The tweet on the left is one of the rare appearances of Scottish Labour’s fabled “2014 Truth Team”, while over on the right is a snippet from Scottish Labour MSP Kezia Dugdale’s column in this morning’s Daily Record.
This shouldn’t take long.
To be fair, the article in today’s Sunday Mirror isn’t shy about setting out its position.
“In the end it will all come down to two little words. One of which will save our 300-year union with Scotland. The other will rip it to shreds. If Scotland’s Bravehearts vote YES on September 18 it will tear apart that union which has seen both countries’ men march shoulder-to-shoulder in two world wars.
It’s all in there – “tear apart”, “rip to shreds”, Braveheart, two world wars, Rule Britannia blah blah etc – inside the first 100 words, so you know what’s coming. Although we’re pretty sure you’re not supposed to leave umbilical cords attached for centuries.
But as it turns out, that’s the most sensible part.
We were in quite a cheerful mood last night. The “indy cyclist” Mark Coburn had just achieved the goal on his latest fundraiser for various Yes groups, which meant that any extra money raised between now and the end of the project next Friday would go to the Maryhill Food Bank run by Julie Webster, which we featured last weekend.
And then we read a story from yesterday’s Scottish Sun.
Iain Macwhirter in the Sunday Herald, 13 July 2014:
Alert readers may recall a piece two months ago when we gently mocked the No campaign’s comical claim to have “more boots on the ground than its nationalist opponents“. An article in the Telegraph suggested that “Better Together” could deploy 30,000 grassroots activists to knock doors and hand out leaflets paid for by millionaire Tory lords, with the largest troop concentrations in the key battleground of Glasgow.
Right, just 29,994 left to find.
We assume Danny Alexander has been writing for the Record this morning.
We still haven’t been issued with our special UK Goverment Scottish Independence Costs Calculator by the Treasury, but we nevertheless still feel fairly confident that £550 million minus £250 million is £300 million, not £3 billion.
Our ever-alert readers will almost certainly recall – for it was only four days ago – this piece, in which we noted the Scottish media’s curious reluctance to cover what looked like a pretty blockbusting story.
Professor Sir Donald Mackay of the pro-devolution think tank Reform Scotland, an extremely distinguished businessman and adviser to the UK government, wrote a stinging article for the Sunday Times rubbishing the Office for Budget Responsibility’s gloomy forecasts for North Sea oil revenue in the coming decades, and suggesting that the real figures were likely to be over £8 billion a year higher.
Despite the enormous effect such a sum would have on the economy of an independent Scotland – wiping out the highest estimate of its deficit at a stroke and leaving it with an annual surplus of hundreds of millions of pounds – the rest of the media uncharacteristically didn’t swipe the ST’s story for their Monday editions.
But then the OBR issued a new forecast.
An alert and concerned reader living in the USA sent us a survey this week. It claimed to be from a charity called The Friends Of Scotland, which first rang a bell with us in relation to a very popular article we ran about six weeks ago, and which referred to a committee in the US Senate called the Friends Of Scotland Caucus.
However, it turned out to be nothing to do with them. The Friends Of Scotland charity was actually the organisation which brought us Jack McConnell in a pinstripe kilt a few years back, and – some might say deservingly, if for that reason alone – it went bust last October. Its website is now vacant, and the most recent archived version of it that actually had any content dates back to September 2012.
We’ve as yet found no reference anywhere to the organisation being revived, so we’ll have to treat their credentials as suspect, but that’s not particularly relevant to us. Of more interest is that the questionnaire says the results of the poll will be forwarded to the Scottish media, and we thought you might want a little heads-up on its nature, just in case any of them decide to run with it.
We think it’s fair to say some of the questions may be very slightly biased.
The Daily Record has a new poll from Survation today, with the same razor’s-edge findings as their last one. With don’t-knows excluded, the vote is poised at 47 Yes 53 No, which is statistically a dead heat (as polls of this size have a 3% margin of error).
The paper oddly chooses to lead not on the headline figure but on a finding which shows one in five Scots have had an argument with a friend or family member over independence, which seems a remarkably low figure to us in the circumstances. But the thing that made us smile was the analysis of the poll by Scotland’s Only Living Psephologist, the esteemed Professor John Curtice.
From last night’s Question Time. We don’t think it’s funny.
We think it sums up the respective campaigns pretty well, in truth.
Only our very alertest readers are likely to recall our first brush with Azeem Ibrahim of the “Scotland Institute”, a right-wing think tank which recently came up with a report on an independent Scotland’s debt that was picked up by some of the less discerning newspapers but which we ignored for being too boring.
And we must concede fair play to the eternally attention-seeking Mr Ibrahim, because he’s come storming right back with something altogether livelier.
Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.
