As it happens, one of the things that we’ve been occupying ourselves with during the current news drought is pulling together a post called “The SNPBAD Files”, collecting all the desperate smear and innuendo of the Unionist press as it systematically tries to discredit every one of the 56 SNP MPs elected last May.
Until last night we hadn’t been sure which had been the most pathetically dismal. Was it the MP who still did a few haircuts in his barber shop on Saturday afternoons? The one who bought a derelict London house many years before he was an MP, renovated it with his own hands and now sometimes stays there when working at Westminster, rather than charging expenses to the public for accommodation? Or perhaps the one who tweeted that he was opposed to the concept of monarchy, the foul monster?
In a cunning meta-twist which simultaneously proves and disproves its own claim, the headline above is itself a lie. It’s of course not true that every single headline you read in a newspaper is absolutely false.
We’re not saying there isn’t a lot going on at the moment, but today’s Daily Record actually devotes a page to telling women when to change their pants.
Below is a 17-minute section of this afternoon’s John Beattie show on BBC Radio Scotland, featuring me and an amateur blogger with a keen interest in Pedigree Chum discussing the effect of the lower oil price on the Scottish economy.
So that’s genuine progress – next time some frothing Yoon screams “OIL PRICE! BLACK HOLE! SNP LIES! TOO WEE, TOO POOR!” at you, you can direct them here for categorical agreement from the Yes and No sides alike that actually the falling oil price makes an independent Scotland MORE economically viable, not less.
Unfortunately you’ll have to put up with a condescending, patronising arse sniggering randomly throughout, but it’s a relatively small price to pay.
Normally when the BBC’s Andrew Neil asks a politician to put a figure on one of their policy proposals the interviewee should be wary, because a trap is about to be sprung.
The phrase most repeated by angry Unionists in the 16-and-a-bit months since the independence referendum is surely “once in a generation”. While the SNP quietly gets on with the business of government, having not mentioned a second referendum in its 2015 manifesto and not being expected to do so in this year’s either, the parties of the UK can’t seem to shut up about it.
(This is happening despite Ruth Davidson having said just nine months ago that her party wouldn’t block a second indyref, while Ed Miliband said that Labour would. However, Davidson’s organ-grinder, David Cameron, joined Labour in ruling it out just a few months later, which may explain Davidson performing a sudden U-turn akin to her famous one over more devolution.)
And when you boil it down to the brass tacks, what that means is that the parties of the Union want to hold the Scottish people prisoner.
The groupthink of the Unionist commentariat is unfailingly a sight to behold. Barely a dozen weeks ago we drew attention to a seasonal crop of articles professing that the end of the SNP’s eight-year “honeymoon” was in sight, and that surely voters would surely tire at any moment of their supposed poor record in government.
But after the damage anticipated by the press from the Forth Bridge affair and another load of ham-fisted Labour attacks failed to materialise (defused in part by a set of excellent and significantly improved NHS waiting-time stats that must have had the BBC’s Eleanor Bradford weeping inconsolably into her clipboard), the pundit hive-mind has moved swiftly on to a new outlook: morose resignation.
The Labour Party has today published Margaret Beckett’s report into why it lost the 2015 general election. We were rather struck by this line:
Let’s just go over that one again to be sure: Labour believed that an SNP victory in Scotland would make it “impossible” for the Tories to form the government.
Which is weird, because that’s not quite what we remember them saying.
During the independence referendum campaign, we catalogued numerous breaches of the law for which the “Better Together” campaign was let off with a slap on the wrist, from data protection to running unlicensed lotteries. Today several papers report that the official No campaign has been fined £2000 by the Electoral Commission for failing to document £57,000 of its expenditure during the campaign.
Alert readers will no doubt recall the explosion of glee from Unionists in the press and on social media last October when this site was fined £750 for being late with some of its own documentation, and we assumed that much the same thing had happened with BT, but on closer examination the story appears to be rather different.
Rather than simply missing the deadline for providing receipts or invoices for specific items of spending, “Better Together” appears, going by the report in the Herald, to not have accounted for the money at all.
twathater on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “I received an email from CHAS , Childrens Hospice Appeal SCOTLAND from their Chief Executive Rami Okasha stating , “I…” Oct 1, 02:18
BLMac on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “No doubt the result of any enquiry (it may just be another carrot for the remaining gullible SNP members) will…” Sep 30, 23:16
charlie on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Time to start kicking the can down the road, slowly and judicially with only the public paying.” Sep 30, 22:38
Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “@ am firinn says:30 September, 2026 at 8:58 pm “Exactly what legislature do you think passed the Scotland Act 1998?”…” Sep 30, 21:32
am firinn on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Exactly what legislature do you think passed the Scotland Act 1998?” Sep 30, 20:58
am firinn on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Remind me what institutions “Scotland” had to raise against these sections in 1998?” Sep 30, 20:57
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Apologies to Mark Beggan. I was 2 minutes later than you.” Sep 30, 20:05
agentx on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Adopting Alternative International Frameworks The review is explicitly tasked with examining alternative Law Officer models used in other jurisdictions. The…” Sep 30, 19:57
Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “And he’s back. And he’s put the cracked record on again. Readers new to this saga might not know that…” Sep 30, 19:37
Ross on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Playing devil’s advocate… Who will the Lord Advocate be accountable to if not the Govt? The Parliament?” Sep 30, 19:34
Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “When required to register for the daily attendance allowance. Just like in the HoL.” Sep 30, 19:07
Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““This really is a “made in England” problem” Of course it is. How many times must we be told? Scotland…” Sep 30, 19:05
Alf Baird on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““which is what puts the Lord Advocate above the law” Indeed, which also tells us that it is not the…” Sep 30, 19:04
agentx on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “No major institutional or governmental objection was raised by Scotland against section 44(1)(c) of the Scotland Act 1998, which makes…” Sep 30, 18:36
am firinn on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “It’s all very well the Scottish Government consulting on this. However, s44(1)(c) of the Scotland Act 1998, which establishes that…” Sep 30, 18:01
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “« They will attend meetings of the Scottish Government cabinet only when required. »” Sep 30, 17:39
Mark Beggan on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““…only when required..” Required for what? Not that we don’t trust a word they say.” Sep 30, 17:37
Spartan 117 on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Hmm. To quote Mr. Spock, “Fascinating”. Entirely disconnected to certain recent going on, I’m sure.” Sep 30, 17:18
robertkknight on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Must be an election in a couple of days and our rancid SNP Government needs to appear, I stress appear,…” Sep 30, 16:18
Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “As a matter of fact, Andy, Memmi predicted exactly this in one of his publications. But I’m not telling you…” Sep 30, 15:45
Hatey McHateface on Whatever Can Have Happened?: ““the former judge leading the review is himself a former Lord Advocate” I see. Everybody else must have been already…” Sep 30, 15:37
Sean Duffy on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “There will be no meaningful change. The politicians have the police and the judiciary firmly within their grasp. They won’t…” Sep 30, 15:34
Willie on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Interesting nugget Colin Dawson about arrangemnts not so long ago being considered as ” appropriate “. Well according to Big…” Sep 30, 15:28
Stuart MacKay on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Sadly no. You forgot a pithy quote from a prominent intellectual who was working with the CIA.” Sep 30, 15:16
Colin Dawson on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “In March 2026, just two months ahead of the last Holyrood election, the Scottish Government published an initial internal report…” Sep 30, 14:30
Willie on Whatever Can Have Happened?: “Cannot for the life of me guess why this has arisen Rev. Maybe Big John of the Independent minds she’s…” Sep 30, 14:15
Hatey McHateface on The Turning Point: “@Aidan You can see why it’s so important to sell the “colony” lie. Real former colonies don’t have to shoulder…” Sep 30, 13:52
Hatey Mchateface on The Turning Point: “Farage comes out swinging: “The state pension is not a handout, nor an act of government charity. It is a…” Sep 30, 13:34