Chitterinlicht says:

    Just plain terrifying.

    You can now understand why they blocked as many devolved powers as possible. They would not have been able to do the math when it came to tax etc.

    Scottish labour really are beyond parody now. (As are Uk labour after last night)

    Well done Garry Robertson who in my opinion is always fair and consistent. Hope he claims your prize for calling them out on air.

  72. Dr Jim says:

    Given that Roofie will run a million miles away to avoid the better together job it looks like being the dream team of McTernan and Dugdale (with a Brown intervention of course)

    They’re just arrogantly stupid enough

  73. Bob MACK says:

    @Galemcennalath,

    They are hoping to split the yes vote. Should be straight choice.

  74. galamcennalath says:

    Another wee point about federalism … a federal setup within a mad bad right wing Brexit UK …. is still existence within the same mad bad right wing Brexit UK! No other UK is likely to come about for a very long time.

    A few years ago there was a valid argument that what was wrong with the UK was its constitutional arrangements. That is no longer true. What is now wrong, Is being part of the UK in any way or form.

  75. stu mac says:

    @sydthesnake
    ===========

    Everyone and their dog have known for the last year or so that KD only remains in place because no one else wants to be in charge when the 2017 local elections hit Labour. Once that’s over someone (Anwar?) will step forward, presenting themself as the saviour while Kezia whimpers, bleeding from various stabs in the back.

  76. Robert Peffers says:

    orri says: 24 February, 2017 at 1:34 pm:

    “There’s a single Treaty of Union signed by both parties. However there are two Acts of Union independently enacted by the previous English and Scottish Parliaments.”

    Indeed that is so but –

    The Westminster Establishment’s view on this as stated in the paper they commissioned during indyref1, and summed up so succinctly by The Secretary of State for Scotland, that, “The Treaty of Union extinguished the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as, ‘The United Kingdom”, indicates something entirely different.

    In the first place the Treaty says no such thing, no matter how you attempt to construe it.

    The Treaty quite clearly describes the United Kingdom as a bipartite union of equals. Not only that but it clearly states that the Parliaments of England and Scotland are to be ended and there is to be a new single parliament that includes both Kingdoms. There are no mentions of countries but there is of, “Dominions”, which I can only assume refers to Ireland & Wales as neither was required to sign the treaty as they were both parts of the Kingdom of England.

    Both acts of Union follow almost exactly the wording of the Treaty. So the Treaty is stating that BOTH parliaments end and a totally new Union Parliament replaces both.

    Yet the claims now being made by Westminster, and conformed by the Supreme Court they instigated, are that Scotland’s parliament was subsumed by the Parliament of England that was then renamed The Parliament of the United Kingdom.

    The closest actual reality to that set-up is that the New Parliament of the bipartite United Kingdom sat in what had been the same building as the defunct and wound up Parliament of England. Yet that was to change as that old building burned to the ground and the present building was purpose built with funds from the entire United Kingdom.

    There is, though, a strange anomaly in that while the old Parliament of England sat and legally wound itself up before the Union that of Scotland never sat to wind itself up as the Members were hiding to prevent themselves being lynched. The fact the parliamentary session had ended was proclaimed around the streets of the Capital by Town Criers and that is not a legal way to end a parliamentary session.

    When the Holyrood Parliament was first opened Winnie Ewing DID NOT open a new parliament she very pointedly declared the old Scottish Parliament reconvened. This has never been legally challenged.

    There really is not a single documented bit of evidence that backs up the Westminster or Supreme court’s claims of sovereignty over Scotland nor is there anything that legally backs up the setup of a devolved UK with NO Parliament of England.

    I.e. Westminster is the de facto Parliament of England and is thus devolving powers of the sovereignty of the country of England to Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland.

    BTW: The notion that the UK Parliament set-up or even recognised the Republic of Ireland is also false. In fact they ruled that the citizens of the Republic were still UK Citizens and the rules of parliament still say that a citizen of Ireland can stand and be elected to the House of Commons.

    The Republic was formed when the dominion of the United Kingdom that was created and named, “The Irish Free State”, declare itself an independent republic. All the, (mis-named), “Treaty of Union”, (sic),of 1800/1 is, was an ACT of the United Kingdom Parliament and the two sides that were being united were both still parts of the United Kingdom.

    The fact is that the actual events do not fit the claimed history of the events.

  77. Muscleguy says:

    How about we ask Kezia what proportion of the membership folk in the conference hall comprise. How many members are at home watching online or ignoring the whole thing. OR as I suspect Conference consists of the entire membership.

    I’ve given highly abstruse and non earth shattering scientific talks to more people than are at that conference, and so has my youngest daughter.

  78. gus1940 says:

    Surely there must be a legal requirement that the accounts of both UK Labour and their Scottish Branch are professionally audited and the auditors’ report together with the full accounts published.

    If that is the case surely the full accounts would have to show the source of and breakdown of all funds received including members’ subscriptions which would surely reveal the truth regarding the number of members.

    If that were not the case how would they know if somebody was not embezzling their funds.

  79. Arbroath1320 says:

    I’m sorry to be the one to burst that particular bubble Stu Mac, the one about Anas replacing oor wee Kez, but I think you’ll find oor “glorious” Labour branch manager is sticking around for around 10 years! 😀

    http://archive.is/aUYuL

  80. gus1940 says:

    I look forward to seeing an article from Rev Stu regarding the new Scottish TV Channel.

    When it appears I have no doubt that there will be a large number of comments.

    I have a few comments I would like to make together with suggestions of possible ways of filling up 5 hours a night within the ludicrously small budget but would prefer to make said comments on an article dedicated to this subject.

    In the meantime perhaps other Wingers could start thinking of possible program content.

  81. Robert Peffers says:

    @Jimbo says: 24 February, 2017 at 1:43 pm:

    “Maybe it’s just simply a case of fraud.”

    Well, Jimbo, someone had to say it for it is, probably, what everyone was thinking anyway.

  82. Proud Cybernat says:

    But, but, don’t we have federalism already as part of the 2014 settled will of the Scottish people? Broon promised.

    And, eh, will England vote for federalism just to pacify the natives of Jockistan? Ever?

  83. galamcennalath says:

    Proud Cybernat says:

    And, eh, will England vote for federalism just to pacify the natives of Jockistan? Ever?

    Never. Absolutely not. A snowball in Hell. Etc etc

    And that is what is so utterly deceitful about Labour (Scotland branch) pretending they can put it on the table.

    That won’t stop the charade.

  84. Snode1965 says:

    Didn’t we gain federalism via Smith / Vow / Better Together?
    ” As close to Federalism as is *possible* within the UK”?

  85. starlaw says:

    Just watched a bit from Slabs conference.
    The audience look like a bunch of professional mourners. Perhaps they are all wondering why they are wasting the day here. Applause for speakers is a bit sporadic, perhaps they need some signalling device.
    Those STOP .. GO boards used by the highways department would help .. Just saying !

  86. BBC Scotland Tells Lies says:

    Is Federalism different from Devolution???

    What difference will it make to Scotland???

    Is Federalism not just powers devolved to a certain Nation/Region???

    And how can we increase the powers that we already have, Brown, Cameron and all the rest of them told us we have the most powerful Devolved Parliament in the whole Universe.

  87. Glamaig says:

    oh god not this federalism pish again. Nobody in England wants it, therefore Scotland won’t get it. That sums up the Union in one sentence, and that’s your case for independence, right there.

  88. Mcdenster says:

    I don’t know what annoys me more – Deputy’s eyebrows or SLABBER fibs.

  89. call me dave says:

    Danny boy Johnston there says judge the SNP (Nicola) by the company she keeps… howling SNP bad but labour and their ilk all good and Oh!…Tories bad too.

    Tories and nationalist all the same …but labour, together were
    stronger!

    What a plonker!

    FGS! Here’s Jackie B.

    She’s giving a list of what they won’t tolerate… pity they are in third place going downwards so we’ll never know.

    All we can do is judge them on their record for over 50 years.

    Oh and SNP very, very bad!

    Poor attendance, and the fire in their bellies gone oot! 🙁

  90. orri says:

    @RP,

    It’s often quoted but the actual report says nothing of the sort. Or more accurately is mentions it as a scenario only to dismiss it as irrelevant to the position of a newly independent Scotland in the world. In other words the report dismisses any and all relevance to whether the UK is simply England writ large or not. If I remember correctly the extract was put to Mundel on live TV and he was stupid enough to accept that as he governments official opinion without actually asking to see it in context. He’s a fool, you are, I hope, not.

  91. Les Wilson says:

    You know Slab’s record in Scotland is soo dismal, Glasgow Council was and is corrupt, has been for many years.
    So many dirty deals done, high paid jobs for cronies, shady deals with contractors, the shame of PFI and more.
    so much they didn’t do for the people or the City. Poverty abounds, this is no new things it goes back to since labour took over 70 years ago.

    So why do we not hear more about their past dealings, again goes back to the media.
    However we should be doing all we can across social media to bring Slab’s record into public awareness.They are shit, and always have been shit, will continue to be shit.

    In cahoots with the BBC (maybe a wee bit less now that the Tories hold the purse strings) but it existed with the state broadcaster as mantra.

  92. BBC Scotland Tells Lies says:

    A Labour supporter on GMS this morning asked if Kezia would take voice coaching lessons, because she talks at 100 MPH.

    He is spot on. She does rattle out the sentences at so some speed.

  93. ronnie anderson says:

    @ Gus 1940

    I wont be waiting on the Rev’s comments on the bbc’s new Scottish channel , he has enough work on his hands with out delving into hypotheticals .

    From the start £30 million costings & from those with media knowledge UNDERFUNDED, remember Power Devolved is Power Retained .

    Scottish controlled broadcaster is the only way forward & that would exclude the Bbc .

  94. call me dave says:

    It seems that Jackie Baillie’s economic plan for Scotland is to manufacture a bigger begging bowl for wee Scotland to stick in front of Westminster’s banquet table for a few dog biscuits.

    Praised all these Labour MSPs and MPs from Glasgow who promised us the ships in 2014… never blushed!

    She is a liar and a disgrace.

  95. Donald says:

    You know what…I now feel sorry for Kezia. You can hear in her voice, she doesn’t have the fight in her any more (if she ever had). It must totally dispiriting coming on the radio talking what you know is nonsense the day after your party got a massive kicking in England and you’re own 15% or something up here. She seems a decent enough person. I hope she gives it up and resigns before her health starts to suffer. Also, didn’t she used to be indy leaning in her youth – c’mon Kez do the right thing on both counts.

  96. The Rough Bounds says:

    I would be soooo embarrassed if I were her father.

  97. orri says:

    On another tack though.

    People mention a preponderance of OAPs coming to Scotland from the rUK who, at the moment, are assumed to be No voters. It’d be really interesting to find out just how much that influx is contributing to the perception of an independent Scotland being unable to balance it’s books without a corresponding influx of younger workers. Come Independence we surely won’t be expected to pay for future retirees from the rUK and will be in the same boat as Spain and other refuges for ex-Pats.

  98. Robert Peffers says:

    @gus1940 says: 24 February, 2017 at 3:41 pm:

    ” … together with suggestions of possible ways of filling up 5 hours a night within the ludicrously small … “.

    Like, perhaps the news where we are followed by a new popular Scottish Panel Game.

    This is to nail the feet of, alternately, a Rangers then a Celtic supporter to the stage and play Jimmy Shand Records to see who can last the longest without attempting to tap their feet.

    The prizes are to be season tickets for a seat in the stand. After all they won’t be great at standing on the terraces afterwards.

  99. Proud Cybernat says:

    Guy in the pub: “So what’s this federalism Kez is oan aboot?”

    PC: “It’s that thing Broon promised us during Indyref 1.”

    Guy in the pub: “And did they deliver it?”

    PC: “Naw.”

    Guy in the pub: “But Broon promised.”

    PC: “Aye – and there endeth the lesson in Unionist promises.”

    Guy in the pub: “Message received.”

  100. Meg merrilees says:

    Just a couple of thoughts…

    One possible explanation for the mismatch in Labour m/ship and funding is affiliated membership through Trades Unions.

    I was an affiliated member, through my Union, with a vote when Corbyn was first elected and by rights would still have been entitled on his most recent vote but have taken steps to ensure that I am definitely not even an affiliated member now.

    And when was their £1 m/ship scheme chucked out – would that impact on the most recent spread sheet?

  101. Sinky says:

    Tory Lord Advocate Lord Keen charged with fire arms offence.

    This is the person who used blunderbuss approach to cower the Scots Law Society over Brexit

    https://www.scottishlegal.com/2017/02/20/advocate-general-launches-attack-on-law-society-of-scotland-over-political-brexit-stance/#

    Leaked emails show that Richard Keen QC (pictured), a well-known Conservative, thought the Law Society’s briefing on leaving the EU was “political rather than legal”. Lord Keen of Elie is the chief legal adviser to the UK government on Scots law.

    A member of staff in Lord Keen’s office emailed the Law Society’s president, Eilidh Wiseman and director of law reform, Michael Clancy, saying: “Thank you for your email of 30 January in relation to the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill.

    Lord Keen has asked me to convey that he has noted the terms of the communication but did not regard the comments as balanced.”

  102. heedtracker says:

    Crash Gordo, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2026…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwfvL4jQVDA

    This is actually spectacular fraud really, not just from Crash either. Nice tv lady says, “your SLab income tax devo plan is much more cautious than the tories or the FibDems?”

    Not saying this a nice example of well rehearsed frauds, going about their UKOK propaganda business or anything but ofcourse it is. Its how seriously dirty it got 2014 and how its only going to be 100 x worse this time.

  103. Hamish100 says:

    Is there a “cadaver” branch?

    Just asking.

    I think Ms Dugdale is looking tired. She has tried her best but I think after the council elections she will stand down. The problem for labour is they are unionist. The hate the SNP with a passion. They hate the Tories less. The people of Scotland see this. The only way Labour will be resurrected is that it becomes a Scottish Party and also becomes a party that believes in social change.

  104. Les Wilson says:

    If anyone ever thinks federalism would work for us, forget it.
    There is no way at all Westminster would accept that situation, and even if it ever did, you can be absolutely sure it is for Westminster’s benefit no matter how it is worded.

    They cannot be trusted on anything, if we do not know by now…..

  105. Les Wilson says:

    Hamish100 says:

    Given their record, that will take about, oh, a hundred years.
    I would settle for that.

  106. heedtracker says:

    Graun, Rowena Mason Deputy political editor
    Friday 24 February 2017 14.16 GMT

    Conservatives
    Theresa May: Copeland victory shows Tories are governing for everyone
    PM visits scene of byelection win to hail ‘astounding result’ and signals intention to challenge Labour in its northern heartlands

    Guardian fake lefty twerps determined to destroy Scottish democracy but there are NO inverted commas in Rowena’s headline. Shock.

    TGIF

  107. jacksgordon says:

    Hi All,

    I attended FMQ yesterday and have to say that Scottish Labour were soo bad it was painful to watch!

    Kezia got up and screamed at Nicola about her time as health minister! demanding that she the FM sorts out the crisis in the NHS singlehandly of course, then screeched a bit more calling Mhari Black a poster girl? aye me neither.

    Anas Sarwar is an idiot who asked a daft question then sat and shouted whilst waving a bit of paper at Nicola. They were like monkeys in a cage and at one point the presiding officer had to tell them to show some respect some hope.

    The Tories well they were well the Tories although one of them got his arse handed to him by our wee nippy sweetie ouch! who of course took it all in her stride and showed them why she is the First Minister and not any of that bunch of no hopers.

    wee smiley thing

  108. Proud Cybernat says:

    Dear Theresa,

    I’ve thought of this new policy wheeze to help win IndyRef New. I call it FEDERALISM. Okay, I know Gordo promised it in the 2014 IndyRef in return for Scots voting NO but as you and I know, Gordo was never in any position to deliver on that promise anyway – not, of course, that any media or politician ever picked him up on that (mum’s the word – lol).

    Anyway Theresa – here’s my problem. Your party gubbed us yesterday in that by-election in Cumbria. We held that seat since the 1930s and you somehow managed to nick it from us. On that basis, it looks pretty certain that UK Labour are in for a severe doing by your lot in the 2020 General Election.

    So – here’s my problem. Neither Jeremy or myself have a snowflake’s chance in hell of being in power at Westminster this side of 2030 or even 2040. So to pull off my little federalism wheeze I need YOU to convince voters in England that federalism is a really cool idea; that it would be really great for them because it will help keep the Scots in our wonderful Union. Oh and try not to mention to English voters that it will mean England efefctively being split into tiny federal states and will no longer be one country.

    I am sure with your help and working together we can pull this off. Thanks Theresa. I owe you one.

    Lots of love,

    Kez.

    PS – SNP Bad.

  109. mike cassidy says:

    I said a while back that ‘federalism’ is the last refuge of the Scottish political scoundrel.

    Still true.

    Its independence or get fitted for the yoke around the neck.

  110. galamcennalath says:

    BBC Scotland Tells Lies says:

    Is Federalism different from Devolution???

    Yes, totally.

    From wiki …

    Federalism is the mixed or compound mode of government, combining a general government with regional governments in a single political system ….. defined as a form of government in which there is a division of powers between two levels of government of equal status.

    Federalism is distinguished from devolution within a unitary state, in which the regional level of government is subordinate to the general level”

    There is absolutely no chance tha England will switch to a form of government where Westminster hands over powers permanently to a lower level of government which is deemed to be of equal status. And I mean within England, never mind the other UK countries.

    I don’t know what Labour are wittering about, because it could NEVER happen. It is not in the nature of the London establishment to give away half their powers.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism

  111. Breeks says:

    gus1940 says:
    24 February, 2017 at 3:41 pm

    In the meantime perhaps other Wingers could start thinking of possible program content.”

    I hear good things about a series called Outlander…

  112. shiregirl says:

    Labour animal welfare society. Christians on the left, Chinese for labour.

    I love animals. Cats. I love cats. But not labour. I adore chinese (people, culture and food) but not labour. I tolerate christianity.

    Is this for real? I don’t mean to be harsh but I am peeing myself laughing here. Why have labour in with animals, chinese and christians? I’m confused but laughing.

  113. bugsbunny says:

    I know they say you should not speak ill of the dead. Watching Scotland today and the folks like Brian Wilson’s Eulogy to Tan Dalyell, whilst mouthing off the Scottish Parliament as irrelevant as far as poverty is concerned. Our poor and desperate must praise the Union and the Queen every day eh Brain boy. And he’d be the first to sing Soldier’s Song at the drop of a hat. Rank hypocrisy runs trough the stick of Labour Rock if you broke it in two. Scum.

  114. shiregirl says:

    The Rough Bounds says:
    24 February, 2017 at 4:22 pm
    I would be soooo embarrassed if I were her father.

    I have it on good authority from my two teenagers that Mr Dugdale is a sound guy and amazing teacher. Like any Dad, he loves his kids….warts and all 😀

    Mr Dugdale, if you are reading this, please come back to do some locum/missionary work to those you left before your travels. They miss you and your philatelic/way out there talk. You are missed.

  115. Lenny Hartley says:

    The Panelbase poll today looked as if it was a private Blis poll, one of the questions was “do you think that their should be an option for Federalism in any future Indy ref, a few questions about raising taxes to pay for Social care and whether the bus pass age should be raised and whether the over 75 tv licence and the bus pass should be means tested.

  116. Andy smith says:

    What I want to know is how kezia found out that I’d 3 numbers up in lottery last year !!

  117. Dan Huil says:

    The by-election results in England this morning are another sign that England is moving further to the right politically. Brexit negotiations will, with help from the rabid English nationalist media, see England reach new levels of xenophobic nationalism. Britnats in Scotland will endeavour to tie Scotland to England’s descent into the political mire.

    I am confident that most people in Scotland will recognize England’s descent and do everything in their power to save Scotland from a similar fate.

  118. bugsbunny says:

    Just reading about Brian Wilson after googling him. What a hypocrite and peice of two faced scum.

    “Mr Wilson said he was not from a Catholic background, but was a supporter of Republicanism over Monarchism, he believed in a United Ireland and his support for Celtic was in his DNA”.

    He said, “The reasons I know the words (of I.R.A. Rebel songs) is that I am a product of youthful conditioning , just as all of us are”. “We are brought up with traditions, values and our parents beliefs”.

    “Bigoted sectarian attitudes are buried deep in Scottish society”, he said.

    “This is a problem worthy of the Scottish Government attention”.

    UTTER SCUM. LABOUR SCUM.

  119. Patrick Roden says:

    Donald says:
    “You can hear in her voice, she doesn’t have the fight in her any more (if she ever had)”

    Funny you should say that Donald, as I noticed that Kez didn’t look ‘right’ at FMQs on Thursday, I couldn’t put my finger on it, but she looked like she was exhausted, even before she asked her questions and got her erse handed to her from Nicola.

  120. Iain More says:

    It was probably invented by those Labour Cooncils that find themselves suddenly awash with cash, so awash in fact they can freeze the Cooncil Tax.

  121. Iain More says:

    It was probably invented by those Labour Cooncils that find themselves suddenly awash with cash, so awash with it in fact they can freeze the Cooncil Tax.

  122. Thepnr says:

    @Patrick Roden

    I reckon Kezia is resolved to giving up the Labour leadership after the May council elections. Polling just 14% support must mean they will have their worst result in modern history.

    She knows she is going and probably wants to go anyway. Who else will take the job though?

    I’ve no idea but whoever does either changes completely their stance on Independence and SNP Bad or sees their support drop further and further until it reaches zero.

    There will be no change I’d guess, so the obvious result is that Labour die in Scotland. They know the reality too.

  123. bugsbunny says:

    Maybe they get their money from dodgy substance deals? Didn’t Gordon Matheson partake as well? I heard he was in the back of a car trying to swallow some COKE from a teenage boy? lol. As well as a liking for taking COKE, I hear he was partial to give teen boys BLOW as well.

  124. JLT says:

    Personally …I couldn’t give a monkey’s how many members Kezia claims to have, because at the end of the day, SLAB’s policies – against that of Jeremy’s Labour Party – and then against what England wants – shows exactly in, not only how out of touch and fragmented the Labour Party is, but also how delusional Kezia is.

    We have Kezia warbling on endlessly about a Federal Great Britain – a concept that is literally Scottish, and rolled out by SLAB whenever the natives start thinking about Home Rule. The only problem is, that SLAB and Labour only had to roll it out once a generation whenever the Scots began to question how they were treated by Westminster. Once Labour took power, Home Rule vanished into the ether. But even then, the Labour Party eventually dropped the home Rule idea altogether way back in the 20’s and 30’s of the 20th Century.

    So when Gordon Brown promised a Federal Britain on the eve of the 2014 Referendum, it was expected that it wouldn’t be required again until 2030 at least. So WHOOPS!!! …when half of Scotland just 2 years later want Home Rule again. Having reneged on the promise straight after the Referendum along with a Tory cherry top-up of the bitter desesert with the idea of EVEL …Scot’s don’t even want to hear the word ‘Federalism’ since it’s not only a broken promise, but also a fantasy.

    A fantasy because (a) Jeremy Corbyn couldn’t give a monkey’s for Federalism and (b) the Tories far, far even less so. In fact, the Tories will never ever endorse Federalism.

    And in there lies the problem for Kezia. If Jeremy doesn’t care one iota for it, then how the hell does she convince the whole of the nation of England which is not only very happy being top dog in the UK, but also very happy with right-wing politics emanating from the Tories and UKIP?

    The lassie’s heid is in bloody cloud-cuckoo-land where pastel winged little ponies fly around on sugar coated fluffy clouds. Federalism is a fantasy. It is an alternative reality in another dimension where the nations of the world get on harmoniously. Simply …it’s never going to happen!

    She’ll never sell it to the English, nor the entire Labour Party itself …let alone in Scotland where half the nation despises SLAB. The other half of Scotland is then broken in half again when we get Pensioners and groups like the OO who are happy with how the UK is run under the Tories, the Queen and the Union Jack. That leaves her with less than a quarter of the Scottish nation …and even then, even they don’t want to hear it. So why the hell is she still warbling away over this nonsense of Federalism?

    As said, she can claim as many supporters as she wants, but the problem for Kezia is, is that the vast majority of the Scottish nation doesn’t even remotely listen to her …and for a Scottish Labour Leader to be treated as such, just goes to show how far they have fallen; literally into oblivion …where the concept of Federalism also lies…

  125. bugsbunny says:

    If the Labour Party has that many members why do they ship supporters up from England to tread the streets in 2015 and 2016? As an aside during the Independence Referendum campaign, unlike our side, the better together team were paying students as well as others to go round chapping doors. I know several Yes campaigners who aside from donating time and money were several thousands out of pocket doing a Labour of Love trying to free their country. Better together paid money to halfwits to go round as pamphleteers. I seen with my own eyes money being handed over and these ner do weels going straight into the pub. Just like a loser who has to buy friends, they had to buy help.

  126. asklair says:

    A few people have mentioned the health of Labour Scottish branch manager, the council election results in May will not help either, who would want to be the next branch manager.

  127. A. Graham says:

    Even at the fist bit of that, I was a bit flummoxed. when was Kezia Dugdale ever an “ordinary worker”?

  128. Muscleguy says:

    @Gus1940

    Pat Kane over in The National is collating program suggestions and ideas. Send a letter to the editor with ‘Pat Kane’ as the subject to contribute.

  129. McBoxheid says:

    Bob MACK says:
    24 February, 2017 at 12:58 pm

    Did you know that Queens regulations compels senior officers to ensure that members of the military and their families get registered to vote. It is not a choice.

    They can be members of political parties but not activists.

    I spend 15 years in the Army and nobody compelled me to vote.
    When I joined up (1979) it was not allowed to be a member of a political organisation. The Armed forces were there to support the government of the day, whatever the flavour. We were definite not encouraged to vote. My brother’s regiment told him he wasn’t allowed to vote as a serving soldier. Maybe it all changed since my discharge in 1992. Any serving member of the Armed Forces know what the current thinking is?



Comment - new users please read this page first for commenting rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use the live preview box. Include paragraph breaks or I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




↑ Top