We’ll never tire of documenting the Daily Record’s increasingly panicked attempts to get David Cameron to enact the Record’s dodgy promise of last September and save it from having to answer for the pup it sold Scotland.
The Daily Record has a major editorial in today’s edition bleating piteously about the way David Mundell and the Conservative government have – to everyone’s complete and utter astonishment, except not so much – ignored the wishes of almost all the MPs elected by the Scottish people just two months ago and blocked every single amendment to the Scotland Bill.
The picture above, by alert reader Neil Hepburn, seems to sum the situation up.
The Sunday Post’s lobby reporter James Millar noticed today that all the parties have submitted their nominations to sit on the Scottish Affairs Committee at Westminster.
As has already been noted, the majority of the committee – seven from 11 – are MPs for English seats (list below). But one name in particular caught our attention.
Two nights of political debate on the BBC:
Six unionists, two nationalists. What’s that all about, then?
How the UK’s constitution now works, in brief:
– English votes for English laws
– English votes for Scottish laws
– No Scottish votes for English laws
Any questions?
Here’s the Times (Scotland edition) last Wednesday:
A lot has happened since then, of course.
The “Clypegate” dossier didn’t bring Scottish Labour the scale of PR triumph they’d hoped for. Few papers bothered picking it up at all, with only a comically error-strewn Tom Peterkin piece in Scotland On Sunday (which amusingly specified the number of alleged offenders named as variously “50”, “almost 50” and “46”, never quite managing to get to the actual number of 45) doing much more than report its existence.
But the compilation, and the distribution to the media, of the list raised a number of far more serious questions about the branch office’s cavalier attitude to data protection law, detailed on Wings yesterday by expert consultant (and Labour voter) Tim Turner.
Individuals have already been subjected to threats as a result of being singled out and vilified by Labour, without having committed any crime. And anyone who’s ever posted a tweet or Facebook message in support of the SNP or independence – whether they’re members of the party or not – could be at risk of similar treatment.
If that alarms you – and it should – here’s what you can do about it.
By now you should all have had a chance to marvel at the extraordinary madness that is Scottish Labour’s 51-page suicide note of SNP members who’ve said rude words on the internet since 2012.
You may even have had time to read a data protection expert (and Labour voter)’s assessment of all the ways in which the dossier breaks the law.
Now let’s get down to business.
For those of you who haven’t seen it yet, the document at the heart of this insanity has been leaked, so you can now see it for yourself. We’ll have more on it later.
EDIT 12.55pm: File now deleted, mirror here.
STV’s notorious quisling correspondent Stephen “Stevo” Daisley has an interesting piece today about the latest manufactured “cybernat” shock-horror outrage being punted by the Daily Mail (although curiously, the major “CYBERNAT WEB OF HATE!” exposé they promised readers would be published on Thursday is yet to materialise).
Daisley’s column makes some valid points about how the SNP could distance itself from the most extremist elements of its online support, but with one important flaw – it overlooks a crucial factor driving internet rage, and as a result its recommendations would only actually make the situation worse.
But fear not, gentle and sensitive reader. Conveniently, there’s an easy solution.
On Wednesday we highlighted a curious outbreak of mass hysteria in the Scottish press, when a whole clutch of its newspapers suddenly and inexplicably jumped on a six-month-old story that had been comprehensively debunked at the time and hadn’t become any more true.
The story was swiftly proven to be complete rubbish all over again, and some of the papers printed grudging and much less prominent pieces admitting it was nonsense (all gallantly blaming their source, some Buckingham Palace flunky gone rogue, rather than their own failure to check the facts).
And then things got weird.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
