The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Abide with us

Posted on November 11, 2012 by

We read something odd in the Herald yesterday.

“In a joint statement, Labour’s Johann Lamont, Tory leader Ruth Davidson and the Liberal Democrats’ Willie Rennie said: “It is vital that the referendum properly reflects the will of the Scottish people. We look forward to hearing the views of the Electoral Commission and will abide by its ruling.”

In the same spirit of magnanimity, Wings Over Scotland would like to humbly and solemnly announce that from today onwards we will abide by the law of gravity and the requirement for human beings to breathe oxygen in order to respire. Thank you.

12 to “Abide with us”

  1. dadsarmy says:

    They’re wrong anyway. The Electoral Commission can’t and won’t rule – it advises. So much for the knowledge and understanding of the leaders of the three opposition parties in Scotland – they need to get educated in how democracy works. Or how it’s best to put brain into gear before disengaging clutch on vocal reality.

    Reply
  2. Aplinal says:

    And for those who think that the EC’s “advice” is mandatory, just refer them to the Westminster government’s own selective use of the EC recommendations in the past.  The EC offers opinion, which governments can (and in Westminster’s case) do reject.

    Reply
  3. Ron says:

    And as Kevin Pringle pointed out on twitter:
    “UK Govt on English Council Tax referendums: “we disagreed with its [Electoral Commission’s] suggestion for the wording”
    Mickey Moore misled the Holyrood Committee, the Westminister Committee, and Westminister House of Commons when he claimed in all 3 that neither his government or the previous Labour govt had EVER ignored the advice of the EC. Didn’t he?

    Reply
  4. steven Luby says:

    It’s so entertaining to see wanna be leaders struggling to come to terms, with the terms of the Edinburgh Agreement. Between the 3 who had no influence on it’s making and coming together to ‘proclaim’ what they don’t understand. 

    Advice comes in many shapes and forms and most advice is double-edged,for these 3 characters from ‘the land that time may well wish to forget’, trying to highten the Electoral Commissions role to such dizzy heights of moral and law, describes 3 leaders who can’t function within the realms of reality.

    Oh well,another stage being set to discredit democracy,Scottish Gov,SNP and Alex Salmond. One day they may just wake up in 99% of the shite from their own making. But who would want to advise them in ways to avoid such a justifiable end! 

    Reply
  5. Juteman says:

    But what if the EC doesn’t reflect the will of the Scottish people?

    Reply
  6. McHaggis says:

    Unionists are going to have their flabbers gasted when – I would predict anyway – the EC return with confirmation the question is wholly acceptable to them… 

    Reply
  7. dadsarmy says:

    Some interesting stuff here:

    link to electoralcommission.org.uk


    1. Voters

    There should be no barriers to voters taking part. This means:
    …
    ? voters are informed about the possible outcomes, and can easily understand the campaign arguments
    …
    ? the result and its implications should be clear and understood

    ===============

    Ah, so the implications of a YES are that defence, foreign policies etc are either specified or explained – so it’s OK and in fact neccessary for the Scottish Government to commission 13 reports to fulfil this function (as it is for the UK gov to do its 16 reports).

    Oh, and I guess the NO campaign will want to tell all voters what the “implications” are of voting NO. Let me see now:

    1). Constant reduction of Barnett
    2). Eventual end to Universal Benefit
    3). Privatisation of the NHS
    4). Privatisation of Scottish Water
    5). Privatisation of Lamont, Davidson and Rennie
    etc.

    Reply
  8. velofello says:

    From their joint statement above “it is vital that the referendum properly reflects the will of the Scottish people…”.
    So a Devo-Max option, known to be a popular option of the Scottish people, is not available? An option the unionists were anxious not to include in the referendum yet they are now keen to nitpick around the single question of the referendum.

    I’m for independence yet I could recognise that Devo-Max could be a comfort blanket for some and would l believe,lead eventually to independence by a slower route. I suppose the unionists thought so too and so failed to put forward a Devo-Max option that would “the will of the Scottish people”.
    Rubbish, humbug,duplicity, and any swear words you wish to add to describe these tiresome, unscrupulous unionist nonentities. 

    Reply
  9. Jim Campbell says:

    Electoral Commission ?

    Nope, Nada, No Way !   Too many influences emanating from Westminster
    make that commissions decisions not exactly 100% unbiased
    – the C of E maybe or, better still, the UN should be chosen run and oversee
    the independence referendum.

    Maybe I am being  too suspicious or cynical but WESTMINSTER HAVE ALWAYS  LIED about Scottish finances, Scottish culture and our Scottish way of life.    Scotland is an energy rich country with a surplus  of gas, oil, hydro, wind and wave power, yet we have pensioners dying in the winter here from hydrothermia because of the high fuel taxes from Westminster and that includes both Labour and Tory governments.   Scotland puts in more taxes and revenues into the Westminster coffers that we get back in return. 

    VOTE YES AND LET SCOTLAND’S MONEY AND SCOTLAND’S NEEDS
    BE USED TO BENEFIT THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE.

    Reply
  10. Dcanmore says:

    What the Bitter Together lot are trying to say is we’ll use the EC as a stick to beat AS and the Scottish Government with. Any slight apprehension, doubt or concern from the EC regarding the referendum question will be magnified greatly by the Bitter Together and MSM to make AS and the Scottish Government look like shifty crooks treating the Scottish public as fools and the Bitter Together triumvirate will consistently bring up the issue over and over again to be seen as protectors of the Scottish electorate even if the issue is pure fantasy of their own making.

    Reply
  11. Arbroath 1320 says:

    “It is vital that the referendum properly reflects the will of the Scottish people.”
     
    Now would that mean the incompetent numpties who follow the dingbats around like nodding donkeys OR would that mean the people of Scotland who will vote in 2014?
     
    Personally I think they mean the former, none of the three dingbats give two hoots about the people who will be voting in 2014.

    Reply
  12. Arbroath 1320 says:

    The terrible threesome want the “question” to be acceptable to the Scottish people do they?
     
    Well here’s a question for the Terrible threesome. Should our armed forces be involved, in any way, in ground involvement in Syria?
     
    link to huffingtonpost.co.uk

    Reply


Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.


  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.

    Stats: 6,990 Posts, 1,253,023 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • factchecker on Faces In Sand: ““You get repeatedly told indy is a matter for the people of Scotland, yet find there is no “legal mechanism”…” Oct 23, 21:54
    • TURABDIN on Faces In Sand: “Andy (duck n dive, never a straight answer) Burnham thinks we all ought to stock up on food and, in…” Oct 23, 19:39
    • Bilbo on Faces In Sand: “What seems to be missing from these conversations of seasonality of our foodstuffs which is grown locally and doesn’t need…” Oct 23, 19:14
    • Confused on Faces In Sand: “of course there is no such thing as “equal partner in the union” – that’s the BULLSHIT THE ENGLISH TELL…” Oct 23, 18:54
    • Confused on Faces In Sand: “I think a good exposition for prepping is shown in trainspotting, when renton is getting off the skag www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm4fsi6OvFI note…” Oct 23, 18:52
    • Aidan on Faces In Sand: “Yes Dan – humanity is off down the pan because we buy food from Spain rather than growing it in…” Oct 23, 18:41
    • Dan on Faces In Sand: “Ach, what does food self-sufficiency and being better insulated from outside events matter anyway… https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckr5yz2pqqppo It’s recommended to have 3…” Oct 23, 18:05
    • Captain Caveman on Faces In Sand: “@Dan That is not a manifesto for independence, it’s a collection of bullet point assertions and facts (the veracity of…” Oct 23, 17:57
    • Captain Caveman on Faces In Sand: “I can only speak from personal experience. I (or the missus) has had Evoques, Range Rover Sports and a full…” Oct 23, 17:52
    • Dan on Faces In Sand: “CC says: “People love to moan about Land Rover stuff, possibly with justification, but whenever anything’s gone wrong they’ve always…” Oct 23, 16:18
    • Northcode on Faces In Sand: “It’s easy to mistake a list of social, economic or cultural problems for proof of colonisation, but that isn’t how…” Oct 23, 16:15
    • Dan on Faces In Sand: “Chuckle at site prick Main complaining that I counted coal in the resources list. https://wingsoverscotland.com/return-of-the-fear/#comment-2778087 A day later site prick…” Oct 23, 15:48
    • Dan on Faces In Sand: “Yawn at CC’s no credible plan bs… If it’s a credible enough strategy for the UK to be run with,…” Oct 23, 15:42
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““Much of it was faulty” An oft-repeated statement, but I have yet to identify what it means. My best guess…” Oct 23, 14:39
    • Spartan 117 on Faces In Sand: “To be honest I’m not sure many people *need* it explained to them, because the facts are blatantly obvious to…” Oct 23, 14:32
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: ““Half or more of the population living in or close to poverty levels” Ah Alf, as an academic you’ll understand…” Oct 23, 14:22
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: “What you write is all true, Northy, but where’s the fun in being all grown up when we can be…” Oct 23, 14:11
    • James Che on Faces In Sand: “North code, Regards Scotlands Constitutional position in a modern democracy it is to realise there is no requirement for Scotland…” Oct 23, 13:15
    • factchecker on Faces In Sand: “I know there is not an equal union. It would be both stupid and undemocratic. More importantly, nobody has been…” Oct 23, 13:09
    • James Che on Faces In Sand: “North Code. Again appreciate your response and keeping the debate polite and clean, They are not actually my own personal…” Oct 23, 12:37
    • Captain Caveman on Faces In Sand: ““Independence would bring political responsibility closer to voters, strengthen democratic legitimacy and allow Scotland to adapt its institutions over time…” Oct 23, 11:24
    • Northcode on Faces In Sand: “James, I haven’t replied to you. My earlier comment was a general observation about the modern independence argument, not a…” Oct 23, 11:10
    • James Che on Faces In Sand: “Alf Baird, I suspect that the non – treaty of union issue and Colonisation issue will merge, for they become…” Oct 23, 10:53
    • Lorncal on Faces In Sand: “MaryB: they also infected people already in hospitals by placing them in wards with uninfected patients. I remember the huge…” Oct 23, 10:48
    • James Che on Faces In Sand: “North code. Thank you for your reply, I will answer your points one by one if I may. Firstly, We…” Oct 23, 10:43
    • Alf Baird on Faces In Sand: ““A convincing case for independence doesn’t need the colonial frame” How else can we explain to Scots: – the ‘union’…” Oct 23, 10:20
    • James Chey on Faces In Sand: “Fact checker. You are entirely correct in stating that there is no equal union, What you omitted by default through…” Oct 23, 10:10
    • Northcode on Faces In Sand: “I’ve been thinking about why the “Scotland is a colony” argument is actually counter-productive. A convincing case for independence doesn’t…” Oct 23, 09:43
    • James Che on Faces In Sand: “North code, Did not have time to respond fully to you yesterday, Which and what Sovereignty works nowadays and where…” Oct 23, 09:14
    • Hatey McHateface on Faces In Sand: “Humza Yousaf has a new book out – just in time for Christmas – although it’s inconceivable that could ever…” Oct 23, 08:35
  • A tall tale



↑ Top