Demarcation dispute
Posted on
October 31, 2012 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Did anyone else notice that in last night’s Scotland Tonight interview (in which he noted that Labour’s tribal hatred of the SNP was blinding and damaging it), former First Minister Henry McLeish referred to Johann Lamont as “leader of the Labour Party in Scotland”, rather than as the leader of anything called “Scottish Labour”? As a current member and ex-head of the party’s Scottish division, you’d think Mr McLeish would know the proper name and internal structure of it. What aren’t we being told?
This is a bit Ian Smart-ish, no? The Scottish Labour Party doesn’t exist, so it can’t have a leader, but Labour in Scotland does. And Leader of Labour in Scotland (LoLiS) is different from Gray’s title (LoLitSP).
Basically, with the Tories having given up on Scotland and helping things along independence-wise, the only ‘unionist’ party left with any hope of holding the UK together is Labour. However, having a ‘Scottish Labour’ would work against this, hence Lamont basically saying she’ll adopt Ed’s neo-liberal New Labour policies while Ed hedges his bets with the ‘one nation’ stuff; that ‘one nation’ being England or possibly Great Britain if by chance he gets lucky.
I think we’re not being told (directly) that we’re basically an oil well and nuclear launch site as far as the UK government is concerned, and the idea of Scotland as a nation is at least faintly amusing to them.
I think we’re also not being told that “Scottish Labour” is really all over the place, being pulled in three directions: London, Edinburgh, and Glasgow. That’s why they don’t have any policies except hating the party they should theoretically have some ideological common ground with but are in bed with their supposed mortal enemies. Who would even know what they’re named any more?
Giving your vote to Labour. Now there is “something for nothing”.
There is only THE Labour Party and its leader is Ed Milliband.
For any further confirmation of this, check with the Labour bunker and pose the following question:
So Johann, Trident aye or naw?
O/T
THE Scottish Parliament’s presiding officer, Tricia Marwick, gave her charges a mini lecture yesterday about behaving better and helping increase the public’s estimation of Holyrood
This is the first paragraph in A Cochranes’ blog Did anyone hear what she said?
The reason I ask is, I, like many others I expect, emailed her and laid the blame squarely at her door for the appalling descriptions allowed in Parliament and directed at the FM last week
I await a reply from her I have had an acknowledgement
House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee question Ministers about the Edinburgh Agreement – or as it says on the website…”The Referendum on Separation for Scotland”
Witnesses
Rt Hon Michael Moore MP, Secretary of State, Rt Hon David Mundell MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, and Alun Evans, Director, Scotland Office
It’s today at 2:30pm and youi can watch it here:
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=11677
With delicious irony Davidson and his cronies hold their hearings in ‘The Thatcher Room’….
Steven of Songnam
You have missed out water for the desert that is the SE of England and North Sea fishing rights to be given in perpetuity to Spain for a quid pro quo over (Gibraltar)?
James, given the level of competence displayed by UK negotiators – signing up to the CFP, Major’s useless Euro opt-out – they’d be lucky to end up with Spanish backing for Gibraltar joining UEFA.
You really have to wonder why no one on the Committee, Labour presumably, tipped the wink to Lour in Scotland in general and Johann Lamont in particular about this opinion?
Rt Hon Bob Ainsworth MP
Labour
Mr John Baron MP
Conservative
Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell QC MP
Liberal Democrats
Rt Hon Ann Clwyd MP
Labour
Mike Gapes MP
Labour
Mark Hendrick MP
Labour
Andrew Rosindell MP
Conservative
Mr Frank Roy MP
Labour
Richard Ottaway MP (Chair) Conservative
Rt Hon Sir John Stanley MP Conservative
Rory Stewart MP Conservative
I wonder why.
@ James McLaren
I knew we were good for something else, thanks!
So Scotland is not a country to them; it is a resource and a problem. Time to shake things up a bit with a Yes vote in the referendum, I think.
Sorry for being O/T but I’ve found these few tit bits which I think folks might enjoy.
1) The reasons we are better together.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxbAu3LphYM
2) After all the lying and deceit could we soon be witnessing another “good day in the office” for Brown.
http://www.order-order.com/2012/10/30/secret-fred-michel-evidence-implicates-brown/
3) Just when you thought all the fun was over could we yet see Blair sweat a little over this one.
http://www.order-order.com/2012/10/30/secret-fred-michel-evidence-implicates-brown/
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/10/31/tony-blair-unpaid-interns-possible-hmrc-investigation_n_2049931.html?utm_hp_ref=uk
OT: Yes events list for Nov, click see more.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=386161224795224&set=a.136650206412995.35100.136640179747331&type=1&relevant_count=1
‘…former First Minister Henry McLeish referred to Johann Lamont as “leader of the Labour Party in Scotland”, rather than as the leader of anything called “Scottish Labour”?”‘
I suspect that Johann is being sidelined in preparation for the boot by devaluing the position she holds in the eyes of the media even though it’s a true description of her position.
As the original commenter who first pointed out way back in 2005 in places like the Herald comments that Scottish Labour wasn’t a real party, it was defined as a region in the Labour party Rule Book, it wasn’t registered with the Electoral Commission and that the then “leader” Jack McConnell only had authority over the MSP’s in Holyrood I feel a sense of accomplishment when even Henry won’t call it “Scottish Labour”.
I listened carefully to what Henry McLeish said on Scotland Tonight last night and I am under no illusions that Mr. McLeish is Labour through and through. He is obviously gutted that Labour are a shambles. He highlighted Labour’s lack of passion, lack of direction, lack of policies, lack of ideas on the constitution, lack of Scottishness (whatever that is?) lack of leadership (he was in limp mode in his support of Lamont). My impression is that he only supports Devo something because he thinks that that is the only way to save the union. I don’t think there is any chance of him joining the YES camp.
On another note found this on Facebook: sunnyscotland.org.uk (sorry about the uk bit!) The McCrone report – an ambarrassment of riches? McCrone in bite size bits, it’s all there in two pages. Brilliant for campaigning. YES campaign might be able to put the very readable information on leaflets.
From what I can see the only argument that the No campaign has is the union. I believe that if the Yes campaign can get across to the Scottish public that there will still remain a social union between the two countries, then it will effectively leave the unionists empty handed.
Two Americans discussing Scottish independence on Newsnicht re. article in the Washington Post. One was a former special adviser to AS, she was entirely comfortable with Scottish independence; the other not happy at all. Basically an independent Scotland would not be in the strategic interest of the US of A. So there we have it, America says NO. We are gubbed!
Bill C. We may not be gubbed. There is a lot of sympathy for an independent Scotland in the US. The free online American monthly magazine Celticguide.com carries their own advertisement for the Yes Scotland campaign every month. I would encourage you all to check it out. A lot of people around the world want us to be free but they aren’t sure just how to help. A good start would be for us all to contact (facebook etc) as many people as possible round the planet and inform them about Yes Scotland. The more help and money and even just encouragement that comes in then the better chance we have. But we will have to inform these people first.
Hi Ronald,
To be honest I was being sarcastic when I said that because the Yanks say no we are gubbed. However there is a serious point to this. Way back in the Seventies when Polaris was all the rage, the Yanks were in no mood to be messed about by such trivia as Scottish independence. It was well known in nationalist circles that the CIA and other more domestic security agencies were actively engaged in trying to discredit the nationalist movement. Geo-politics is never off the agenda with western security agencies, I doubt very much if the black ops brigade will remain inactive in the run up to the referendum.
I suspect that someone or something must be subsidising the Herald and Scotsman. How else can you explain commercial suicide?
The BBC don’t give a monkey’s as they still get their money no matter what they do, who they serve. They have been bought already.