The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


But what does journalism matter?

Posted on July 25, 2018 by

The BBC front page headline for this is actually just the alarming-sounding “Scottish prescription costs rise by 25%”, without even the qualifier about the timespan.

It’s worse than that, though.

Because 17 paragraphs down the piece, this bit of information is buried:

Oh. So SOMEONE probably ought to take that into account, right?

Because inflation in the UK over the same ten years has been 31.9%. Which means that in real terms the cost of providing prescriptions in Scotland – DESPITE an ageing population and the cost of new drugs – has FALLEN, not “risen by 25%”.

Readers might reasonably feel that anyone accepting the salary of a journalist ought to have been able to ascertain that simple and incredibly pertinent fact before writing the story. After all, they KNEW that inflation hadn’t been factored into the figures, and that inflation is a thing, and that inflation makes stuff more expensive, and that it’s not hard to find out what inflation has been over a period of time, and that you always, always compare costs over time with inflation included in order to present a true picture.

But that’s not how things are done in Scotland these days.

Because the truly spectacular news is that the BBC’s wildly misleading report (which can’t even round properly – 25.7 should round to 26, not 25) is still the most accurate one available to the unfortunate people of Scotland, because at least it MENTIONS the inflation factor, albeit halfway down the page in passing.

The Scottish print media, on the other hand, blares the news all over its pages – in at least two cases, as the front-page lead – WITHOUT mentioning inflation.

The Scotsman front-page splash doesn’t mention inflation at all.

The Herald’s coverage doesn’t mention inflation at all.

The Scottish Daily Mail front-page splash doesn’t mention inflation at all.

The Telegraph doesn’t mention inflation at all.

The Daily Record’s little corner piece doesn’t mention inflation at all.

In short, folks, there isn’t a single proper journalist left in Scotland. Good luck.

Print Friendly

    167 to “But what does journalism matter?”

    1. bobajock says:

      ROFL – theres lies and deceptions, and simply pointing at the cute squirrel while publishing a dog turd.

      ^ well spotted.

    2. Auld Rock says:

      Bobajock, would that be a polished ‘turd’ then?

    3. Greannach says:

      Does the BBC still have journalists, or just students on placement?

    4. Robert Louis says:

      Yes but the paid liars at the Westminster controlled BBC would NEVER run a good news story about Scotland. Can you imagine the headline, ‘Prescription prices in Scotland have fallen in real terms, defying inflation’?? No, neither can I.

      The simple fact is, the paid liars who write this stuff for the Westminster controlled BBC, KNOW FULL WELL, EXACTLY what they are doing. In that context, I have to say ANY Scot behaving in such a way, is not only damaging Scotland, but they are quite literally lying in order to run down and damage their own country – the country their children will grow up in.

      It makes no sense, but then as I guess is the case at the Westminster controlled BBC, every man has his price. For London’s gold, they are bought and sold… as Burns so eloquently AND ACCURATELY put it.

    5. Fred says:

      Who was the author of this? to whom do we give the credit?

    6. david hill says:

      yes an unbelievable story. when I got to the bit that it had gone up in 10 years I thought that’s actually brilliant, without getting to the bit that it was not adjusted for inflation. the bbc is really just a joke now

    7. 3 million Just abot Managing children will starve during the (English apparently) school holidays yet BBC churns out Judem Rause propaganda like this.
      I’m sure that the Boss at the Pacific Quay Stockade is bursting with pride and admiration at the dedicated team of Brit Nat Fourth columnists she has assembled.
      What a bunch of Tractors.
      I presume that they are all childless, so don’t give a fuck about Scotland and its future.

    8. Scotspatriot says:

      Since 2016, the pound has been devalued by at least 13% against the $ and the €.
      This also has a major bearing on imported drugs, thus increasing the prescription budget.
      Thanks Breexiteers.

    9. mogabee says:

      Abysmal. No-one really expects any better from the MSM and the general press but jeezo.

      Journalists: Just jump in the fucking sea will ya?

    10. Valerie says:

      Someone posted on Twitter quoting Corbyn saying the fall in £ value was a good thing.

      I responded by saying, oh, just what Farage says, he will be pleased with Corbyn.

      Lots on Twitter decrying Corbyn for this “manufacturing coming home” vision he is touting. He really is the pits. Trying to push factories, no doubt to increase his Trade Union support.

      Factories belching smoke to produce pig iron is fitting for this crazed Trot, fearful of all the new science, tech, research that UK is more known for.

    11. Ken500 says:

      2% a year to keep people well and saves lives. Less than inflation. Money well spend. Unlike the extortionate BBC. £3.7Billion a year for complete nonsense. Misogynistic wage scales. Repeat programmes for some overpaid prima donnas who think they are the News. Programmes no one watch. They hide the viewing figures. A complete and utter disgrace.

      The BBC the symptom of the British problems. Overpaid liars. Controlled by the overpaid Westminster unionist liars. A complete and utter shambles costing £Billions. Sanction and starving people. Making people sick. Killing off the elderly. Increased in the rest of the UK.

      Cut the BBC funding. Half goes on the estate maintainence. Spend it on healthcare and education. It would be better spent.

    12. Paul.snowdon@hotmail.co.uk says:

      Aye, listened to this pish on Radio Scotland this morning. Immediately thought, so it’s in line with inflation.

    13. Former vegan god says:

      No idea how much you earn but suspect you are massively underpaid

    14. Petra says:

      Did anyone come across anything on the BBC site relating to the Scottish Tory ‘dark money’ donations? Naw, I didn’t think so. How long has this been going on for? Used to oust Alex, Angus et al?

      It’s high time that Ruth Davidson was taken to task on this and the recent (ongoing) Brexit fiasco. Imagine if this had involved the SNP? The BBC would be camping outside Nicola Sturgeon’s door 24×7. People like me are forking out to pay Davidson’s wages, for what? Where is she? Where is the former BBC employee? One thing for sure is that her forthcoming baby has sure come in handy, imo. Say no more.

      ………………………

      Posted by Smallaxe this morning.

      ”Call for Westminster probe into Tory ‘dark money’ donations.”

      http://archive.is/tZJRx

    15. Fred says:

      @ Valerie, Iron Puddlers Wanted! lifespan about 30 years!

      So the Brit rail unions don’t fancy Police Scotland taking over the policing of trains from Brit Transport Polis, there’s a surprise

    16. Andy-B says:

      I think we can safely say that whatever the BBC says, it should taken with a pinch of salt. Afterall it’s a Westminster government propaganda machine.

      It really is a preposterous position that Scots are in, that broadcasting is a reserved matter. I doubt any other nation in the world, is in such a farcical situation as Scots are. When it comes this medium.

    17. Donald McGregor says:

      That’s an extraordinarily coordinated media attack on Scot Gov, given that the very first thing that came to my mind yesterday when I saw the bbc piece was ‘ I wonder what inflation accounts for over that period’
      If Scot Gov cannot use this blatant piece of tripe to attack back – as it’s an easy and readily understandable rebuttal to issue- then they have lost it.

    18. Josef Ó Luain says:

      Unfortunately, you can’t lay-a-glove on the scumbags without getting the time-honoured: “freedom of the press” [to lie our fucking heads off] routine.

      Excellent work!

    19. Truth says:

      Aye, and just imagine what the cost would be if we were means testing it like before.

      I bet the means testing beaurocracy wasn’t factored in to the historical figure either.

    20. Dan Huil says:

      Britnat propaganda continues its anti-Scottish agenda. Boycott all britnat media. Let the Rev expose these britnat liars for the scum they are.

    21. Karmanaut says:

      State of this.

    22. foxprorawks says:

      Also, isn’t NHS specific inflation generally higher than general inflation?

    23. Sinky says:

      Bbc Scotland want you to text them on this

    24. yesindyref2 says:

      Don’t forget you can follow the UKSC with short tweets on twitter

      https://twitter.com/woodstockjag

    25. Thepnr says:

      You read that and immediately see the overall cost of £1.3 billion. If your like me you would think that’s a hell of a lot of money from the Scottish governments budget.

      But if you go back to pre 2011 before prescriptions fees were scrapped by the SNP you find that over 90% of prescriptions were free anyway.

      Removing the bureaucracy involved for those that did have to pay then the actual additional cost was very low indeed and it made sense to scrap them as had already been done in Wales and Northern Ireland. Many lower paid people who didn’t qualify for free prescriptions often didn’t collect them because of the charge which could cost the NHS more in the long run.

      We also mustn’t forget that when the NHS started prescriptions were free until the Tories decided to start charging for them in 1952.

      No one in Scotland will have to pay for prescribed medicines following the move brought in by the SNP government.

      It comes on the same day charges per item rise in England by 20p to £7.40.

      But despite the charge, 90% of items dispensed are given out free as children, those on low incomes and cancer patients are exempt.

      Prescription charges have been falling in Scotland for the last three years and stood at £3 before the 1 April change, which will mean the Scottish government losing out on £57m a year.

      So not really £1.3 billion then and they are not losing out on anything, simply using our money wisely in improving peoples health.

      http://archive.fo/ZnBq3

    26. The scum who walk among us.

    27. desimond says:

      Can we expect “Amazing House price rises over last 10 years!” headlines tomorrow?

    28. galamcennalath says:

      A coordinated attack? Since absolutely no journalists anywhere did much journalism, that would suggest to object was simply to get another fake news story out there on their recurring SNPBaaad theme.

      Or, one big cash-rich organisation does some shite journalism and all the rest, with reduced staff numbers as they contract, just plagiarise?

      Truth is,what actually matters is that Scottish democracy is been severely damaged by not having an effective media which does its job. And the BritNats are happy with that situation because democracy is their primary enemy.

      Sites like WoS set the record straight, good. However the combined reach of the pro-BritNat media is a continuing issue. We need to bypass it by word of mouth and face to face.

    29. AstroImages says:

      So how is it that all media outlets have the same story on the same day, all with the same ‘facts’ and similar wording?

      Do all media outlets receive their stories from a single source?

    30. yesindyref2 says:

      I personally think the UKSC isn’t too happy with the UKG, not that it can allow that to affect its judgements of course.

    31. Thepnr says:

      @galamcennalath

      I think for the Britnats, Truth is their primary enemy and I agree it’s down to pro-indy sites like this and word of mouth to get the truth out.

      We can only work with the tools we have so must use them as best we can. All of us that support democracy that is.

    32. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      The BBC in Scotland are complying with the Royal Charter of the BritNat Broadcasting Corporation:

      6. The Public Purpose

      (4) “….help contribute to the social cohesion and wellbeing of the United Kingdom.”

      They are just following orders folks.

      Don’t pay the propaganda tax.

      British Nationalist Broadcasting (Scotland Division) is our equivalent of the Rwandan radio station of the 1990s called Radio-Television Libre des Milles Collines.

      It exists to undermine the Scots Government, foster division and sectarianism and is backed by powerful people in business and Government of the UK and Opposition on Scotland.

    33. galamcennalath says:

      Groondhog Dae Scotland. It’s so unbelievable and improbable, but here we are living through it!

      A superficial/inaccurate/false anti Scotland/Indy/Holyrood/SNP story ‘breaks’. The entire loyal BritNat media run with it. It quickly gets debunked online.

      Reset. Repeat.

      There have now been sooo many iterations. Will someone please just shoot the Groonhog!

      We need a top … 20/50/100 of these stories in a chart. All the ‘best’ and most convincingly debunked stories. A catalogue of BritNat attempts at fake news.

      It could be the online place-to-go to see the unbelievable but truth picture of BritNat propaganda.

      A good start time would be from 2014 after IndyRef1. The BritNats are supposed to have won, yet their ongoing efforts are both vigorous and relentless.

    34. Andy Anderson says:

      Just copied this to my four active cases for conversion to Yes. Good stuff like this helps.

    35. Effijy says:

      Well done SNP for such a comprehensive saving on our most important assets-giving people healthy pain free extended lives!

      Well Done Rev too for showing the BBC Scum for what they are, yet
      again.

      Another aspect of these UK Media House Boys headlines- Do they propose that pain killers should no longer be given to those in pain? Should we stop prescribing drugs that keep people alive?
      Should we ignore that some of these people paid in to NHS for 50 years?

      In Tory UK the answer to these questions is: take the money instead and give to the rich.

      They can then buy and support the corrupt media and break the electral commission rules on funding and pay the fine to ensure that their candidate is looking after their fortunes.

    36. yesindyref2 says:

      So I think there are two things, 1) whether the UKSC rules the Continuity Bill competent, incompetent, or partially incompetent and needing changes

      2) if it needs changes should the UKSC point out specifics

      but also 3) the chronology – should the UKSC take note of the Continuity Bill being passed before the EU Withdrawal Bill? For me it should be chronological, so the CB should be deemed to have been passed and received Royal Assent without reference to the EUWA. And that the Scotland Act needs future clarification on this issue, where two conflicting Bills of the UKP and SP are progressing at the same time.

      Hopefully of course there’ll be no need for future Scotland Act mods as we’ll be gone, bye-bye, and thanks for all the sh*te.

    37. Artyhetty says:

      Lying journalists are an insult to the profession, those who dare to tell the truth in some parts of the world, are murdered for doing so. Disgraceful, but this is all part of UKGov state agenda of course.

      I don’t suppose the article mentioned that prescriptions are free at the point of need in Scotland, and that in fact your GP is very likely to say you can buy paracetemol for 35p at your local chemist, rather than hand a prescription for them.

      When people are forced to pay for their medicines at the point of need, and if they have a chronic condition, they might need a number of different meds. In England, each medication can amount to a large amount of your low wage each month. It’s unaffordable.

      So what do you do? You only pick up some of your medication, and guess what, that means you end up in hospital which is horrendously expensive for England’s NHS, I am sure. I know this happens and it is a terrible way to treat your own people and waste money at the same time. Then again, it’s what the Tory/Labour governments are really very good at isn’t it.

    38. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      I used to get so fizzing over these blatant lies but, nowadays, I just sigh and think that if that is all they have, they are really, really fucked.

      The sands of time are running out for their Union and you can smell their fear and desperation.

      They are doomed.

      They know it too.

    39. yesindyref2 says:

      OT again sorry Rev – UKSC
      I’ve a feeling the likes of Breeks may be disappointed with this case, and in some ways me too. No Claim of Right, sovereignty of the people, as far as I can see.

      But it’s possible the main point of the whole thing was won without our man, Wolffe, the Lord Advocate, having said one single solitary word, and that would have been by his written submission plus the Continuity Bill itself, to provoke Keen, the Advocate General, Westminster’s man, into claiming again and again that Westminster is “sovereign” over Westminster.

      Bearing in mind the Tories were the only ones who opposed the Continuity Bill, it could be that hearts and minds is the main point, and whatever the result, that has been furthered already. The Conservatives in Scotland are being pushed further and further into their own corner where they are seen more and more, as not supporting the interests of Scotland and the Scottish People.

    40. yesindyref2 says:

      Basically speaking it’s a Tory trap, win or lose, and they’re diving as fast as they can into the sewer like rats around, umm, a sewer. We’re going to need a padlock on that cover.

    41. Tinto Chiel says:

      Another example of the state of UK journalism:

      http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/07/the-silence-of-the-whores/#respond

      I don’t always agree with Craig, but where would we be without him, WGD and The Rev?

    42. Scott says:

      If I did not know better reading these msm headlines I would think that Scotland is a right crap place to live and I suppose there are many who do just read this stories and think like that,poor buggers.

    43. HandandShrimp says:

      I think it was the BBC that ran with this first. The dead tree press just did a copy pasta without even thinking about what they are writing. I think “free press” today means copy that ideally costs absolutely nothing to produce. If it rings the bells of their prejudice so much the better.

      The BBC are the primary culprits through lying by omission. No great surprise there.

    44. Big Jock says:

      What about this for a headline.

      Cost of the Scotsman newspaper more than doubles by 130% since 2007.

      Yes folks it was 65p in 2007 and now it’s £1.50!

    45. HandandShrimp says:

      Big Jock

      LOL

      but, but, but that’s different 🙂

    46. Thepnr says:

      @Tinto Chiel

      The whole Novichok episode is totally bizarre and some poor innocent woman has paid with her life.

    47. Robert Peffers says:

      @Greannach says: 25 July, 2018 at 11:20 am:

      ” … Does the BBC still have journalists, or just students on placement?”

      Oh! Greannach, that is a highly actionable and very illegal statement and the BBC should take you to court for defamation of BBC presenters and Journalists, (or something).

      The BBC exclusively only employs very, very, highly trained, (and very, very, expensive), trained experts in their own particular fields.

      For example they have a highly trained pet food salespersons as their premier expert economists and highly trained propagandists as their TV & Radio presenters and journalists.

      How very dare you cast aspersions on a much much loved and much respected, “British”, institution like the totally, very much, independent, Westminster Government funded, “British”, Broadcasting Corporation.

      How very dare you!

    48. Luigi says:

      Oh Dear. The BBC in full SNP BAD attack mode again.

      You would think there was a referendum approaching. 🙂

      They are trying awfully hard. Alas the law of diminishing returns. Once you open your eyes and see what stinky brown stuff the BBC have been feeding us, you will never trust it again. Our job is to open people’s eyes. Wings provides the ammo, but we have to use it – in our homes, in the streets, cafes pubs and shops – wherever soft NOs are encountered.

      By the time the referendum comes along, the BBC will be well spent and people will see it for what it is – a major propaganda pillar of the British nationalist establishment.

    49. Lochside says:

      The agenda as ever is to play to the worst prejudices in the mainly right wing elements of the population ( not all unionists either). Many elderly and poor themselves, and therefore most at risk at any return to charging for prescriptions.

      But because of our poisonous ‘media’ led by the contemptible BBC on a daily basis, ordinary uninformed folk , without access to Wings etc have been primed to react with angry knee jerks to anything ‘free’. Naturally, the narrative is always linked to ‘immigrants’ or welfare ‘scroungers’. The English have fallen for it and the emotional reasoning buttons being pushed by the scurvy ‘media’ has delivered the ugly birth of Brexit.

      The Brit handlers of Scotland’s media realise that we have proved to be more resolute in resisting this toxic manipulation, so far. But I see and hear evidence of it working its evil, in many conversations and reactions amongst people I know. And no wonder. There is no concerted organised public denial of it.

      The SNP long ago decided to play ‘nice’. Yet a walkout in the HOC created huge numbers to join up. But still the leadership do not want to make waves. Nevertheless, we must try somehow to resist the propaganda onslaught. The Yes movement should be organising phone ins; write ins; and demos outside newspaper premises and the BBC. But it won’t happen. We’re supine and we know it. And so it continues with more than half of our electorate accepting grotesque lies daily.

    50. manandboy says:

      The British Brainwashing Corporation (The BBC) does so much damage to Scotland’s good name, to the Scottish Government and to the SNP.
      It’s such a shame that the Head of BBC Scotland, Donalda MacKinnon, doesn’t get anywhere near enough credit for it.
      Truth is, Donalda likes it that way, preferring to do the British Establishment’s dirty work anonymously and always under the corporate cover of ‘The BBC’.

      According to the BBC website, Donalda is “responsible for the strategic direction and for the programmes and services produced by Scotland.”

      In other words – she knows exactly what she’s doing.
      Her fingerprints are on every lie the BBC in Scotland tells.

    51. Petra says:

      @ Big Jock at 2:05pm ….. “Scotsman up by 130% since 2007.”

      Anybody know how much the TV licence fee has gone up over the last ten years? It’s around £150 now.

    52. Liz g says:

      Yesindyref2 @1.52
      Thought this N.Irish Guy was ment tae be on our side????
      He’s so far just letting the Judges of the hook in favour of Westminster…

    53. Graeme says:

      If the cost of providing free medicine in Scotland has risen over the past 10 years (who’d have thought it, eh?) then surely the cost will have risen in Wales and NI. Why nothing about that from the BBC?

    54. Robert Peffers says:

      @Andy-B says: 25 July, 2018 at 12:12 pm:

      ” … I doubt any other nation in the world, is in such a farcical situation as Scots are. When it comes this medium.”

      Well wonder no longer, ANDY-B, for it is a fact that the BBC and the BBC Overseas Service/World Service is far and away the World’s largest propaganda broadcaster and has always dwarfed both VOA, (Voice of America), and Radio Moscow, and they broadcast on every possible medium from radio, TV to the Internet.

      http://oro.open.ac.uk/33208/

      Most people fail to realise just how large the BBC, (including the Overseas Service/World Service), actually is: What’s more the BBC was the World’s First broadcaster taken over by a government for propaganda when they funded 2LO:-

      https://www.radiorewind.co.uk/radio2/2lo_page.htm

    55. Proud Cybernat says:

      O/T

      Watching Supreme Court hearing and something crossed my mind from the discussions going on there.

      If the Scottish People are sovereign in Scotland (and not the Queen), why then do Scottish Bills from Holyrood have to go to the Queen for Royal Assent to become Acts of the Scottish Parliament? Is it because Holyrood is a “creature” of Westminster? But surely this then effectively over-rules Scots law and the sovereignty of the people of Scotland (represented by our MSPs in our Scottish Parliament)?

      Anyone know?

    56. Big Jock says:

      Petra it was £135.50 in 2007 and now it’s £150.50.

      Using my wee Indy brain calculator that’s 15%. We can apply the logic to just about everything in life.

      A university education in England Fees in 2007 was £3000.00

      2018 – It’s a whopping £9200.00 percentage increase 300%

      In Scotland in 2007 fees were £1200.

      2018 – £0.00 a decrease of 100%!

    57. Big Jock says:

      Proud- It’s because devolution is a mechanism of the union, not of Scotland.

      Operating in the construct of the legal entity of devolution, the rules are observed as set out in the devolutions settlement.

      In other words it’s a Westminster invention, not an acceptance that we have to seek the Queens permission.

    58. Liz g says:

      Proud Cybernat @2.44
      Because as Queen of the Scots she is charged with the safe keeping and protecting of our Sovereignty.
      Unless and until she fails to do so and we tell her to go and we find some other body to put our Sovereignty in…

    59. raineach says:

      Proud
      Acts of the Scots Parliament are effectively upon being passed by the Parliament. Royal assent is not required

    60. Liz g says:

      Big Jock @ 3.00
      She still signed things into Scots law pre devolution Big Jock!
      It was done at the request of the SOS for Scotland thru the Scottish office

    61. Petra says:

      @ PC …..”Sovereignty … Queen.”

      The people of Scotland are Sovereign but as far as I can make out Elizabeth 11 is Queen of Scotland (Elizabeth 1 of Scotland), not the Scots. Not that you’d ever know it right enough.

      No doubt Robert (P) will clarify PC.

    62. Breeks says:

      yesindyref2 says:
      25 July, 2018 at 1:49 pm
      OT again sorry Rev – UKSC
      I’ve a feeling the likes of Breeks may be disappointed with this case, and in some ways me too. No Claim of Right, sovereignty of the people, as far as I can see.

      It’s heavy going, but the National picked up on this yesterday.

      http://www.thenational.scot/comment/16374993.supreme-court-hears-the-sentence-that-says-it-all-about-the-dis-united-kingdom/

      But yeah, Constitutional Law isn’t much of a spectator sport.

      If I was writing the script for all of this, the “Law” would have made this Union unsound in Law 300 years ago. Why has it taken Scots Law and Scots lawyers over three centuries to ram a stick into the spokes of Unionism in all its infamous illegitimacy?

      But then again, you might ask why our Lords and Gentry have been equally docile. Or why our ordinary people have been so ambivalent about their subjugation that the Union has survived so long without riots and bloody disorder. What is wrong with us???

      Are we living through the highest watermark which Scottish Independence has ever achieved? Is it true when Nicola says we are closer to Independence now than ever before? I want to believe so, but there is surely something amiss about the fate and legitimacy of the Union being determined by a Supreme Court which is itself riven with doubts and inconsistencies in its own Constitutional integrity.

      Why are we so supine in our respect for the “highest” Court in the Land which properly has no legitimate superiority over our own Scots Law?

      My head says to Hell with the Supreme Court. Get the Constitutional issue set out in an International Court which can recognise Sovereignty when it sees it.

    63. Thepnr says:

      I posted something yesterday about the UK’s submission to the WTO where it basically wants to keep all the EU agreements with WTO members with some adjustments to quota’s based on past trade.

      The Rev has just posted a link on twitter to LBC radio where this is discussed between James O’Brien and some expert on WTO rules from the US.

      Aye, leaving the EU and trading under WTO rules will be a piece of cake so it will.

      Ridiculous and this is well worth a listen.

      https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/experts-explanation-trading-wto-rules-means/?__twitter_impression=true

    64. Robert Peffers says:

      @Donald McGregor says: 25 July, 2018 at 12:13 pm:

      ” … If Scot Gov cannot use this blatant piece of tripe to attack back – as it’s an easy and readily understandable rebuttal to issue- then they have lost it.”

      Oh! Aye! How prosaic is that comment. Donald?

      Aiblins the SMSM and United Kingdom funded BBC and Commercial Broadcasters throughout Scotland will head their newscasts and their big black headlines with the SNP/SG/First Minister of Scotland’s rebuttal of their British/English own newscasts and big black headlines …

      … But then again Aiblins it micht nae cam up thir humphs tae dae sae.

      Which of those two alternative scenarios do you imagine the SMSM and British/English Broadcasters will go for, Donald?

      Just how many Wingers, never mind the non-politically motivated people of Scotland, avidly read the SG or SNP website on a daily basis, or even access a more unbiased news agency, like Reuters:-

      https://uk.reuters.com/news/uk

      for their daily dose of either information or misinformation?

    65. Liz g says:

      raineach @3.03
      That’s not so…
      Royal Assent is and was always required for a bill to become law.
      Pre Devolution it was done thru the Scottish Office

    66. Liz g says:

      Petra 3.03
      Is the opposite of that Petra….. are ye trying tae make Robert hiv a stroke lol …..
      She is Queen OF the Scots
      And
      Queen of EngLAND

    67. Lenny Hartley says:

      Petra your wrong, she is Elizabeth 1 Queen of Scots. That title alone says that the Scots people are Sovereign and not her or any Parliament.

    68. Big Jock says:

      Royal Assent was descended from the English parliament, before the act of union. After the Act of Union it then became part of the WM British parliament legislation.

      Whether the assent was required before or after devolution is not the issue here. It is only required under the Acts Of Parliament because of the union. In other words it is a mechanism of union not Scotland.

      An independent Scotland may or may not choose to continue with the historic process of seeking royal assent.

      The people are sovereign and the people elect the government, not the same in England or WM.

    69. Robert Louis says:

      Just as a reminder, prescriptions in England cost 8 pound PER ITEM. In Scotland, they are free, thanks to the SNP Scottish Government.

    70. Robert Louis says:

      Lenny Hartley at 320pm,

      You are correct. Indeed, I watched as the then First Minister Alex Salmond, addressed her as such, ‘Elizabeth I, Queen of Scots’. to her face, at the opening of one of the parliamentary sessions.

    71. North chiel says:

      “ Breeks says@ 0305pm” . Perhaps the “ Supreme Court” judges could ask themselves a question ? If the Westminster parliament is the “ so-called” parliament of the “ so – called United Kingdom’s of Scotland & England ( under the treaty& articles of union) then how on earth can Scotland have a “ devolved” parliament unless England also has a devolved parliament?? ( with the equivalent “ PR” voting system as well , by the way.).
      If they cannot answer the question, then we have to assume that Westminster is now the “ de facto parliament of England “and therefore Holyrood is the de facto Parliament of Scotland.
      Ratification of this can be put to the “ people of Scotland “ via a general election ( single issue mandate) or referendum.

    72. Abulhaq says:

      With climate change possibly burning up large parts of Europe Scotland could be a very desirable place to live. A nice bit of Lebensraum, but for the locals. Demoralising those locals with tales such as this, a sort of Highland clearances by psychological warfare, could free up land for escapees from the parched south east quadrant.

    73. yesindyref2 says:

      @Liz g
      I think the Welsh one and the NI one are addressing different points which makes it quite useful. The Welsh guy has beena ble to bring in the Welsh repeals, and tackle the word “modify”, and the NI guy did this one (from that twitter feed):

      AGNI “the word modify should not be overcomplicated”. A not very gentle rebuke of the submissions we heard yesterday.

      Keen gets the last word of course, a strong one too. But we’ll see what happens 🙂

    74. yesindyref2 says:

      @Liz g
      My feeling is that Keen won’t succeed in getting the whole Bill overturned, just that the Scottish Parliament will have to change some clauses.

      Which keeps it in the public eye for, oh, weeks at least!

    75. thomas says:

      @ big jock.

      Not sure about that. Royal assent in scotland certainly pre dates the parliamentary union with England in 1707 , not sure about the monarchial union of 1603.

      https://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/20041/1/Symbolism%20and%20Ritual%20in%20the%20Seventeenth-Century%20Scottish%20Parliament.pdf

    76. yesindyref2 says:

      Well, that’s it. This was interesting:

      Lord Reed: are you saying the Withdrawal Act would modify s30A Scotland Act before it comes into force?

      I guess I’m totally lost now! It could be messy all the same, which I guess is the last thing Westminster wants.

      Interesting though to see several mentions of the S30 – the one needed to get Westminster’s “consent” to an Indy Ref.

    77. call me dave says:

      Well that’s that at the Supreme Court.

      Nice try Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland we can hope but ‘no cigar’
      this time is more than likely!

      Upwards and onwards. 🙂

    78. Thepnr says:

      Well that’s the Supreme Court finished for now and until we hear the result of their deliberations.

      I’ve had it on in the background and dipped in now and again. I never learned anything at all as it was way above my comprehension and I’m left with just gut feeling.

      I’m really not that concerned that there will be any great issue of bias from the judges against the Scottish Parliament in their judgement as I feel they might equally be as bias against what the Tories are trying to do in dragging not just Scotland but the whole UK out of the EU.

      I’m not fussed either way though whatever their decision as I see no result that can be bad for Scotland. If Holyrood win then that’s another spoke in the wheels of those that would drag Scotland out of the EU against our wishes.

      If Holyrood lose then as far as I’m concerned that’s simply another reason why we need to be Independent and capable of making our own laws that suit Scotland’s needs.

      We’re definitely getting close to the end game now, get your boots on as there’s work to be done to get us over the line.

    79. Andrew says:

      The BBC is funded by licence fee payers. That’s you and me – not the government. So many lies posted in this thread saying BBC journalists are lying because they are paid for by ‘Westminster’. When you lie you become unbelievable. And that applies to the rest of your opinions too. Especially if you lie for free!

    80. Big Jock says:

      Thomas Pre-Crown unification it’s sketchy. However from that very article you sent me there is this extract:

      “Scottish kings were chosen by election and were also subject to the authority of the law, a law they could not circumvent. Sovereignty therefore resided with the people not the Crown”.

      Very important, and even more important Kings were chosen by election not the case in England

    81. Bobp says:

      When the snp had 56 seats at westmidden, that’s when they should have pressured,harried,and demanded day in and day out in the bestest union in the world, for devolved broadcasting. At least we could then go into any Indy ref getting our point across rather than the lying westmidden state propaganda channel

    82. Big Jock says:

      Thepnr- Remember Mike Russell said losing the SC ruling need not necessarily be a bad thing….with a wink.

    83. Liz g says:

      Yesindyref2 @ 3.49
      I’m taking it from the bit where the N.Irish guy said..
      “A bill doesn’t become Law till it’s passed the Parliament AND received Royal Assent” ….. My first thought was..
      Oh here we go again one word,instead of everything turning on the word Normally they will use that AND to mean because it’s not been given Royal Assent before the Withdrawal Bill it now can’t be….. In other words they held it back long enough to get the Westminster bill on the books..
      But we’ll see..
      Anyhoo,I think yer right,they will let some of the Bill through, just to keep it from appeal to Europe..
      But the Westminster guy made it clear that it will be back in Court to be struck down because of the later Withdrawal bill taking precedence….. And as the law currently stands I think he’s right,it won’t stand beyond that court case!
      But at least Westminster CANNOT deny they have changed the Devolution Act and used the EU withdrawal bill to do it!

    84. Luigi says:

      Lochside says:

      Yet a walkout in the HOC created huge numbers to join up. But still the leadership do not want to make waves.

      Yep, absolutely. The only, I repeat, the only way the SNP/SG/YES movement can take on the BritNat MSM effectively is to make waves. I accept the odds are stacked against us, which is precisely why we have to mix it up a bit. Start a brawl (metaphorically speaking of course!), lob a few constitutional hand grenades and see what happens. Create a fog of war and at least we have a fighting chance.

      MAKE WAVES

      It’s the only way.

      I still live in hope that our leaders are keeping the powder dry for the right time. And when the time comes, they are bold enough to stir the brown stuff and rattle our imperial masters. We will soon find out, cos we are fast approaching that “now or never” moment.

      There is only so much crap the country can take.

    85. Robert Peffers says:

      @Proud Cybernat says: 25 July, 2018 at 2:44 pm:

      ” … If the Scottish People are sovereign in Scotland (and not the Queen), why then do Scottish Bills from Holyrood have to go to the Queen for Royal Assent to become Acts of the Scottish Parliament? “

      You are way off beam there Proud Cybernat, and in danger of drawing wrong conclusions.

      Her Majesty, “The Queen of England”, is also, “Queen of Scots”, and that is the important thing. It differentiates her separate rolls in the only two kingdoms that are signatory to the Treaty of Union and it signifies the differing legal sovereignties of, “Her United Kingdoms”.

      It also shows that the United Kingdom is in fact a description of a personal union of the crowns a.k.a. sovereignty of the United Kingdoms and does not form a legally sovereign parliament of Westminster. While the monarchy wears two crowns the two kingdoms sovereignty cannot be held by the same monarch and thus neither can Westminster claim legal sovereignty over the people or the kingdom of Scotland.

      I’ll put that in a simpler, more easily understandable way:-

      In 1706/7 the two kingdoms were still independent until the treaty came into force and before it did so the Queen of the independent Kingdom of England was legally sovereign but the monarchy of England had legally been made to delegate their Divine right of Kings to the Parliament of England and the parliament of England, (and only the three countries of the Kingdom of England), became legally a Constitutional Monarchy and thus legally transferred the sovereignty of the monarchy to the Parliament of The Kingdom of England.

      This could not be applied to Scotland as Scotland for, in 1320, Scotland had changed the law of Scotland from Divine Right of Kings to the people of Scotland but, unlike in the Kingdom of England that only delegated the sovereignty and left the monarchy still legally sovereign, Scotland made the people fully legally sovereign.

      So since 1707 Westminster has illegally assumed it had sovereignty over Scotland but never actually has been sovereign over Scotland, or rather sovereign over Scots.

      So, as the legally sovereign monarch of England Elizabeth Regina signs as the legal sovereign but as Queen of Scots she is the protector of the people of Scotland’s sovereignty and she legally signs bills on their behalf. (and there is the legal minefield that Westminster has just walked into with its eyes wide open but seeing nothing).

      Here is the thing they are going to have to face and I quote the Declaration of Arbroath on which the legal sovereignty on the people of Scotland is based:-

      “Yet if he should give up what he has begun, seeking to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own right and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be subjected to the lordship of the English. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.”

      This is the bit that makes the former King of Scotland into the King of Scots and a subject of the sovereign people of Scotland who, with the full agreement of King Robert, gave the now legally sovereign people of Scotland the legal right to drive out the king and appoint another in his place.

      So while the English Kingdom left their monarch legally sovereign and legally delegated their powers to the parliament of England, (not the parliament of the United Kingdom), the Scottish Kingdom made the people directly legally sovereign but, until now, the people of Scotland have chosen to remain sovereign and send their elected members to Westminster and if we chose to now invoke our legally sovereign right to end the monarch’s role as our protector, (she hasn’t done a great job to date), and end the Treaty of Union it is, under Scots law a done deal and Westminster has no say in the matter.

      Whether we then decide to appoint another able person in The Queen of Scots place will be a matter for the people of Scotland alone to decide.

      Mind you the declaration has made no provision to NOT have someone in her place but we could call that person the President rather than the king/queen of Scots.

      Hope that helps to distil the place of the legal history of how the Union was supposed to be and not how it actually works under Westminster rule(s).

    86. Just some of the Bridges and tunnels on A roads subject to toll charges Down There.
      Imagine if Mum 2B Davidson got control of Scotland?
      Add £30 a week to your travel to work costs if you cross a bridge, go through a tunnel or venture on to what little motorway we have.

      Where is she anyway?
      Pregnancy isn’t an illness.

      A4 Batheaston Bridge Bath, Somerset
      A15 Humber Bridge Hull, Yorkshire
      A19 Tyne Tunnels Wallsend, Tyne and Wear
      A38 Tamar Bridge Plymouth, Devon
      A41 Mersey Tunnels – Queensway Birkenhead, Liverpool
      A57 Dunham Bridge Lincoln, Lincolnshire
      A59 Mersey Tunnels – Kingsway Wallasey, Liverpool
      A477 Cleddau Bridge Milford Haven, Pembrokeshire
      A533 Mersey Gateway Halton, Cheshire
      A3025 Itchen Bridge Southampton, Hampshire

      Our ‘whores’ at the Dead Tree Scrolls and the State Propaganda Broadcasters are on a par with Lord Haw Haw and Tokyo Rose.
      How do you face your kids at night, or have they been enrolled in Rees Mogg’s Youth Organisation?

      Spy on a neighbour is now official DWP policy.
      A&E staff have now to check the immigration status of every mangled body arriving for treatment.
      England is the new Reich.

    87. Liz g says:

      Big Jock @ 4.03
      Who signed things in to law then?
      In the Kingdom of Scotland,if not the King/Monarch then who and what exactly was the King for…
      Because its my understanding that’s their whole point!

    88. Luigi says:

      IMO, with all the BREXIT nonsense, and a sense of dumbfoundment and utter betrayal, there is a huge number of people in Scotland (and elsewhere) just itching for a fight with the establishment.

      Even quite a few soft NOs!

      Pick yer moment, Nicola, and when it comes hit em. Hit em hard. You won’t be alone. 😉

    89. Bill Glen says:

      Now we know why there was no one Available to Pick the Crops this Year, They were Busy Writing For the Media

    90. ronnie anderson says:

      Just trying to think of a medication that can increase the Inflation factor ( wheels turning whirrr ) ! oh aye Viagra , those so called journalists have a hard on for always misleading the public, when there up there up an never coming doon in ah hurry , ah hope its painfull .

    91. Haggishunter says:

      Most people I talk with, who aren’t interested in politics, know not to trust the Beeb or any other mainstream uk media.
      It’s shocking they get away with this crap, and it will be worse when the Brits get their country back, there will evolve a society of the stupid misleads, the discontented and the plutocrats behind it all

    92. orri says:

      Fun fact,

      One of the duties of the First Minister is to advise on the use of the Royal Prerogative. The case against her calling herself ER II was lost on the point that, you’ve guessed it, what the Queen of Scots chooses as he Sunday go to meeting name is part of that. Therefore whilst Salmond may not go as far as suggesting she go as far as changing her title within Scotland he had every right to suggest she use said title.

      It also means that Sturgeon, or whoever is FM, when Charles comes to the throne might have a word in his ear about how daft it might be to call himself George. Certainly an independent Scotland might insist he does not adopt that name when crowned here.

    93. Mountain Shadow says:

      ——————
      Lenny Hartley says:
      25 July, 2018 at 3:20 pm
      Petra your wrong, she is Elizabeth 1 Queen of Scots. That title alone says that the Scots people are Sovereign and not her or any Parliament.
      ——————
      That’s not strictly true. It’s normal protocol for the Monarch to take the highest regnal number, therefore should Charles decide to be known as Robert for example, he would become Robert IV of the Uk of GB & NI and not Robert I.

    94. Big Jock says:

      Liz – As far as I know the bills or laws were ratified by the King or Queen of Scots. The technical difference is that in England the sovereignty rested with the monarch, but in Scotland it was always the people.

      So the Act of Union adopted the English tradition of the unelected monarch being the ruler, and the people being the subjects.

      That is why I say the current system of Royal Assent is a product of the Act Of Union. It is not a product of Scotland. Devolution is a unionist device and is therefore subject to the current Westminster model of legislation.

      Devolution was not set up by Scotland. It was set up by Westminster. Devolution is entirely meaningless in terms of Scottish sovereignty. When we argue about devolution and independence. They are two entirely different entities.

    95. Bobp says:

      Breeks 3.05 pm. I’m in full agreement with your post. Just wonder how long Scots will continue to be happy being a doormat?.

    96. Capella says:

      I thought the AGUK was a bit flustered this afternoon. He sounded less pompous and maybe suspects the UK may lose this one.

      The Lord Advocate, the AGW and the AGNI all presented cogent arguments that the Continuity Bill IS within the SG competence.

      The AGW was, IMO, the most accessible hammerer of the UK Withdrawal Bill. Once the proceedings are online you could listen to the last half hour of today’s morning session to hear his arguments.

      Scroll to foot of page for the Watch/hear links. Todays proceedings are not yet available:
      https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2018-0080.html

    97. Remember the State,laundered through the BBC,are giving nearly £100,000,000 to prop up/influence the Brutish UK `free press`,

      using Orwell speak they are calling the State paid hacks `Local Democracy Reporters`,

      London with pop of 11,000,000 get 12 LDS`s

      Scotland with pop of 5,000,000 get 23 LDS`s

      the State owned hacks should really be called `Democratic White Helmet Reporters`,

      the State are trying to control all media outlets.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/lnp/ldrs

    98. LDS should read LDR.

      predictive text thing,honest.

    99. gus1940 says:

      Given the severe drought crisis in England with near empty reservoirs and dried up rivers together with some localised water shortages in Scotland is it not time to take the sensible decision to construct a Scotland-wide water grid extended to 2 connectors to England at Berwick and Gretna?

      Given Scotland’s overall abundance of high quality water needing minimal treatment due to it being sourced from lochs and reservoirs an independent Scotland could make a fortune selling our water to England and there would be none of the nonsense of transmission charges as we have when we export electricity.

      Apart from the water stolen from Wales and taken from the Lake District most of England’s water comes from rivers and groundwater.

      With the rush to fracking in England their groundwater sources will be endangered and anybody who has ever had the misfortune to taste the water in London knows that they would welcome palatable Scottish water in place of the processed sewage from the Thames which constitutes most of their supply.

      In Scotland we have plenty of pipeline construction experience from the oil industry and it would not be punishingly expensive to construct a national water grid.

      The export of water would be nice little earner and we would set the price.

      Has Wales ever received so much as a penny for the vast quantities of water stolen from them over the years to supply Birmingham and The Midlands?

    100. Petra says:

      @ Lenny at 3:20 …. “Petra you’re wrong.”

      Lol, I fairly botched that one up! Honest I knew the answer Gov, but in my haste got it the wrong way round.

    101. Bill McLean says:

      A brave woman journalist died for pursuing truth in her country. This scum in Britnat world led by the awful BBC should be ashamed of their disgustingly low standard of journalism. Daphne Caruana Galizia of Malta died in the cause of truth. These scum here are determined to ruin Scotland so that their kids and grandkids can suffer in bankrupt, corrupt and useless isolated Britannia!

    102. Gullane No4 says:

      No doubt old Archie will be spouting the BBC/Daily Mail/Scotsman headline at the golf/bowls/old folks/Conservative/RBL club as gospel truth.

      What a desperate state the Unionist BBC and Scottish press are in when they start spouting this guff.

    103. Brian Powell says:

      They see an opportunity to get misinformation out and go for that. It’s not that they don’t know.

    104. Lenny Hartley says:

      Mountain shadow ! I give you Jamie the Saxt and as the song goes how can lizzie be the 2nd when there has only been wan, i think you better go and check some post boxes pal!

    105. SOG says:

      So what other news did the Prescription Charge bull keep off the front pages?

    106. Valerie says:

      @ Thepnr 3.06

      Well worth a listen to that link you posted. I’ve just started following that chap on Twitter.

      Heads up, shitstorm incoming. Meanwhile, Hannan is writing in incendiary language in the Scum about the EU wishing us to fail.

      This is Wednesday, and this week, we have taken 2/3 steps along the road to fascism. If we don’t leave, I don’t want to live here. We are surely just a shade away from Orban’s Hungary?

    107. yesindyref2 says:

      @Thepnr
      I’m really not that concerned that there will be any great issue of bias from the judges against the Scottish Parliament in their judgement as I feel they might equally be as bias against what the Tories are trying to do in dragging not just Scotland but the whole UK out of the EU.

      I agree, and with the Miller case, followed by Westminster’s power grab, or to put it another way, the Conservatives power grab not just over Holyrood, but the UK Parliament – both houses – I wonder if the judges are wondering if there’s enough gap between the legislative (Parliament) and the executive (Theresa May)? That was obliquely referenced a few times with “Ministers” mentioned a fair bit.

      I can’t help feeling if the UK had a written consttution and an actual constitutional court, it would be busy right now. As it is, the UKSC has to work within laws that have been passed – and precedent which is of course a definition of what is “normally”.

      @Liz g
      Wolffe seemed to use the word “normally” a lot. I wonder if he’s trying to make a point, not just for now, but for future?

      I don’t think this is the last time (apart from the judgement) we’re going to be seeing the UKSC.

    108. Hamish100 says:

      Mountain shadow
      How come Jamsey the 6th got sent back to ean?

    109. Proud Cybernat says:

      @ Mr Peffers

      “You are way off beam there Proud Cybernat, and in danger of drawing wrong conclusions.”

      I have to say, Mr Peffers – no, honestly, I really do – that you have a mighty fine way of answering posts here that has a tendency to rub up, even like-minded folks such as myself, the wrong way. Tell me something – why do you almost always begin a reply to someone on this board by telling them or otherwise implying that they view is wrong or, in this case, “way off beam”?

      How the hell can I be way off anything when I a not expressing a view but merely ASKING A BLOODY QUESTION? I don’t need you to tell me I’m wrong before you begin to explain why I’m wrong. An answer to the bloody question is all I seek – not your bloody sanctimonious pre-amble.

      You may be well-versed in Scots history, Mr Peffers, but FFS please do something about your bedside manner cos it stinks. And that is from someone who otherwise likes reading (most of) your posts.

    110. orri says:

      To clarify something. Signing an act into Scots law can be done either by the monarch sticking on the big hat, tottering up to Scotland and signing in person or by use of the Great Seal of Scotland.

      In theory Sturgeon or whoever is FM can do two things to veto that process.

      One is to act as Keeper of the Great Seal and withhold it’s use. The second is to advise the Queen not to sign. Either of which might be enough to kick off a constitutional stushie.

      So yes, at times, an act might come into force in parts of the rUK and Scotland. However that doesn’t mean they are signed off in the same manner.

      Allegedly the SoS, Mundell, can intervene in matters where he has a “reasonable” case that an Act passed by Holyrood will impact on reserved matters. He’s missed his chance this time around or he’s to feart to put his name to it.

    111. Petra says:

      And if we win at the Supreme Court, what then? Andrew Tickell (Peat Worrier) is saying that Westminster could just go ahead, override the decision in policy terms, by pulling the rabbit out of the Section 35 hat. If they were to do that, crazy enough to do that, it would co-incide with the so-called Brexit “clarity” period in October. Would the combination of results, lose or a win being overridden by Section 35, then set off the firing gun?

      Expect the MSM to really ramp up the ante now. If that’s possible! I’m also wondering what the Queen of the Scots makes of it all? I’d love to be a fly on the wall of her wee but and ben.

    112. Thepnr says:

      See that £1.3 billion cost to the SNHS for presciptions I can’t believe it as it is simply staggering.

      See my earlier post where the BBC reported on prescription charges being scrapped and it says:

      “Prescription charges have been falling in Scotland for the last three years and stood at £3 before the 1 April change, which will mean the Scottish government losing out on £57m a year.”

      https://wingsoverscotland.com/but-what-does-journalism-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-2379015

      At £3 a pop for a prescription that implies that 19 million prescriptions were paid for in any given year.

      Since 90% of prescriptions weren’t paid for, it then implies that around 190 million prescriptions were being issued every year.

      Sounds like utter bollocks to me in a country with a population of 5 million.

    113. Valerie says:

      @ yesindyref2

      UK is one of about 5 countries in the whole world without a written constitution. We share that stage with Israel and Saudi Arabia.

      Even the small dictatorships have something written down, even if it’s shit, to try and at least LOOK like they care about citizen Rights.

      These calls today about a new law on treason, are having to refer to 1352 previous law on treason. We look like utter arseholes that cant get their act together for citizens.

      Also serves to highlight how nothing is considered or thought out. The Right Wing see the two Isil terrorists, and immediately think – we must exploit this for more draconian measures, and hit out at soft, liberal lefties.

      I was arguing with a yoon on Twitter about archaic WM, and he kept responding “rubbish, greivance mongering”.

      I said about Speaker calling on Sergeant at arms, who uses a sword to chase lingering MPs out of voting lobby. He of course ridiculed me, saying it never happened in recent times.

      He shut up when I told him Mhairi Black described what happened a few months ago.

    114. Golfnut says:

      Here’s a thought. There is statute in Scots law for suing the Monarch, I think it deals with loss, i.e. when the Monarchs actions or inaction cause loss. Elizabeth, Queen of Scots, signed the ‘Withdrawal’ Bill against the expressed will of the people of Scotland, we voted to stay. It will undoubtedly cause in some form or another to every person in Scotland. Would that be considered grounds for taking the Crown to court.

    115. Capella says:

      @ Thepnr – £1.3bn will be the cost to the SNHS of drugs, charged by the suppliers. The amount the SG charges patients is not necessarily related to the drug bill.

      I belive Nicola, when Health Minister, decided it cost as much in admin to charge for prescriptions that it wasn’t worth it.

    116. yesindyref2 says:

      @Proud Cybernat
      It goes back way before 1707, and perhaps one way is to check out the Great Seal of Scotland.

      How does Royal Assent happen?

      The day after the Bill is passed in the Scottish Parliament letters are sent to the law officers (Advocate General for Scotland, the Lord Advocate and the Attorney General) advising them of the four week period in which they can raise legal objection to the Bill.
      If no objection is made by the law officers, or the four week period has passed, the Presiding Officer writes to Her Majesty The Queen enclosing the Bill and a Royal Warrant for signature – these are then delivered to Buckingham Palace.
      When the Bill and Royal Warrant are returned to the Scottish Parliament, the Warrant is hand-stitched together.
      The documents are then delivered to Registers of Scotland, followed by the National Records of Scotland, in Edinburgh, where the Great Seal of Scotland is applied.
      Notices are then placed in the official journals of record: the London, Edinburgh and Belfast Gazettes signalling that Royal Assent has been given.
      In all of the 200 Acts of the Scottish Parliament the Great Seal of Scotland has been made using beeswax supplied by a specialist firm in East Lothian. The process of making the Great Seal of Scotland has changed very little over 800 years.

      http://www.parliament.scot/help/66524.aspx

      The Great Seal of Scotland is the two-plate silver mould – known as a matrix – used to create a wax seal that is attached to official documents to confer royal assent by the reigning Monarch. All Royal Warrants are superscribed by the Monarch of the day. One side of the Seal features the reigning Monarch and the other side, the Royal Arms as used in Scotland.

      A number of functions disappeared under the Act of Union, which technically abolished the Great Seal but appointed a Seal to be kept and used in place of the Great Seal. It is this seal that is generally referred to as the Scottish Seal though technically it is referred to as “Her Majesty’s Seal appointed by the Treaty of Union to be kept and used in Scotland in place of the Great Seal of Scotland.”

      https://news.gov.scot/news/great-seal-of-scotland-goes-on-public-display

    117. Chang Sha says:

      @Bill McLean
      Apologies for OT
      Replied to your query on previous post

    118. Clootie says:

      I’m always amazed at how well the media is co-ordinated in Scotland…it is almost as if a central office sent out today’s SNPbad story.

      The BBC quotes the papers and the papers quote the BBC. Then the Unionist politicians quote both and if any doubt remains the will create a think tank to confirm.

      Journalism is another word for propaganda when it comes to the MSM.what other nation on earth would tolerate this insult?

    119. galamcennalath says:

      I can remember when broadcast media, even the BBC, exposed political ineptness, corruption and incompetence.

      Either with serious investigative journalism and exposés, or ‘fun’ like Spitting Images.

      Power held to account with programmes like World in Action, Dispatches, Panorama. No doubt there were limits to how far they would push the Establishment, but I reckon they would have been all over the recent dark money and undermining of democracy. And they wouldn’t have gone along with all the pro Brexit bullshit.

      I understand Panorama still exists. Can’t remember them coming out with any shock horror revelations recently though.

      Some day soon, iScotland will have a media fit for purpose.

    120. Thepnr says:

      Don’t mean to go on about this but I will anyway 🙂 190 million prescriptions cost at say £1 billion in 2011, so an average cost of just over £5 each. Which sounds OK as far as the cost goes.

      Then though, if you look at how the number of prescriptions and divide by the number of households then every single household in Scotland needs 3 prescriptions every 2 weeks LOL.

      Pull the other one.

    121. galamcennalath says:

      The War Game, now available on iPlayer.

      “Contains upsetting scenes “ … understatement of the century.

      This is what happens when society actually breaks down. Not relaxing viewing, but certainly an eye opener. Government procedures probably haven’t changed all that much!

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02zy7nt/the-war-game

      Threads (1984) is perhaps even more harrowing!

    122. Thepnr says:

      @Capella

      No I get that the prescription charge of £3 was not the cost of the drugs. It was stated though that the money lost to the Scottish government would be £57 million.

      So that £57 million can only be the amount collected from the prescription charge. i.e. 19 million prescriptions at £3/each = £57 million.

      Since less than 10% of prescriptions were paid for and the other 90% were free the total number of prescriptions in any one year is 190 million.

      19 million paid for and 171 million free is how I read it.

    123. Macart says:

      Probably a greater betrayal of public trust than any party. More personal as it were. Media and journalism were meant to protect us. Speaking truth unto power and all that.

      Today?

      It’s a toss up as who people hold in greater contempt. The establishment and their political class that brought all of this upon us, or their go to propagandists. Mainstream journalism.

      Tough call really.

    124. Robert Peffers says:

      @Proud Cybernat says: 25 July, 2018 at 5:19 pm:

      ” … I have to say, Mr Peffers – no, honestly, I really do – that you have a mighty fine way of answering posts here that has a tendency to rub up, even like-minded folks such as myself, the wrong way.”

      Well there’s a, how did you call it, “sanctimonious”, pre-amble if ever I was one.

      “I have to say, Mr Peffers”

      Well in fact you didn’t have to say it – you chose to say it -so why did you?

      … Tell me something”, and not as much as a by your leave or even a simple, please.

      ” … Tell me something – why do you almost always begin a reply to someone on this board by telling them or otherwise implying that they view is wrong or, in this case, “way off beam”?”

      Now let me see – (pause for though), Ah! Yes!

      Could it be that this is a forum and a prime object of any forum is to debate things? So the obvious point is, if I agree fully with someone, what is the point of a string of commenters all posting, “Me Too”.

      When everyone is in full agreement, there can be no debate. It begins to look like Prime Minister’s Questions when all you can see are the Tory front benches. A row of nodding heads and the unified cries of Here! Here! As the Tory benches support their leader in public while fighting like ferrets in a bag in private.

      I do not just tell or imply, someone is, or may be wrong, I explain why I believe them to be wrong, or much more likely, mistaken or misled, I invariably not only proffer the reason but offer cites and arguments why they are mistaken or misled.

      ” … How the hell can I be way off anything when I a not expressing a view but merely ASKING A BLOODY QUESTION?”

      The fact you are asking the questions is because you claim not to know the answer – otherwise why are you asking the questions?

      Yet now you are given answers, instead of entering into debate, you attempt to castigate someone who is attempting to tell you straight answers and going to the bother to explain the answers and even quoting evidence to back up those answers.

      Could it be that you didn’t really want answers but were attempting to mislead? A sort of, “Oh” Look! There’s a squirrel over there”.

      “I don’t need you to tell me I’m wrong before you begin to explain why I’m wrong.”

      Ah! There it is – so I have got it right – you were asking questions that you now claim , “you don’t need anyone to answer”.

      … An answer to the bloody question is all I seek – not your bloody sanctimonious pre-amble.”

      So you didn’t want answers then?

      ” … You may be well-versed in Scots history, Mr Peffers, but FFS please do something about your bedside manner cos it stinks. And that is from someone who otherwise likes reading (most of) your posts.”

      This from a person just making a rather obnoxious diatribe right here on Wings. That is the difference, If you had corrected me on anything I would accept your correction if you explained where I was wrong and might even have thanked you for your correction.

      This is, after all a forum to exchange views and ideas and I always welcome debate. It leads to everyone sifting through different views and different ideas and everyone benefits from that.

      Let my put all that in a different manner – if you do not want to be open to debate then start a blog of your own.

      Many bloggers are not like Stu who throws down a topic and lets Wingers get on with debate. He will, though, often come back and comment when he feels he needs to. and it is my opinion, and I may be wrong, the open debate between Wingers is what makes this forum such a great success.

    125. Robert Peffers says:

      @Thepnr says: 25 July, 2018 at 5:52 pm:

      ” … Don’t mean to go on about this but I will anyway ? 190 million prescriptions cost at say £1 billion in 2011, so an average cost of just over £5 each. Which sounds OK as far as the cost goes.£

      I cannot claim to know very much about this subject, Thepnr, but it strikes me that the sum quoted might also include all SNHS drugs and certain disposable items used in Health Centres and Hospitals throughout the SNHS including items carried by Ambulance crews and paramedics too. These may well be in excess of personal prescriptions costs for GP patients.

      Such as ‘Flu and other immunisation jabs by GPs and Practice Nurses will most likely also fall under those costs.

    126. yesindyref2 says:

      @Robert Peffers: “the open debate between Wingers is what makes this forum such a great success.

      Yes Robert, but you could try to be polite for a change, rather than imply people you “debate” with are thick as two short planks, taken in by media (i.e. thick as two short planks) – or worse (e.g. thick as two short planks).

    127. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      It is surely crunch time for the Labour Party in Scotland. They can choose to die or they can choose Scotland.

      I recognise political loyalty and respect it. After all I have been in the SNP for 59 years and have been very annoyed lots of times (no more so than being involved in last year’s shambolic vetting procedure for Council candidates). But there comes a point sometimes when the very principles of the organisation you believe in are not adequate to represent the best way forward for the people you seek to protect and represent.

      Here’s a statement.

      “Give us our parliament in Scotland. We will start with no traditions. We will start with ideals. We will start with purpose, with courage. We will start with the aim and the object that there will be 134 men and women pledged to 134 Scottish constituencies, to spend their whole brain power, their whole courage and their whole soul in making Scotland into a country in which we can take people from all the nations of the earth and say : this is our land, this is our Scotland ,these are our men, our works, our women and children: can you beat it?”

      Who said that?

      James Maxton said that.

      The door is open. Is there anybody in the Labour Party in Scotland ready to walk in?

    128. Liz g says:

      Robert Peffers @ 6.25
      Proud Cybernat has a Point Robert….. And fine well ye Know it…..
      But I do hope to be that abrasive when I’m in my 80s, even so… ye did make the point aboot the Tories fighting like rats in a sack behind the scenes…. we need mind and no hiv unnecessary fights below the lines, wouldn’t ye say?
      And I know that you’re smart enough tea ken the difference…. Proud Cybernat is one of us…

      How did ye get on this morning…. any further forward?

    129. Big Jock says:

      The important think about ancient history, is that it is open to different interpretations. Hence our healthy debate about Royal Assent before the union.

      One thing stands though. The current system is of the Union. So any argument about devolution, is an argument about legislation in the union.

      Independence and sovereignty are completely different matters. We haven’t got to that stage yet. The SC decision is about devolution not sovereignty.

    130. admiral says:

      Robert Peffers says:
      25 July, 2018 at 6:44 pm
      @Thepnr says: 25 July, 2018 at 5:52 pm:
      ” … Don’t mean to go on about this but I will anyway ? 190 million prescriptions cost at say £1 billion in 2011, so an average cost of just over £5 each. Which sounds OK as far as the cost goes.£
      I cannot claim to know very much about this subject, Thepnr, but it strikes me that the sum quoted might also include all SNHS drugs and certain disposable items used in Health Centres and Hospitals throughout the SNHS including items carried by Ambulance crews and paramedics too. These may well be in excess of personal prescriptions costs for GP patients.
      Such as ‘Flu and other immunisation jabs by GPs and Practice Nurses will most likely also fall under those costs.

      There’s also the issue that new and better drugs for serious conditions like various cancers have come on stream in those ten years. New drugs will always be more expensive than old ones because, among other things, the drug companies have to recover the huge cost of R&D to develop the drugs and to continue R&D for new drugs and therapies into the future.

      There are also new drugs and therapies that prolong the lives of people with conditions like HIV and therefore cost more as more and more people survive longer.

      So to compare what we spent 10 years ago with what we spend now is a bit like comparing apples and oranges – there isn’t a direct comparison because the products being compared have changed and evolved over that time. And that’s before you consider simpler issues like cost inflation and changing demographics in society.

    131. admiral says:

      I would also add that it would be good to bookmark these articles because sooner rather than later the MSM and BBC will be getting into a lather about some poor, sick soul who will be used by them for an SNP bad story about some new wonder drug that the SNHS won’t fund.

      Well, yoons, YOU were the ones complaining about the cost of the drugs budget!

    132. yesindyref2 says:

      Another thing about prescription charges is that it isn’t the 69p for a packet of paracetomol, it’s the fee and cost of drugs that is paid to the pharmacists to keep them in existence and pay for their staff. Yes, pharmacies are often well off, well, that also helps them keep going and often on the high street. Fee is maybe I don’t know, say £5 each, can’t find it quickly.

    133. ronnie anderson says:

      Golfnut Salvo jure 1688 ( cujuslilibit ) whom soever should sue the crown if thats what you were referring too.

    134. Bugger le Panda says:

      “If I was writing the script for all of this, the “Law” would have made this Union unsound in Law 300 years ago. Why has it taken Scots Law and Scots lawyers over three centuries to ram a stick into the spokes of Unionism in all its infamous illegitimacy?”

      If the layers didn’t do anything about befoore, it was because there was no money in it for them

    135. PacMan says:

      For the life of me I still don’t understand why people keeping referring to it as the BBC. It is the British Broadcasting Corporation and takes a particular British perspective to all aspects of its output. This British perspective isn’t any different whether it is based on events happening in Scotland, the US or any other part of the world.

    136. ben madigan says:

      @ David McEwan Hill
      What you wrote echoes the sentiments of an Irish patriot, a great humanitarian

      Just substitute Scotland for ireland!

      “Ireland that has wronged no man, that has injured no land, that has sought no dominion over others. Ireland is treated today among other nations of the world as if she was a convicted criminal”

      “Self government is our right, a thing born to us at birth a thing no more to be doled out to us by another people than the right to life itself, than the right to feel the sun or smell the flowers or to love our kind.” Roger Casement.

    137. Legerwood says:

      ISD Scotland published its report on prescribing statistics yesterday. Here is their summary of the main points in the report:

      “”Overall Cost

      The total (net) cost for dispensing items and providing services in 2017/18 was £1.3 billion, an increase of 3.3% compared to 2016/17 and 25.7% over the last 10 years.

      Products Dispensed

      The total number of items dispensed over the last 10 years increased by 20.5% from 85.8 million to 103.4 million items. There was little change between 2016/17 and 2017/18.

      The cost of items reimbursed (Net Ingredient Cost) has increased by 24.8% over the last 10 years.

      The cost of medicines (Gross Ingredient Cost) for items dispensed increased by 2.7% between 2016/17 and 2017/18, to £1.2 billion. This is partly due to price increases for items in short supply, new medicines and the move in supply of some high cost treatments from hospital to primary care.

      Pregabalin, used to treat epilepsy and chronic pain, had the highest total Gross Ingredient Cost in 2017/18, at £36.38 million.

      Services Provided

      The cost for remuneration of services has increased by 0.9% between 2016/17 and 2017/18 to £216 million.””
      ……….
      Note Indyref2 @ 7.27pm the costs for Services Provided.

      The figure relating to the increase in costs over the last 10 years, and reported by the BBC etc, comes from the ISD Scotland report. I have scanned and searched the full report and have not found any mention of inflation or adjustment for same but it was a quick scan.

      Therefore the report by the BBC and others seems an accurate reflection of what was in the ISD report

      That still leaves the question as to why the ISD did not adjust the figures for inflation.

    138. robertknight says:

      MSM Journalists in Scotland – Useful Idiots to the British Establishment.

    139. Capella says:

      @ Thepnr – sorry I misundrstood your point.

      But there are a lot of people who take multiple drugs every day for chronic conditions. Those of us who are relatively heathy are lucky. Imagine if you were in England and needed three drugs every day for blood pressure, diabetes and oedema at £8 per prescription.

      I recall Nicol argued that poorer people would avoid getting drugs they needed if they had to pay for them.

      Heard about a woman in the US who begged bystanders not to call her an ambulance after an accident becaue it would cost her more than she could pay. Most personal bankruptcies in the US are on account of illness and the cost of medical care. Absolutely wicked.

    140. ScottieDog says:

      @galamcennalath
      Aye Threads is probably the most harrowing – probably why it was banned initially.

      I also saw a remake of ‘On the beach’ on YouTube recently. Closely follows the first one. The end always gets to me.

    141. Liz g says:

      Big Jock @ 7.06
      Yes Healthy and I hope good natured ( it’s so hard to put tone into print,when like me yer punctuation is crap).
      Anyhoo…
      I only half agree that Independence and Sovereignty are two different things…. In and of themselves they are but the 2014 No vote is to date the most obvious example of Sovereignty and that was about Independence…Also given that while the Treaty of the Union survives our Sovereign will can never be “blindingly” expressed again …. Until the next vote on independence.
      Tis a puzzle right enough….
      Which is why I’ve always disliked that it IS a vote for independence…. When truth be told it should really be about keeping the Treaty of the Union or not….I’d even settle for which Parliament do you want to be Superior,a nuclear option,I know but it would frame the debt more honestly,if we lost the next time we will loose Holyrood too and people should know that…. Jist sayin!!!!

    142. K1 says:

      Can we all just remember that the ‘way we ‘hear’ each others’ comments isn’t always the way those comments were intended?

      *I don’t mind a constitutional slap from RobertP every now and again, but as I’m as thick as two short planks at the best of times on all manner of btl subjects, it kinda cheers me up when he even notices a comment I’ve made…it’s a bit of an honour tae be telt yer aff piste and it finely hones one’s understanding when he does impart the ‘corrective’. 😉

      *all views are my own

    143. Dr Jim says:

      The BBC has uncovered using an FOI request massive increase in the price of our childrens favourite treats:

      Mars bars Ripples and Galaxies have risen in price 79.02% since 2007 Sturgeons dreams of Independence shattered

      Labour party spokestwit says *It proves conclusively the separatists agenda has failed and crumbled to dust Sturgeon must get on with the job of fixing Scotlands dire problems with the existing powers she already has and give up this nonsense about Independence*

      SNP spokesperson said *We are working hard to ensure our kids aren’t obese*

      Lib Dem spokesgit said *Mental health Mental health Mental health*

    144. Ealasaid says:

      @ K1 * all views are my own

      They are also my views as well K1. I couldn’t have written them better myself.

    145. Golfnut says:

      @ Ronnie Anderson,

      Thanks, for the life of me I could not remember its name.

    146. ronnie anderson says:

      Golfnut It’s the latin by design to confound the common man/woman .

    147. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Wierd, isn’t it, the way the same damn story pops up all over the place at exactly the same time? Like mushrooms after a rain shower. (Just more pungent and poisonous.)

      Has to be pure coincidence, surely…?

      …each time…

    148. Liz g says:

      K1 @ 8.23
      Ok… I confess
      I’ve never (that I can remember) had an “utter Pish” from Robert and I sometimes feel…. well … I’ve missed something.
      But still K1…. We also need tae try and keep the debate healthy… Robert will, I think , be the first to agree.
      Nae doubt that being argumentative attracts readers,and that’s where I think he is coming from, and I don’t think he is trying to offend…. but rather offend to be trying…
      And by trying I mean to make people think… no necessarily the poster but the reader…
      As you know perfectly well K1…. We’re the bad wans!!!!! and that Robert Peffers is no stealing our reputation….
      What say you K1

    149. Calum McKay says:

      I wonder how much the rise in subsidy Scots give to the English royal family over the same period is in comparison?

      People get to vote on whether we have free subscriptions, we don”t get to vote on su/sidising parasites!

    150. Robert Peffers says:

      @Liz g says: 25 July, 2018 at 6:59 pm:

      ” … we need mind and no hiv unnecessary fights below the lines, wouldn’t ye say?”

      I’m not the one picking fights, Liz g.

      A question was asked and I gave what I considered, not only an answer, but went to the trouble of looking up some cites and quotes to explain the thinking behind the answer.

      Note that he isn’t complaining about the answer but his about his sense of hurt that he didn’t like being told someone else thought he was on the wrong tack.

      I cannot remember how long you have read and/or commented on Wings but if you go back as far as I do you would know I initially suffered pelters for some time until it began to filter through that the people of Scotland were indeed legally sovereign, (among many other things), that to me were very obvious things that many Scots had just blindly accepted as true.

      I got it in the neck for quite a while and although fighting back always maintained that Wings would start to decline in popularity if all it became was a wee cosy group all saying, “Aye! Me too”.

      You only get the best opinions surviving when robust debate takes place. Matter of fact the schools debates around Edinburgh when I was at school were outstanding and you didn’t get the choice of whether you were for or against any particular thing being debated.

      The object being to learn how to produce the best argument and that was not necessarily the argument that was actually technically correct – it was the one that was best argued and won the debate.

      Mind you if the winning argument was not technically correct it was pointed out by the judges, (the teachers), why the winning argument was technically wrong and why it and should rightly have lost.

      Thing was there was no time wasted on hurt feelings even if things did occasionally get a bit overheated.

      Here’s a wee true story that taught me a valuable lesson. I served a five year craft apprenticeship at a very demanding craft covering vast and varied skills and knowledge.

      Our first year was group training and then we were put with a succession of qualified craftsmen and we most certainly were not there to make tea and run errands. My first craftsman was an old and very experienced craftsman.

      The particular area of work was, “Afloat”, that is working on a ship under refit and that meant in an area where all trades worked together and thus had to co-operate with each other.

      It also had the advantage that you learned a good deal about other trades and in spite of the general publics views that there was trade unions restrictive practices the truth was there was much overlapping. Mainly because the trades worked on piece work.

      So, for example, if a sparkie needed a wooden panel removed to gain access to a cable run the joiner was likely to tell you to do it yourself because he was on piecework and so on.

      However we apprentices were only trained in our own trades so we had to find out some of the skills needed by the tradesman who was telling us just to get on with it ourselves.

      So Davie, my old fitter, told me this very wise bit of wisdom.

      Look, laddie, yer gaun aboot things aa wrang. A’h heard ye tryin tae get Bob, (the Joiner), tae tak doon yon big widdin panel an he wis a bit short wi ye whan he haed tae stoap wirk an lost piecework time tae tak it doon fir ye.

      Next time dinna gae ask him nicely hoo tae tak onythin doon. Jist tell Bob he’s daein it aa wrang an he wull move hevin an earth tae prove tae ye he aye dis it richt an shows ye hoo he aye diz it richt tae prove it.

      Davie kent a thing or twa aboot psycology.

    151. McDuff says:

      The problem is as the Rev has said in the past , its the headline that grabs the attention. People absorb and believe this stuff and until we can get the Rev`s articles out to the mainstream its going to cost us votes in another indy referendum.
      Is there a reason why the National can`t print these articles.

    152. potter says:

      Anyone who thinks their taxpayers money is better spent on guns and bombs than medication is an erse.Yoons eh.

    153. Elmac says:

      There has to be a reckoning. It is not enough to call out lying journalists and broadcasters when most people in Scotland never get to see the truth. At the very least post independence these turds should never work again in the media and, if possible should be prosecuted where it can be proved that they lied in a position of public trust. Wait a minute….. that must apply to so called politicians too!

      They say that revenge is a dish best served cold but I would like it before it starts to cool, preferably in the white hot heat of a newly independent Scotland.

    154. K1 says:

      We’re puir rancid Liz…me especially, can utterly nullify the beautiful ongoing debate wi jist a wurd or two 😉

    155. Liz g says:

      Robert Peffers @ 9.50
      Ah do understand and appreciate yer points Robert…
      Also I’ve been around Wings long enough to have seen yer infinite patience explaining things tae Rock… And worked out that it wiznt really Rock ye were talkin to…
      I can appreciate that after all they year’s tryin tae get yer point across…. Ye are done suffering fool’s..
      But sometimes just sometimes ye are a bit “sharp” wi the wrong people….
      Fair’s fair Robert.. the guy did try tae tell ye he was, as someone who enjoyed (aka takin on board yer information) yer posts,respectfully tellin ye not to post as though ye were insulting him…. Thats no a big ask?

      I know,you know,how to debate….and I know that you have taken enough/more than yer fair share, of shit on here…
      But not from Proud Cybernat..

      I also appreciate that you,like me,, have been around so long that name’s start to gel…
      But Robert…Proud Cybernat does deserve respectful replies,and that’s all he asked for….
      You don’t need to respond about it….I am no looking for a justification…. I only ask that ye note what I said!!!

      Also ye haven’t said (,don’t need your private details) how ye got on this morning….did ye get tae the bottom of what’s going on?

    156. Liz g says:

      K1 @ 11.42
      Rancid….RANCID…. When did you decide tae dial back the cray cray… We are, I think, so much mair than Rancid…:)
      Westminster should be very afraid….

    157. K1 says:

      Lol…I was being economical wi the cray cray 😉

    158. boris says:

      The annual cost of the BBC Television licence has increased by around 43% over the last 10 years providing the BBC with approximately £1.50 billion additional revenue. All this accompanied with a marked reduction in the provision of quality television to Scotland.

      The Scottish Government needs to address issues arisig from the BBC Scotland output, in particular inaccurate News and Current Affairs reporting which is still massively biased against Scotland. Just it was at the height of the 2014 Referendum.

    159. Liz g says:

      K1 @12.54
      Quite right K1…
      Let’s keep it on the QT…LOL
      Just like Nanas night v ..oops nighty.. Opps…night nurse…

    160. louis.b.argyll says:

      Re dirty tricks, by BBC, PRESS, UK PARLIAMENT.

      We ain’t seen nothing yet, wait til they tag us as subversives, drip feeds from secret blacklists that we know are used by ruling Westminster hegemonies.

    161. Breeks says:

      I’m no lawyer, so with all the subtlety of a five year old playing with crayons, I read the Supreme Court case, not as a dummy run exactly, but a kind of courtesy gesture giving the UK the “polite option” of recognising the awkward reality of Scotland’s inalienable Sovereignty.

      In a fair world, or even a fair Union (of equals), that recognition should be a formality, but in the reality of the UK and it’s coventional acceptance of this asymmetric Union, then recognising Scotland’s Constitutional Popular Sovereignty is a throwback directly to the early 18th Century thinking, and reopens a whole cacophony of arguments which the Union believed it had successfully buried.

      If the Supreme Court has the balls to do it, it might recognise Scottish Sovereignty, but realistically, when push comes to shove, do we really expect the UK’s Supreme Court to recognise the sanctity of Law absolute and Scotland’s long misunderstood Sovereign legitimacy, and place these issues ahead of protecting the integrity and “accepted” conventions of the UK Parliament in Westminster?

      To that extent, I believe the “British” Supreme Court will find a way, or contrive a way, to hold the British line, and repel Scotland’s assault upon the “accepted” conventions.

      So far so good, or rather, so predictable.

      However, change the theatre, and change the Courtroom, and pit Scotland’s ancient and well documented Sovereignty against the dubious integrity and infirmities of the Union in an International Court, and suddenly any judgement against Scotland by the UK’s highest Court becomes material proof that Scotland cannot expect Constitutional justice from an instrument of United Kingdom rule and faux superiority.

      To that extent, I think the Supreme Court case might be a cul-de-sac for us, where losing the battle might help us win the war.

      The frustration I feel is that our campaign to overturn the faux sovereignty of Westminster and properly recognise Scottish Sovereignty, is a very linear and one dimensional campaign. It seems we cannot move on to objective B before we have successfully resolved objective A, and so on, and so on. I can see the sense in it, and perhaps it is necessary, but my frustration is that objectives A,B,C,D,E,F and G cannot be pursued simultaneously.

      What that means in real terms is I am frustrated that we are now going to squander weeks awaiting the outcome of a Supreme Court judgement before moving on to our next objective. It seems a great pity to me that we don’t have a second torpedo already in the water and running with a Constitutional Test Case lodged with the UN, and a third torpedo running seeking EU recognition of Scottish Sovereignty and International Personality to become a recognised player in Brexit negotiations. As I said, options B, C, D, E etc all running simultaneously.

      It’s not that I outright condemn our approach to Constitutional emancipation. It does seem to be thorough and well considered, and our opposition in Westminster seems conveniently bullish and delusional as usual, however the pace troubles me. Brexit will be a disaster for Scotland, and notwithstanding the immediate and direct consequences of Brexit, it will also move Scotland from a position of Constitutional strength with International interest in our affairs, and place us in a much weaker position of isolation and strengthened subjugation.

      I see it as imperative that Scotland’s Constitutional emancipation from the Union becomes a material reality BEFORE Brexit actually happens, but we are running dangerously short of time to achieve that.

      Let us bring the Constitutional battle to a head so that we can save our Country from Brexit, and not plan to accommodate the damage of Brexit as further grounds to undermine the Union. Fight the fight now to avoid Brexit. If we fail, God help us, but if we do fail, and Brexit then occurs, then we already have the same “change of circumstances” that can ignite IndyRef3. IndyRef 3 is our worst case scenario. IndyRef2 must be this side of Brexit.

      [Just for clarity too, I’m calling it IndyRef2, but I don’t necessarily see IndyRef2 as a referendum. IndyRef2 is a concerted full on attack to the Union with the objective of Sovereign Scottish Independence. It may or may not be achieved by an electoral referendum.]

    162. John Bell says:

      When I was in hospital 3 years ago I was prescribed paracetomol as a painkiller. I am sure my surgeon would have been happy to let me visit the local ASDA(3 miles away) in my hospital gown and 40 staples in my chest and abdomen to buy some every 2 days as there is a limit on the amount you can buy

    163. Pete says:

      Painkillers. I have a knee that feels like it is slowly disintegrating through arthritis. I take painkillers almost daily to relieve swelling and pain. Now I don’t take them everyday, and when I do, it’s normally two first thing in the morning. Our local village shop does stock them, but can’t be guaranteed, and my nearest Chemist is 50 miles away in Ullapool, or 100 miles in Inverness. With restrictions on purchase amounts, there is no way I can get paracetemol in large enough quantities other than by prescription.

      So please, will people stop going on about being able to get them cheaper from a supermarket, that is not always the case.

      I would happily show a prescription, to allow me to buy them in larger amounts from a supermarket and drop the quantity restriction..

    164. CameronB Brodie says:

      The BBC simply can’t help itself as it is Charter bound to promote the social cohesion of Britain. As such, the BBC must oppose Scottish independence rather than respect the principle of universal human rights and basic principles of liberal democracy. The BBC promotes English nationalism to Scotland, in the guise of fake news, and is a danger to Scotland’s civil society.


      Fake news and critical literacy in the digital age: sharing responsibility and addressing challenges

      Social inclusion and democratic participation rely on opportunities to access, express and share information as citizens. The extent to which misinformation can undermine these opportunities legitimises both concerns about fake news as symptomatic of information disorder, and discussions on what should be done. As such, as our engagement with information is increasingly mediated by the internet, discussions about how to promote critical literacy in the digital age are imperative.

      http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2018/05/21/fake-news-and-critical-literacy-in-the-digital-age-sharing-responsibility-and-addressing-challenges/

      “News you don’t believe”: Audience perspectives on fake news
      http://www.digitalnewsreport.org/publications/2017/news-dont-believe-audience-perspectives-fake-news/

      The Fake News Game: Actively Inoculating Against the Risk of Misinformation
      https://www.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.cam.ac.uk/files/fakenews_latest_jrr_aaas.pdf

      N.B. Brexit represents the adoption of a narrow, culturally driven, authoritarian totalitarianism. Brexit articulates the innate cultural predjudice that is inherant to British nationalism. Personally, as a left-thinking Scot, I don’t fancy a future living under a paradigm of increasingly fascistic English culturalism.

    165. CamerornB Brodie says:

      I know I’m a day late but Brexit really scares me. The Brexit campaign was largely aimed at promoting right-wing populism and stirring up good old-fashioned cultural prejudice/race hatred. This is what Scottish Tories and KH appear to support.

      UK media coverage of the 2016 EU Referendum campaign

      Summary

      Immigration

      • Coverage of immigration more than tripled over the course of the campaign, rising faster than any other political issue.

      • Immigration was the most prominent referendum issue, based on the number of times it led newspaper print front pages (there were 998 front pages about immigration, 82 about the economy).

      • Coverage of the effects of immigration was overwhelmingly negative. Migrants were blamed for many of Britain’s economic and social problems – most notably for putting unsustainable pressure on public services.

      • Specific nationalities were singled out for particularly negative coverage – especially Turks and Caesar!nians, but also Romanians and Poles.

      • The majority of negative coverage of specific foreign nationals was published by three news sites: the Express, the Daily Mail, and the Sun.

      Other political issues

      • Other political issues, such as the future of the devolved nations, the environment, and education, were covered far less than the economy and immigration during the campaign.

      Sovereignty

      • Sovereignty was referred to frequently (in almost 2,000 articles), but almost always in the context of other issues – most notably the economy and immigration.

      • Only 6% of articles containing issues of sovereignty also mentioned law-making powers.

      • In contrast, in almost half the articles in which sovereignty was referenced it was associated with ‘taking back control’.

      https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/policy-institute/CMCP/UK-media-coverage-of-the-2016-EU-Referendum-campaign.pdf

      EU Referendum Analysis 2016: Media, Voters and the Campaign
      http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/24337/1/EU%20Referendum%20Analysis%202016%20-%20Jackson%20Thorsen%20and%20Wring%20v1.pdf

      Towards a political economy of fake news
      https://polecom.org/index.php/polecom/article/download/86/288

    166. CameronB Brodie says:

      The main reason that British nationalist have gotten away with their xenophobic crap for so long, is that the public generally lack the skills needed to call them out.

      Critical media literacy is not an option

      Abstract

      Abstract

      This article explores the theoretical underpinnings of critical media literacy and analyzes four different approaches to teaching it. Combining cultural studies with critical pedagogy, we argue that critical media literacy aims to expand the notion of literacy to include different forms of media culture, information and communication technologies and new media, as well as deepen the potential of literacy education to critically analyze relationships between media and audiences, information and power. A multiperspectival approach addressing issues of gender, race, class and power is used to explore the interconnections of media literacy, cultural studies and critical pedagogy. In the interest of a vibrant participatory democracy, educators need to move the discourse beyond the stage of debating whether or not critical media literacy should be taught, and instead focus energy and resources on exploring the best ways for implementing it.

      Keywords
      Media literacy, Critical media literacy, Media education, Critical pedagogy, Cultural studies, Radical democracy

      https://www.tandfonline.com/keyword/Public+Service+Broadcasting

      Risk Perceptions and Risk Characteristics
      http://communication.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-283

      Recent Developments in Sociology of Risk and Uncertainty
      https://www.kent.ac.uk/scarr/events/finalpapers/ZinnTheories.pdf

    167. don marr says:

      Pretty obvious propaganda .
      It’s what they do best,



    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. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




    ↑ Top