Unsteady Eddie
We gather a few refreshments are usually taken at party conferences, so given that Eddie Barnes of the Scotsman is in Inverness covering the Scottish Labour gathering, perhaps a hangover explains his rather confused piece for Scotland on Sunday today.
There are three particularly notable passages, which we’ll take you through quickly here so you don’t have to go and read them on the paper’s website.
“On one level, there is a self-interested concern; a further extension of Holyrood’s powers, MPs fear, could mean a further cut in the number of Scottish MPs at Westminster, thereby handing the Conservatives a UK general election victory on a plate.”
(Our emphasis in all cases.) Oh dear God. We suppose we could cut Mr Barnes some slack on this one, as it could be argued that he’s merely discussing the idiocy of Scottish Labour MPs rather than perpetuating it himself.
But all modesty aside, our article explaining in detail why the scenario described above is a complete myth has now been read by tens of thousands of people since we wrote it over a year ago. It’s been linked far and wide, and picked up by others. And even if a serious Scottish newspaper’s political editor hasn’t read it here, he ought to at least be smart and diligent enough to have worked it out for himself from the easily-available statistics. No excuses.
“And then there is a question of principle – if the UK is a state which seeks to redistribute cash from poor parts of the country to the wealthy why is the single biggest tax in the system in one part of the country suddenly off limits?”
The Scotsman is a Tory paper. We believe that’s called a Freudian slip.
“Aside from tactics, proponents of the ‘devo-more’ model also argue they have to espouse change to bring about a culture shift at Holyrood – a culture, they argue, which currently gives the SNP a free ride to popularity, and leads to bad decisions”
Here, though, Eddie stumbles from laziness to howler into an insightful point. We’ve highlighted recently how both Johann Lamont’s and Ruth Davidson’s visions for a Holyrood with “more powers” actually translate to “more responsibilities, without any benefit to Scotland”, and Mr Barnes perceptively highlights the reason why: neither proposal is aimed at helping Scots, but at hindering the SNP, crushing it under a weight of expensive, pointless, unpopular bureaucracy.
However much we castigate and mock Scotland’s mainstream media for its frequent failings, the people producing it are still by and large skilled professional journalists and sometimes they just can’t help writing the truth, which is this: faced with unmoving polls despite years of unremitting negativity, both of Scotland’s serious opposition parties have given up on defeating the SNP democratically. The Tories want to instead turn them into budget-slashing tax collectors, and Labour to do the same while also diverting power to their corrupt, crony-stuffed local councils.
That, not a beefed-up Scottish Parliament, is the true meaning of a No vote.
Vote No get Labour.
“redistribute cash from poor parts of the country to the wealthy”
Where’s the Christian Spirit Rev? The lost soul makes an honest statement and you mock him.
On second thoughts you a re right.
Rev… you have the core argument against “No” in your ultimate paragraph.
The continuation must be that the unionists (or at least E B) believe the SNP/Greens/Ind/SSP shall be the power in the Scottish Parliament for the future whether it is an Independent Scottish Parliament or a devolved one.
Let’s get that message out !
For the uninitiated, it is sometimes difficult to see The Scotsman as a true blue Tory rag given the levels of Labour support contained within its columns. However, common sense dictates that since Scotland has roundly rejected Toryism, this journal uses Labour as the next best unionist attack dog. Labour in Scotland are just too damn stupid to see they are being played by a journal, that underneath the veneer, despises them.
I’ve also said elsewhere that Scottish Labour has lost its way on the fundamental principle that to woo voters and win votes, you should generally be able to demonstrate you are BETTER than the incumbents in power.
It is a real vote loser to simply try and bring the incumbents down below your own level, simply to APPEAR to be better than them.
Flipper questioned on indy Scotland using the pound on SKY and managed to fit in at least 3 untruths, (he often repeats them and gets away with them), and Im afraid no ”donorgate” question.
Oh well, another opportunity goes a begging.
Rev.Stuart, I think you’re doing Eddie Barnes a disservice, in that his stated opinion that “the UK is a state which seeks to redistribute cash from the poor parts of the country to the wealthy” is actually quite accurate. Successive NewLabour and Tory Westminster Governments have been doing this for decades now! Even under the stewardship of North British Broon and his Chancer of the Exchecquer, Serial House Flipper Darling, the gap between rich and poor widened considerably. Note to the Independence Referendum electorate – Vote No, Get Poorer!
“Rev.Stuart, I think you’re doing Eddie Barnes a disservice, in that his stated opinion that “the UK is a state which seeks to redistribute cash from the poor parts of the country to the wealthy” is actually quite accurate.”
Indeed. That’s what a Freudian slip is – saying the truth by accident.
What actually happened in Inverness then? I thought it was supposed to be a Labour Party Conference but it seems to have only been an anti-SNP rally. Has any party ever let themselves be so defined by another party as Labour is in Scotland…or is it simply easier than thinking up actual policies for your own party?
Meanwhile over in Glasgow, the Sunday Herald’s editorial on Mrs Graham’s speech to the bored faithfull in Inverness:
link to heraldscotland.com
the final sentence:
She needs vision as well as derision.
OT a bit sorry!
I watched Tony Robertson (Baldric) “Walking through History” program on channel 4 last night. This is the first time that I have heard independence mentioned in a non political context in mainstream media. The program was about the 1719 Jacobite rebellion. He was walking around Glenelg, Eilean Donan and Glensheil amongst other places. (Worth watching for the scenery alone Sandaig bay is knucklebitingly beautiful)
It was his positive piece to camera at the end that surprised me. “And yet today in and around Scotland more people want to leave the UK and break away from the government in London than ever before. So perhaps the spirit of the Jacobites is still with us” This plus a positive conversation (with indi links) in a pub with some folk musicians.
Great to hear independence being normalised.
Great to hear independence being normalised.
The more it can be discussed as a simple and genuine step the more likely it is to happen. That is why the Nae Sayers have to keep the debate pitched as a stone throw from Armageddon.
roboscot says:
21 April, 2013 at 10:12 am
Vote No get Labour.
robscot,
Vote no get “New” Labour. I have to pull you up here as there is a difference you know.
As a Labour voter (I admit I voted SNP at last SGE out of frustration), there is a difference between Labour and “New” Labour.
Lamont & Milliband’s “New” Labour in their current guise are Tories wearing a rose.
I wholeheartedly hope that after the Yes vote next year we will get our Labour party back, however, it won’t be easy as the SNP have consumed the left ground that “New” Labour vacated.
Vote Yes in 2014!
I am Labour to my toes. But when I look at the Labour party, I don’t see anything Labour about it anymore.
I see a party which is controlled from the top down which does not do anything for the worker.
I have decided that the most important thing for my country is to get us away from a system that has been bleeding Scotland dry for 300 years.
So I vote SNP, not because I like them but because they are the only party that is going to do anything about the biggest problem facing Scotland.
After Independence I’ll probably go back to voting Labour, but not if the party is stacked with the current crop of ("Quizmaster" - Ed)s.
@ The Man in the Jar,
I watched that upto 9pm before changing over to BBC 4 for the Swedish crime drama ‘Arne Dahl’ which is quite gruesome compared to other Scandinavian dramas that have come before – it is surprising how they drop in a few positive Scottish links however. Something the next and last series of Borgan is reported to be continuing.
Back to ‘Walking through History’, there was a great number of parallels with today. He managed to pick up on a number of things such as Scottish culture at the time. Tony managed to do a good balanced program. Its worth a watch on iPlayer for those that didn’t catch it last night.
Meanwhile, ‘Scottish’ Labour’s ‘Truth’ Team releases more evidencei showing that we really are better together:
link to twitter.com
@Adrian B I amongst others am giving a talk on “The Jacobites” in Grangemouth on Monday night. I will cover the Scottish social and economic situation in the 18th century. Plenty of scope for some wee indi hints!
Sorry, error in my last comment – you will find ‘Walking through History’ on 4OD:
link to channel4.com
Sunday Mail Today –
John Niven
“And, finally, I thought… enough. I believe Scotland would legalise same-sex marriage. I believe it would reject Trident. I believe it would refuse to accept the victimisation of the poor, the ill and the weak.”
“Of course, I’ve been “down here” in England so long I’m practically a Pearly King so there’s no way for me to do much. But there is a way for most of you. You can all vote yes.”
So Johann get’s a quick opportunity to demonstrate her new found desire for “truth and honesty” as Angus Robertson has written to request she clarifies her position on the Taylor donation in light of John Mann’s well publicised views.
I had a laugh to myself when Flipper was talking to the party faithful about post independence and Scotland eventually having it’s own currency. He went on to describe the scary future when we have to exchange our money before a trip to see family living in the south – no change there then!
I recalled a visit to my brother in St Albans to change my car, we went for a bite after picking up the car and I offered to buy him lunch in a local pub. We eventually left without eating as the barmaid refused point blank to accept my Scottish £20 notes which had been freshly withdrawn from an RBS Cashline before leaving home.
Rev. Stuart, you’ve stated exactly what I’ve been thinking recently. The sequential release by all three unionist parties suggesting more powers, but especially at a council level, had me wondering if they were ‘normalising’ the concept with the intention, should there be a NO vote, of giving councils more power at the expense of Holyrood – all under the guise of ‘local accountability’ and ‘responding to Scotlands demands for greater powers’. This is why we can’t afford a NO result – it would be difficult for all these ‘mini-governments’ to act in concert. The epitome of Divide and Conquer.
Does anyone know if any of the unionist parties have shared a platform with each other yet? If not, i think we should be asking why!
Especially now that more Labourites seem to be stressing the need for a separate Labour No campaign, we should also be pointing out the obvious, that Labour are now split where Devolution is concerned.
BTW, I reckon Labour will rue the day they thought up their truth committee!
I saw Barnes and Magnus Gardham interviewed together on the BBC conference coverage yesterday, first time I’d set eyes on Gardham, google eyed twerp, who came out with a deluded fantasy of a No vote causing a breakup of the SNP and no more worries. It’s hard to believe the No side imagine that would be the end of it. Win or lose their disgraceful lies would be exposed and the new Union reality would bite big time. If they managed to fool us next year we’d be right back on the case the next day, it ain’t ever going to be over until the fat lady sings. Hopefully not Jackie Baillie like.
A friend a wee while back, showed me a simple colour coded map which shows the percentage of votes that clinched the election for the tories. I will try to find it but basically no matter how we vote in Scotland, the core votes in and around London and the S East of England have been and will be instrumental in who is in government in Westminster. It’s the very well off who are so desperate to cling onto their cash and property.
Ah, I did think it seemed strange for the bbc to show a decent programme like ‘Walking Through History’. One thing is if you want to watch it and you haven’t already signed up to 4OD, you have to do that to access the programmes but it takes seconds and is well worth it.
I loved ‘Crapston Villas’ animation series, which, sorry has nothing to do with what we are talking about, but it’s great and worth a watch!!
Latest Labour wheeze. Unemployed? Welcome to debt slavery!
link to guardian.co.uk
@Hetty,
Here’s one such map:
link to telegraph.co.uk
It’s also worth checking the detailed breakdown of seats in southern England here, see in particular, pages 16-21:
link to parliament.uk
And with England’s population expected to increase significantly over the next 15 years, with most of the increase concentrated in the southern half of England, it looks like if there’s a No vote in 2014, we could be looking at another decade or more of Tory governments after the British general election in 2015:
link to dailymail.co.uk
Thanks for the Tony Robinson link Man in the jar and Adrian B, got it bookmarked for some nice viewing later
Always thought Tony was a good lad, grew up with Timeteam and Blackadder.
Also I just heard the other day that Bill Bailey is pro indy! Put a great big smile on my face, we’re in good company.
I feel quite sorry for unionists, they’re in rubbish company! Except Eric Joyce maybe, I know he’s a twat but it’d be great fun to go drinking with him in the HoC bar
Stuart Campbell: “However much we castigate and mock Scotland’s mainstream media for its frequent failings, the people producing it are still by and large skilled professional journalists and sometimes they just can’t help writing the truth, “
I spend a deal of time consuming their output and while a few are reasonably skilled propagandists, never has it occurred to me to describe them as professional or as journalists (with the exception of MacWhirter).
As you say, sometimes the truth will out anyway, as it tends to do when the press of lies leaves it nowhere else to go.
Man in the Jar
Wondered if you caught it. Though do we need the present drive to be independent AGAIN linked to two failed attempts. The risings were about change of Monarchs not independence. The Stuarts would have headed to London and never been seen again in Scotland. It was all about Charles’s birthwrite as gods chosen to rule Britin. Britin being used here to describe the UK and not England. Devine right of Kings and all that.
On another note how many of us are union members. Are we making our wishes known to our Union and also where our contributions go.
You guys do know Tony Robinson is a die hard Labour supporter ?