The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


For English Gold

Posted on December 06, 2022 by

The SNP has for quite some time been a hollow shell of a political party. Like the Conservative Party, its members have been systematically stripped of all policy-making powers, with decisions of conference on major issues simply ignored and other policies pushed through (most notably “gender reform”) which have never been put in front of conference for debate at all.

The party is now primarily a vehicle for processing cash and funnelling it to carefully selected and ideologically vetted activists, mostly from the fundamentalist youth wing, who are given well-paid jobs working for MPs and MSPs or parachuted into council seats in return for their unquestioning loyalty to Nicola Sturgeon.

And at this, it must be admitted, the SNP is still a highly effective operation. Which is fortunate, because without UK government money it would be bankrupt.

Above are the Electoral Commission’s donation figures for the third quarter of 2022. They note that 100% of the SNP’s reportable income for that period came from the UK government’s coffers – a trait shared with Plaid Cymru, the SDLP and the DUP.

Given that three of those four parties are nationalists committed to removing various constituent parts of the UK, one might almost be tempted to commend Westminster’s generosity. But perhaps it knows exactly what it’s doing.

The SNP was the second-highest recipient of UK government largesse, behind only the Labour Party, but taxpayers only provided 39.6% of Labour’s funding, with the party sourcing the rest itself. The full table looks like this:

SNP: 100% (£396,000)
SDLP: 100% (£115,000)
DUP: 100% (£86,000)
Plaid: 100% (£28,000)

Alliance: 57% (£20,000)
Sinn Fein: 55% (£83,000)

Greens: 41% (£47,000)
Labour: 40% (£1.9m)
Lib Dems: 18% (£296,000)
Tories: 2% (£58,000)

According to the SNP’s accounts, only membership income (£2.5m) provides a larger revenue stream than the £1.6m or so that the Westminster party receives from the UK government every year to fund its Parliamentary work.

But when you also factor in the over £9m a year paid out on top of that in SNP MPs’ expenses – most of which goes on paying family members and cronies as staff – and then add almost £4m for the MPs’ own wages, the total sum coughed up by the UK government to the SNP’s Westminster payroll reaches almost £15m a year and easily outstrips all the party’s other income several times over.

Given that it made an operating loss of £750,000 in 2021 and had only £145,000 in the bank, that hundreds-strong payroll – on which the leadership depends for its power, having eliminated the influence of ordinary members – would clearly be out on the street should the SNP ever achieve its ostensible goal of securing independence. The party certainly couldn’t afford to pay them itself – it only has 20 or so staff employed from its own funds and would struggle to support any more.

By so generously funding the SNP, the UK government provides the small army of people who make a very comfortable living from the party with a powerful incentive to ensure it never succeeds in its supposed aim.

(Nor even, come to that, adopts an abstentionist position like Sinn Fein’s, which would greatly reduce the amount of money it received from the UK.)

And when better than December to point out that turkeys never vote for Christmas?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

185 to “For English Gold”

  1. Socrates MacSporran
    Ignored
    says:

    Rev, I can see our Glorious Leader reforming the Get Salmond band for a second studio album – Get the Rev.

    She won’t like this post one little bit. But, well said.

  2. misteralz
    Ignored
    says:

    I never left Labour, Labour left me.

    Twice.

  3. Chas
    Ignored
    says:

    It seems that MONEY is quite important after all. Whoever would have thunk it?

    BPHB please take note.

  4. Willie
    Ignored
    says:

    Socrates. I think the Rev might just have an inkling that the wicked witch might not like him.

    But you know what, so what. There are many, many, many who absolutely detest Nicola Sturgeon.

    But detestation aside, Sturgeon’s tenure is coming to an end. The SNPs tenure is coming to an end. It is being replaced and it is only because priorly there were no alternatives to the SNP that its vote was holding up.

    It either reforms, changes track to be a pro independence party working with theindepen dence movement or it is gone.

    And who cares if Sturgeon hates the Rev Stu.

  5. Vivian O’Blivion
    Ignored
    says:

    I was long sceptical about Craig Murray’s idea of abolishing Short money. But I’ve come round.
    This would be too specific to be an article of a Scottish Constitution. I think the wording would be broader; “Members of the Scottish Parliament will receive only a fixed stipend for representation of the constituents who directly elected them.”
    This would remove Short money and donations from lobbyists.
    Maintaining transparent financing of the parties, now that’s a different problem.

  6. Luigi
    Ignored
    says:

    Has anyone managed to locate that missing 600,000 yet? Just curious.

  7. David Beveridge
    Ignored
    says:

    Unfortunately anyone pointing this out to the cult of L Ron Sturgeon is immediately denounced as a hate-filled member of Alba or a yoonyonist. I’ve no idea how you get it through to these people that The Empress is starkers. They just won’t have it.

  8. Scott
    Ignored
    says:

    The “ring-fenced” £600K has been woven through the accounts so much that it’s completely vanished from the accounts!

  9. Andy Ellis
    Ignored
    says:

    Interesting that for such an (ostensibly?) we’ll supported – one might even say electorally dominant – party, the SNP didn’t attract any private donations. You’d think given the fact they have such a dominant position and represent a fair chunk of Scottish voters that there would be a few wealthy individuals, whether owners of successful businesses, independently wealthy or even lottery winners who might feel inclined to pony up?

    Why it’s almost as if folk don’t trust them anymore.

    I wonder why….?

  10. John Main
    Ignored
    says:

    For some time, I have been posting calls to:

    Show Us The Fucking Money!

    This is not what I expected.

    Not possible to argue with Rev Stu’s conclusions re turkeys.

  11. Desimond
    Ignored
    says:

    Be interesting to see a list ( dont need names, just numbers) of SNP representatives that:

    Employ Family
    Employ Friends
    Are Registered Landlords
    Have Directorships
    Own Shares

    They are a deep ingrained part of the game\furniture now. You always thought Alex Salmond was inside the tent and causing trouble, now we have no Alex and no trouble. Lets just meander along until retirement, which is whenever the honourable member wants it to be..no rush, you carry on, comfy?..thats nice.

    Its only a matter of time before someone in the SNP asks “But why not The Lords…shouldnt we be heard there too…” and cue party nominations.

  12. Frazerio
    Ignored
    says:

    UK PM salary is about £161k pa
    Scottish FM salary about £157k pa
    Chief Exec of SNP salary undisclosed, but almost certainly six figures. Lets call it £100k for sake of this point.
    The FM’s household trousers over a quarter of a million per annum to maintain the status quo. Before we get conspirational, or talk about Sturgeon being compromised or whatever there are 250,000 reasons per year that ‘encourage’ Mr & Mrs Murrell to maintain the status quo.
    Multiply that by however many years these leading SNP figureheads have been failing to achieve independence and it appears they’ve been doing not too badly at all.

    Maybe the Rev (he’s much better than I at it) could do a more comprehensive summing up of just how much this pair of charlatans have trousered from the independence cause.

  13. James che
    Ignored
    says:

    English gold.

    Bank of England,

    Is there a bank of Great Britain?

  14. gregor
    Ignored
    says:

    Times (05/12/2022): Backers of gender reform bill given Scottish government funding:

    “Five human rights organisations that wrote to a UN expert defending the gender recognition reform bill have received Scottish government funding, it has emerged…”:

    https://archive.ph/2022.12.05-002751/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/backers-of-gender-reform-bill-given-scottish-government-funding-xmwxpmdb8

  15. Geoff Anderson
    Ignored
    says:

    The short money is a cunning move by Westminster. For a few Million quid a year they trap any Party of Independence and the draining of the Nation brings in far greater wealth than the bribe. It is no different to the 1707 bribe.
    The Murrell Business Unit cannot afford Independence….what would all those employees do!

  16. Graf Midgehunter
    Ignored
    says:

    In other words, THE SNP Party, the (so called) leadership, Nicola Sturgeon an’ Murrel, NEC, MSPs, MPs, Councillors, Spads etc. are nothing more than a criminal Organisation.

    A Mafia racket designed to gather money to keep the head honchos in an exclusive lifestyle and to avoid at all costs any movement that could endanger it.

    Independence is to be avoided like the plague.

    These people are not only “Tractors” and Kwis….s, they are deliberately for personal gain destroying the pathway to freedom for the folk of Scotland.

  17. Charles Findlay
    Ignored
    says:

    The Bank of England was started up by a Scot called William Patterson, before the Union.
    It doesn’t matter what it’s called. The name ‘The Bank of England was really just a ruse, to make the English assume it was something to do with the Government. It wasn’t. It was just another bank, and it introduced ‘fiat’ currency, which was a great way to get everyone in England into debt. It’s called ‘The National Debt’.

    There’s a really good documentary out there, by a guy called Bill Stills, called The Money Masters, which explains it all very well. He made another doc called The Secret of OZ, which explains what The Wizard of OZ is really about. If you don’t already know about fiat currency, just Google these titles and watch the documentaries, and you will be depressed for the rest of your lives.

  18. wullie
    Ignored
    says:

    The living wage should be sufficient. They are happy to inflict that appalling level of income on other less fortunate people.

  19. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    A lot has been made about the recent Zero Tolerance meeting in Edinburgh which Nicola Sturgeon but little has been made about what she actually said:

    In that meeting she had said

    ‘Much of what I’m going to say today is about male violence against women because it is men who commit violence against women. In my long experience, most men who commit violence against women don’t feel the need to change gender to do that. Those who do, my argument is we should focus on them because they are men abusing a system to attack women. What we shouldn’t do is further stigmatise a group of women who are already too stigmatised.’

    Mealy mouthed words but it can be argued that she is saying men who are abusing the system by pretending to be trans will be allowed to enter womans-only places.

    The article suggests that by using such language, Sturgeon is guilty of transphobia as defined by the Trans Rights Activists but regardless, she is acknowlegding there are problems with the legislation that needs to be fixed.

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/is-nicola-sturgeon-now-guilty-of-transphobia/

  20. Poppy
    Ignored
    says:

    Don’t the SNP MPs and MSPs have to donate a chunk of their salaries to the party?

  21. Heaver
    Ignored
    says:

    Parasites, in other words.

  22. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    OT…. not off topic, but in Other Trougher’s News…

    Far be it from me to defend Michelle Mone, but given the wider shenanigans with Tories giving their pals blank cheques for nonexistent PPE equipment, it seems a little odd that this non-Etonian outsider is the only one currently being thrown to the wolves like a sacrificial lamb with “minted sauce”.

    With regards the SNP troughing, I’m profoundly struck how very cheap the deal is for Westminster to perennially “buy off” Scotland’s Independence Revolution.

    I mean, just how many SNP Governments does even a one-off £80billion windfall from North Sea Revenue pay for?

    £396k seems a derisory amount, but of course, it would be very low if it was index to productivity. Look at it that way, and £400k seems a grossly generous absurdity..

  23. Stoker
    Ignored
    says:

    Rev wrote: “The SNP was the second-highest recipient of UK government largesse, behind only the Labour Party,”

    Talking of largesse i see some Labour peers are pushing back against their bosses latest repeated announcement (for over 100 years they’ve been promising to scrap ‘The HoL’) that he plans to reform and replace The House of Lords. Now there’s a surprise (not!), Labour peers against socialist-type thinking. LOL! Red Tories right enough.

  24. Anne Johnston
    Ignored
    says:

    “Follow the money” . . All the way to England!

  25. Socrates MacSporran
    Ignored
    says:

    For as long as the House of Lords exists as a dumping ground for the Labour Party’s awkward squad, Labour leaders will not abolish it.

    I reckon, just about the only awkward left-wing Labour MP who wouldn’t go there was Dennis Skinner.

  26. Anne Johnston
    Ignored
    says:

    It seems Joan Rivers quote was correct, ” Politics is showbiz for uglies”

  27. Cenchos
    Ignored
    says:

    Could the Holyrood opposition parties not propose a Scottish referendum on gender reform?

    I’m sure SNP/Greens would be delighted to confirm the public’s unalloyed support of the Scottish Government’s flagship policy.

  28. Stoker
    Ignored
    says:

    Given that none of these SNP troughers have made any serious attempts to retake Scotland’s right to self-determination, that article above, written by the Rev, should be reason enough for a campaign to boycott any (and all) Westminster elections.

    There is no way on earth the current SNP are ever going to do anything serious towards obtaining our indy, nothing whatsoever beyond window dressing. Every one of them are taking us for granted and every one of them are taking the piss right out of us.

    I for one will *never* vote in another Westminster election even if it’s referred to as “de facto” or anything else.

    The current SNP: A sack of rancid smouldering con-merchants.

    de facto: existing or holding a specified position in fact but not necessarily by legal right.

    It’s time we all put paid to their self-serving trough orgies and dumped them back on civvy-street.

  29. Lorna Campbell
    Ignored
    says:

    More or less everyone underestimated the far left’s infiltration of the SNP and what its ‘wokerati’ vanguard and ‘trans’ lobby activists were capable of. They have taken control of the SNP from top to bottom, of the civil service, of every public institution, including the police, the justice system and the local authorities.

    This was achieved in very few years, roughly two, so that by 2016, and certainly by 2017, the ‘wokerati’ were firmly entrenched in the SNP. They gradually, removed ordinary members’ rights and conventions until, now, only the leadership cohort has any real say. After that, the people the party employed were, by and large, of the same ‘wokerati’ mindset and were new, young people, the older, more experienced people dispensed with along the way.

    What is left is a party that has been disembowelled and its smeddum gone. I’m not suggesting that new ways and new thinking are anathema, but the new ‘woke’ sentiment that has invaded the party has left it weak in areas where it needs to be strong. It will become increasingly irrelevant to the Scottish population unless something happens to change its direction, and it is showing a suspicious devotion to totalitarian thinking and actions which is also consistent with its youthful authoritarian intake.

    Just as Stonewall transformed into an authoritarian and downright dangerous ideological organisation in order to remain relevant and to source funding, so the SNP has done the same. Stonewall relies on the SNP (and the other mainstream parties) for funding, as well as all the public institutions, and many private ones, and the SNP relies on ‘short money’ and other allocations from Westminster. Neither is going to actively jeopardise its existence. Parasitical organisms, which Stonewall is, on social policy, and which the SNP is becoming, on the Scottish body politic, rarely compromise their host to the point of death, but there are always exceptions, and, often, the parasite is dislodged or rendered harmless before that happens.

  30. Gregory Beekman
    Ignored
    says:

    I might form the Gravy Train Party. Might get votes for at least being up front about it!

  31. Stoker
    Ignored
    says:

    Socrates MacSporran says on 6 December 2022 at 2:13 pm: “For as long as the House of Lords exists as a dumping ground for the Labour Party’s awkward squad, Labour leaders will not abolish it. I reckon, just about the only awkward left-wing Labour MP who wouldn’t go there was Dennis Skinner.”

    And i doubt there will be anyone able to argue differently with you.

  32. James Che
    Ignored
    says:

    Charles Findley.

    The Bank of England had plenty to do with Westminster government.

    You will find the information in The History and proceedings of the House of Commons,
    First parliament of Great Britain, 6/11/1707,
    Volume 4

    Act 13:

    Then under the following heading in next session.

    The Perposals of the Bank of England to the Commons,

    And reading further on,

    The Purposal of the Bank of England Accepted,

    Note that the bank has links to the parliament as a sitting member of the bank is also a sitting member in the parliament,

    That comment you made about it being related to Scots seems to be a deflection, rather than facts related to the bank of England and the connection to Westminster parliament.

  33. 100%Yes
    Ignored
    says:

    Looking at the pic there isn’t one of them you’d trust to bring you a hot meal, never mind a legal and binding referendum.

  34. James Che
    Ignored
    says:

    The Bank of England was a “Company of the Bank of England” before and after the Treaty of union, with members in the parliament,

    Not a British Bank,
    So Money from Scotland was going into a private Company at that period, and connected to the exchequer. Through Westminster parliament,

    They are still the Bank of England, not of Britain.

  35. PhilM
    Ignored
    says:

    This investigative journalism is all very well but have any of you considered that one of the unintended consequences of these exposés might be that Pete Wishart ends up inflicting his music on us once more?
    Is the game worth the candle? Is this an ethical dilemma too far?
    What say you Melanie Phillips…

  36. robertkknight
    Ignored
    says:

    I’m old enough to remember those halcyon days when people, self included, thought the SNP was something different. That as a political party it stood head and shoulders above the other parties, whose MP’s comprised troughers, careerists, spivs, inbred aristocratic tw@ts and trade union backed, alcoholic bully-boys, most of whom were ‘on the square’.

    The SNP wasn’t just a political party, it was as a movement, with a broad church whose members came from all social and economic backgrounds, working together towards a common goal.

    Changed days now though, eh? And not for the better!

  37. PhilM
    Ignored
    says:

    Being the practical person that I am, can I suggest that instead of donating any more money to the SNP that we club together and do a bulk buy of metal detectors for those SNP MPs and MSPs soon to lose their seats?
    As the saying goes, “if you give a man a fiver, you feed him for a day at one of the many subsidised Westminster food outlets but if you teach him how to use a metal detector you may feed him for a lifetime after he loseth his trough”.
    Slightly adapted but still perennially true…ay verily…

  38. Republicofscotland
    Ignored
    says:

    The Rev points out clearly above in the article why the SNP will never push for independence, they’ve got it kind of cushy right now with the cash rolling in, there’s no way on earth Sturgeon and her MP’s will ever endanger that cash flow, the gravy train sustains too many obedient acolytes for independence to be taken seriously.

    For the mugs who still want to give this bunch of charlatans their money, remember they’ve already spaffed the missing 600k up against a wall.

  39. panda paws
    Ignored
    says:

    @Gregor and @Lorna Campbell

    The final GRR vote at Holyrood will be 21 December.

  40. Geoff Anderson
    Ignored
    says:

    @ robertkknight 14:59

    “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”

    ? Eric Hoffer, The Temper of Our Time

  41. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    Excellent financial analysis Stu. Difficult to gauge SNP membership numbers without knowing the average contribution of SNP members. But 2.5 million revenue suggests the halcyon days of a six figure membership is over. At say an average monthly contribution of £10 per member 25000 members would net you 3 million per annum. Losing 80% of your membership in any political party would result in the resignation of the CEO and leader. Strange times indeed.

  42. Republicofscotland
    Ignored
    says:

    Sarcastic pr*ck, and Whitehall puppet, thinks he’s funny, he must be laughing up his sleeve at Scots with this.

    https://twitter.com/StewartMcDonald/status/1600035066398187520?cxt=HHwWgICpjczau7QsAAAA

  43. Ottomanboi
    Ignored
    says:

    As the constitutionalist SNP confects a novel model of human sexuality, elsewhere that «not what is but what we say/are told is» cuts a destructive swathe through academic research.
    https://unherd.com/2022/12/the-rise-of-archaeologists-anonymous/
    When will book burning begin?…just around body burning time.
    They tend to march in close step.

  44. TheSNPLeftMe
    Ignored
    says:

    Sadly, we need to pull them down and start again. As a Party they had a chance to protect the organisation, but they sat back and let her wreck it. It is infested with those intent on using the Party than driving Independence.
    They are worse than the Labour Party we rejected already.

  45. Frank Black
    Ignored
    says:

    brilliant article. see, this is whats been missing.

  46. Stoker
    Ignored
    says:

    https://tinyurl.com/mr2dku3p

    “The SNP has joined Labour in saying the Conservatives should have removed the whip from Lady Mone in the House of Lords (see 12.42pm), instead of waiting for her to take leave of absence. Brendan O’Hara, the SNP’s Cabinet Office spokesperson, said:”

    “The reality is that Baroness Mone should have had the whip removed from her a long time ago while a thorough investigation into her business dealings was carried out. Instead, the Tories have turned a blind eye while presiding over an anything-goes culture that has seen vast sums of money given to friends, family and party donors.”

    “The exact circumstances surrounding Baroness Mone’s case are now the subject of a National Crime Agency investigation, which must be allowed to proceed without hindrance – but it is clearly for her to answer exactly how much money she and her family have made from these contracts, in what circumstances and what tax arrangements were made.”

    “But the bottom line in this whole affair is that the stench of sleaze surrounding this broken Tory government has become simply unbearable.”

    No, Brendan, the bottom line is there’s simply no words to adequately describe The SNP’s rank hypocrisy. Hypocrisy just doesn’t seem to fit the bill. Btw, Brendan, have you read todays WOS article above? That’s about largesse too. What a coincidence, eh? 😉

  47. Mark Boyle
    Ignored
    says:

    robertkknight says:
    6 December, 2022 at 2:59 pm

    I’m old enough to remember those halcyon days when people, self included, thought the SNP was something different. That as a political party it stood head and shoulders above the other parties, whose MP’s comprised troughers, careerists, spivs, inbred aristocratic tw@ts and trade union backed, alcoholic bully-boys, most of whom were ‘on the square’.

    The SNP wasn’t just a political party, it was as a movement, with a broad church whose members came from all social and economic backgrounds, working together towards a common goal.

    Changed days now though, eh? And not for the better!

    The SNP’s still a movement Robert, pity’s it’s more of a bowel movement thesedays, judging by what comes out from it …

  48. Stoker
    Ignored
    says:

    TheSNPLeftMe says on 6 December 2022 at 4:19 pm: “Sadly, we need to pull them down and start again. As a Party they had a chance to protect the organisation, but they sat back and let her wreck it. It is infested with those intent on using the Party than driving Independence. They are worse than the Labour Party we rejected already.”

    My belief is, even if we somehow manage to get rid of Sturgeon & Co, the damage done to the vessel (SNP as a party) is such that not only has it lost any value it once held, but the stigma will continue to do harm for a long time to come. Both to the SNP as a Party and, to a lesser extent, the wider Yes movement. Only a real no nonsense strong leader can rectify that situation. Sturgeon & Murrell have to be held accountable for every bit of this.

  49. Doug
    Ignored
    says:

    Do we care if it’s Thewliss or Flynn?

  50. Merganser
    Ignored
    says:

    Soon be time for the Thewliss coronation.

    JC’s support for Flynn was the kiss of death for him. Sturgeon would not pick him once JC supported him even if he had been Sturgeon’s first choice, such is Sturgeon’s perversion and hatred of people cleverer than her.

    JC surely should know this. Perhaps she is playing a double bluff – saying she supports him because she doesn’t want him as leader.

    Anyway, it’s been decided long before the vote at 6.00pm.

    Rien ne vas plus.

  51. Whit?
    Ignored
    says:

    ‘For English gold.’ That we give to them in the first place. So is it largesse from England, stolen from Scotland, or is it stealing from Scotland sorta-direct, via England as a middle-thief? It’s a riddle wrapped in a whatthefuck wrapped in an ohyacuntche. Insoluble heidnippery. Schrodinger’s great Scottish financial swindle.

  52. Merganser
    Ignored
    says:

    “The SNP is still a highly effective organisation” says Stu.

    So was the Communist party under Stalin, who set up a dictatorship in which a small class of Party members lived very well, and the rest of the population did not.

    It’s what dictators do. Now Scotland has its own dictator. What else could be expected?

  53. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    Doug says:
    6 December, 2022 at 4:45 pm
    Do we care if it’s Thewliss or Flynn?

    I think Robin McAlpine pretty much nails it here…

    https://twitter.com/indyscotnews/status/1599683868943994880?cxt=HHwWgMCilZuAnLMsAAAA

    Scotland urgently needs a collegiate / harmonious YES movement without a one Party leadership trying to go it alone. I’d agree.

    Is that cooperative arrangement likely under Sturgeon? Fat chance. Absolute zero.

    So,in terms of Thewliss or Flynn; Thewliss almost certainly promises more dreadful, unreformed Sturgeonism and corrosive Self-ID horseshit pushing Independence down the agenda.

    Flynn? Frankly, this time last week I’d never heard of him. Still don’t know him from Adam. Very promising if he’s been instrumental getting Blackford out the way, but the brownie points come tumbling down given Mhairi Black is his No 2, and a brief flicker of optimism gives way to despair.

    So who is most beneficial to Scottish Independence? – The one most likely to rid us of Sturgeon. I think that means “not” Thewliss, but frankly, it feels like “Time Gentleman Please” in the Last Chance Saloon.

    It’s just a changing of the guard I fear, and there’s nothing about to stop the rot. Disappointment abounds… Again.

    Cherry was my last hope, but seems she’s not interested either.

  54. Big Jock
    Ignored
    says:

    The SNPs very existence depends on British funding. Their MPs, a collection of ner do Wells, carpet baggers and career politicians. Depend on those massive salaries to furnish their lifestyles.

    And we wonder why the workshy erseholes are funking up independence?

  55. gregor
    Ignored
    says:

    @panda paws

    All seems lost re. super-charged New Woke Order

    I’m confident the public will seize its opportunity.

    We hold everything to make a success of Scotland’s transition…

  56. Ruby
    Ignored
    says:

    gregor says:
    6 December, 2022 at 1:10 pm

    Times (05/12/2022): Backers of gender reform bill given Scottish government funding:

    “Five human rights organisations that wrote to a UN expert defending the gender recognition reform bill have received Scottish government funding, it has emerged…”:

    https://archive.ph/2022.12.05-002751/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/backers-of-gender-reform-bill-given-scottish-government-funding-xmwxpmdb8

    Cheers for that Gregor that is an interesting article.

  57. twathater
    Ignored
    says:

    This is a genuine question ,Can I ask the people who decry and deride the SALVO ,SSRG , Liberation.Scot , COR avenue or approach how we are going to change ANYTHING by continuing to vote for politicians who in the main are leeches, parasites con men and women and self serving lying arseholes

    HOW is anything going to change , HOW do we get these people to pay attention , HOW do we get these people to do what WE demand when they are intent in doing what they want , HOW do we INSIST on integrity and honesty when they are doing their jobs , HOW can we prove that everything they do and say they will be held responsible for, HOW do we enact a punishment on the ones taking the pish

    The REALITY is that we are powerless as is PROVEN DAILY ,irrespective whether it be WM or HR WE have NO POWER , every one of these politicians in every party PROMISES the earth to get elected but as soon as their arse gets comfy they forget about the VOTERS and follow the party doctrine which is determined by a few of the hierarchy of the party , the snp is only a Scottish version of the whole , that are literally LAUGHING at indy supporters and Scots overall

    IMO the ONLY way we can effect change in OUR country is through a people’s assembly or the convention of the estates , where VOTERS or JOE and JESSIE public CAN assert and DEMAND change

    Alternatively in the spirit of peace on earth and Christmas I am genuinely asking the detractors and demeanors what their solution is bearing in mind that revolution unfortunately is not on offer

  58. Deepdivedave
    Ignored
    says:

    Look at the body proportions of the front bench! Certainly living off the fat of the land!!

  59. Ruby
    Ignored
    says:

    Was it any different in 2014?

    Did Alex Salmond get the turkeys too close to Christmas to be allowed to carry on?

    Obvioulsy we need a movement which doesn’t involve anyone being paid by the UK Government.

  60. Lynne
    Ignored
    says:

    Scott says:

    The “ring-fenced” £600K has been woven through the accounts so much that it’s completely vanished from the accounts!

    It’s perhaps been used to weave that invisible suit of clothes the empress is wearing.

  61. Rev. Stuart Campbell
    Ignored
    says:

    “Don’t the SNP MPs and MSPs have to donate a chunk of their salaries to the party?”

    Yes, quite a substantial one.

  62. Tinto Chiel
    Ignored
    says:

    @Ottomanboi 4.17: interesting article on modern academics imposing ideology on the “evidence” they find and ignoring or deploring what doesn’t fit.

    Of course, in some respects this isn’t new. English academics have often in the past sought to question the very existence of Celtic peoples beyond just a range of pottery styles, metallurgy, burial practices, etc.

    Their condescension can be very irksome.

  63. Haud
    Ignored
    says:

    Flyn and Black it is…

    Which means what ecactly?

  64. Robert Hughes
    Ignored
    says:

    Haud says:
    6 December, 2022 at 6:51 pm
    Flyn and Black it is…

    ” Which means what ecactly ”

    Zero .

  65. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    @Haud 6:51pm
    Progress.. a defeat for Nicola.

  66. TQ
    Ignored
    says:

    I see no figures for Alba. Do they not receive any finances from Westminster?

  67. gregor
    Ignored
    says:

    @Ruby

    Knowing the public values the truth makes any effort worthwhile.

  68. Scot Finlayson
    Ignored
    says:

    Flynn be asking questions at PMQs tomorrow ?

    Wonder if Mhairi Black will be organising a drag act for the SNP Westminster Christmas night oot.

  69. Robert Louis
    Ignored
    says:

    Aye for England’s gold, right enough. All the SNP MP’s are just a bunch of troughers. We got rid of Labour for this, and it is time to get rid of the SNP. I see zero hope of independence when the procrastinator and ditherer in chief Sturgeon is in charge.

    No, those SNP MP’s have important work to do, turning up at the HoC for their subsidised meals and drinks, and occasionally standing up to whine about how awful it is. Nothing to get independence. Not one of them has any fire in their belly. Independence, in their minds, is something for ‘another day’.

    It is so easy to see why they have no rush to get Scottish independence when they get free flights and free second home, plus expenses, plus around 5k minimum after tax and deductions per month, plus one of the very best pensions money can buy. It is easy to see why they are in no hurry for independence.

    Robert Burns had it right. For London’s gold, they are bought and sold, such a parcel of rogues in a nation.

  70. Merganser
    Ignored
    says:

    Haud @ 6.51.

    It means that JC backed a winner after all, and a wind of change is blowing. So pleased to be wrong.

    It also means that anyone near Sturgeon will be wearing a crash helmet and doing a lot of ducking.

  71. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    @Scot Finlayson 7:10pm
    Yes Flynn will be answering questions at PMQs. He took on Mhairi Black to secure the Woke half of the Parliamentary party. Needs must. A defeat for Nicola’s preferred candidate has to be a good thing. Flynn will have to step up to the plate. We will find out tomorrow if he is up to it.

  72. Breastplate
    Ignored
    says:

    John Main @ 12:45pm,
    I think you are still missing the point.

    We are being robbed blind by another country and you’re asking people to consider how much more we might have by getting mugged by our neighbour on a regular basis.

    There really is no good excuse for carrying this argument around with you constantly.

    An independent Scotland will be in a position to make the best decisions for us, no other country will ever do that for us.

  73. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    In the spirit of Christmas I will give Flynn a steer to his first question. As oppose to Blackford who answered rather than asked the question. If we are an equal Union why does it depend on Westminster when Scotland can have a vote on Independence?

  74. Johnny
    Ignored
    says:

    George Ferguson @ 7:15pm:

    We will find out absolutely nothing about whether anyone is “up to it” tomorrow. PMQs is a lot of shite and nothing angered me more than morons slabbering on about how well Blackford was doing slevering the same drivel every week.

    Even if Flynn is “good” at it, it doesn’t matter jot.

    Actions, not words, is what is required and an end to the idea that talking well is enough (on its own, it’s fine if it backs up actions).

    He’s a wee guy, basically, so will not be holding my breath.

  75. Rev. Stuart Campbell
    Ignored
    says:

    All that can be said for Flynn is that he’s the useless woke arsehole Sturgeon didn’t want, rather than the useless woke arsehole she did want.

  76. Geoff Anderson
    Ignored
    says:

    I will give Flynn a chance. The negative rants should wait for evidence.
    Don’t bother giving me your rants on my view.

  77. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    @Johnny 7:50pm
    Action not words. I always thought it would be Alf and brigade that brought the weapons in. Memmi and Fanon etc. Just when the movement is making progress. Getting rid of Sturgeon is the single most important imperative of any Scottish Independence voter. Have you read Stu’s articles?.

  78. Big Jock
    Ignored
    says:

    PMQs is just pantomime. It achieves zilch.

    We will not get independence by appealing to England’s sense of fair play. They don’t play fair.

    To beat a bully you have to be smarter than them, not beg them or petition them. We have already discussed the folly of a GE plebiscite. Out only hope is a Holyrood election on independence.

  79. Robert Hughes
    Ignored
    says:

    @ Rev S.C

    Lol , AYE ! The quid pro quo was a BOGOF , it appears – Buy Flynn get Black thrown in gratis .

  80. Guy
    Ignored
    says:

    How much do SNP politicians have to donate to the party?

  81. Chas
    Ignored
    says:

    The new SNP dream team at Westminster is now known-Flynn and Black. Neither of whom have ever had a real job in their lives!

    There might be some benefit if they stand up to Sturgeon. Time will tell. The SNP slowly but surely are unravelling.

  82. M Thompson
    Ignored
    says:

    I started giving you a monthly donation a few weeks ago, but do nit even get your blog sent toy email address, I only see it when others retweet it. Are you able to ha e it sent to me please?

  83. Taxi for Sturgeon
    Ignored
    says:

    This is absolutely shocking. I can see how the SNP MPs are so comfy in Westminster. This needs to get out there so the public can see what’s happening!

  84. Joe
    Ignored
    says:

    James che says:6 December, 2022 at 12:59 pm
    English gold.Bank of England,
    Is there a bank of Great Britain?
    —————————————
    The Bank of England (Central Bank) was formed 1694
    Great Britain formed officially 1707 strangely enough.

    Do you understand the difference between the Bank of England and other Banks James ?

  85. Merganser
    Ignored
    says:

    Rev.Stu @ 8.02.

    It’s what it says about Sturgeon’s grip slipping that’s important to me. A small step on the road to freedom – from Sturgeon.

    A tiny split over GR, a little split in the choice of Westminster’s leader.

    They say things go in threes. Let’s hope the next comes soon and is bigger. Something to do with de facto elections possibly.

  86. Elizabeth Hagan
    Ignored
    says:

    Why has it taken you all so long to realise that these people are only in it for the money.

  87. Merganser
    Ignored
    says:

    Elizabth @ 8.58.

    If you look at the number of times people have used the term ‘troughers’ or similar you will realise your assumption is incorrect.

  88. Stoker
    Ignored
    says:

    Rev. Stuart Campbell says on 4 December 2022 at 5:58 pm: “A well-placed source tells me Thewliss is likely to win. And not just because so far she’s the only declared candidate.”

    Sack the source! Not up to WOS standards. 😉
    Flynn won by 26 to 17 votes.

    Rev. Stuart Campbell says on 6 December 2022 at 8:02 pm: “All that can be said for Flynn is that he’s the useless woke arsehole Sturgeon didn’t want, rather than the useless woke arsehole she did want.”

    Merganser replied to Rev on 6 December 2022 at 8:54 pm: “It’s what it says about Sturgeon’s grip slipping that’s important to me. A small step on the road to freedom – from Sturgeon.”

    I wouldn’t be too sure about any of that. Time will tell i suppose. We will soon see how much he is “his own man”. I think the clue is in Revs statement at 8:02 pm about Flynn being a “useless woke arsehole.” Personally, i don’t trust any of them. Not one!

  89. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    Chas says: 6 December, 2022 at 8:17 pm

    The new SNP dream team at Westminster is now known-Flynn and Black. Neither of whom have ever had a real job in their lives!

    The Tory party is full of people who have had ‘real jobs’ but they are corrupt and useless.

    There is merit in saying that having a job outside of politics before entering it is beneficial as it gives the individual a broader outlook on life but I just don’t believe that it will somehow make them a superior and honest politician.

  90. Merganser
    Ignored
    says:

    Stoker @ 9.38

    Agreed, but anything which indicates schism is a start. It’s unusual for Sturgeon not to get her way, she must be throwing a big tantrum. The bigger the better, so more people will come to see what a monster she really is.

    When she goes, the SNP crumbles , and the real effort for independence can begin again. Could be some time. Sigh.

  91. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    Stoker says: 6 December, 2022 at 9:38 pm

    I wouldn’t be too sure about any of that. Time will tell i suppose. We will soon see how much he is “his own man”. I think the clue is in Revs statement at 8:02 pm about Flynn being a “useless woke arsehole.” Personally, i don’t trust any of them. Not one!

    I’m sure he’ll be his own man. His own man that does good for himself.

    That may be beneficial though as Merganser says it will weaken Sturgeon hold on the scared rabbits of the SNP hierarchy.

    Expect the blinks from Sturgeon to go into overdrive and her looking rougher than a badgers bum in the coming weeks.

  92. Livionian
    Ignored
    says:

    I don’t trust those figures that the SNP got SFA in donations this quarter, I think they are merely not disclosing it properly. I think a few of us should donate 0.03 quid or something just to prove a point and still watch the figures come out as nothing next quarter

  93. AnnemarieD
    Ignored
    says:

    Flynn is my MP. He took the time to call me when I was leaving the SNP after the Nicola video insult to the gender woowoo brats. I still left but he at least listened for an hour.

    My concern was that he really didn’t realise the issue was brewing to the extent it was. I have emailed several times since on various stuff. He always responds. I genuinely believe his priority is independence but he is not clued up enough about how the party is being destroyed.

    I am waiting to see who he appoints to the so called front bench to get a better idea of where he is.

  94. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    The wee HoC furore is over. Where the SNP is at, depends on the vote on 21st December. GRR is the defining issue of Sturgeon. I am hoping Scottish Labour get savvy and realise there is not enough protection of women and girls safe spaces. Hopeless when you have to rely on the opposition. And why have a vote just before Christmas?. This issue won’t go away on boxing day. I will vote for any party that promises to repeal the leglisation if it goes through. I hope that is clear. Speaking on behalf of the women and children in my life including my granddaughters.

  95. Christopher Pike
    Ignored
    says:

    I remember watching Flynn attempt to cross brains with Dr. Jordan Peterson on Question Time last year – Peterson proceeded to cut Flynn to pieces. Flynn isn’t on the same intellectual sphere as Peterson, he’s like the buzzing of flies to him. I might not agree with Peterson on everything, but he’s 100% right about identity politics.

    The woke independence movement just got more woke tonight. Everything woke turns to s.h.i.t

  96. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    George Ferguson says: 6 December, 2022 at 10:03 pm

    GRR is the defining issue of Sturgeon. I am hoping Scottish Labour get savvy and realise there is not enough protection of women and girls safe spaces.

    Maybe Labour not allowing Eddie Izzard to stand as their Westminster candidate could be a sign of a change particularly if they want to be seen to be more socially conservative in order to win back their North England Red Wall seats?

  97. Robert Hughes
    Ignored
    says:

    ” I might not agree with Peterson on everything, but he’s 100% right about identity politics.

    The woke independence movement just got more woke tonight. Everything woke turns to s.h.i.t ”

    Agreed ; on both counts .

    J.P is one of the few prominent intellectuals ( for lack of a better description ) who grasps the insidious nature of the whole * Woke * quasi-religion/business opportunity ; it’s poisonous infiltration of Academia , Politics , Media , Sport etc . The majority of his peers are either captured or muted ; even his erstwhile protagonist Zizek

  98. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    @PacMan 10:29pm
    Perhaps that is true. But this is a Holyrood issue. I met Jimmy Reid once, he came to debate with undergraduate engineering students. Great natural politician and held the room with ease. Gave way on issues when he was losing the argument. And now the BBC are jumping on his back “It all belongs to us”. No it doesn’t. It belongs to the people. Sturgeon jumped on the back of the people and I have been trying to throw her off since 2015. GRR is our Stalingrad for the sake of our women. Lot’s of resource needed to defeat this abhorrent leglisation. The Scottish Independence movement relying on the opposition..

  99. John McGuire
    Ignored
    says:

    ….most of which goes on paying family members and cronies as staff

    you’ve only given one example here rev

    Be interested in seeing a fuller picture and if there are any more snp cronies than labour/tory/greens etc

    Its a cesspit probably

  100. Bob Mack
    Ignored
    says:

    The new leader of the SNP in Westminster just called Blackford ” A giant of the Independence movement”.

    That says it all. Thats where we are folks.

  101. akenaton
    Ignored
    says:

    Follow the money, especially the property market money. The Murrells will be history within six months. They know it and the European nest is presently being feathered for “Our glorious leader”.
    With the state of corruption in all state offices when will the Scottish people get their money back

  102. Maxxmacc
    Ignored
    says:

    Why do Sinn Fein get any money at all when they don’t turn up at the Big Hoose?

    The amount of UK money the SNP gets is big, but it would be dwarfed (can i still say that) if independence were achieved, by the amount of corporations making their way to Holyrood to get preferential treatment in return for bribes.

    Thus I wouldn’t say that English money is the main block to independence, instead it is a leader who has never been interested in the cause, and even more so, the lack of interest in Scottish politics by the Yanks, who are the real power-brokers in this world.

    All the SNP MPs could set themselves alight for the cause in the chamber, and it wouldn’t matter one jot, as it would be of no real interest to Washington.

  103. David Hannah
    Ignored
    says:

    Hopefully Flynn picks his pretend cabinet ministers based on ability and not ideology.

    I wish him well. In hope of saving the SNP from having to be replaced like thd Irish Independence Party.

  104. David Hannah
    Ignored
    says:

    Hopefully Flynn picks his pretend cabinet ministers based on ability and not ideology.

    I wish him well. In hope of saving the SNP from having to be replaced like the Irish Independence Party.

  105. Robert Hughes
    Ignored
    says:

    Bob Mack says:
    6 December, 2022 at 11:05 pm

    ” The new leader of the SNP in Westminster just called Blackford ” A giant of the Independence movement”.

    That says it all. Thats where we are folks. “.

    C’mon tae , really ? Hahaha. Brilliant. He was kiddin’ , right ?

    ” If saw as far as he did , it was by standing on the shoulders of pygmies “

  106. robertkknight
    Ignored
    says:

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss…about as much use to the furtherance of Scottish Independence as teets on a bull.

    Doesn’t matter a jot who calls themselves “Ringmaster” to the SNP’s Westminster circus, with Sturgeon’s brand of SNP, there’s more chance of Quebec and Catalonia achieving independence than Scotland.

  107. Kcor
    Ignored
    says:

    It has been clear since Brexit that independence is not in the interests of the SNP leadership and its MPs and MSPs.

    It is also clear that the SNP will continue to get the votes of gullible independence supporters.

    It is also clear that ALBA has so far failed to attract support and is unlikely to do so anytime soon.

    The Rev. Stuart Campbell keeps on exposing the SNP’s betrayal, but as before the last election, SNP voters remain ignorant.

    IMHO, the way out of this quagmire is for a new grassroots movement to be formed which specifically forbids any SNP (or Green) politician to be part of it.

    Perhaps this might force the likes of Cherry to finally leave the SNP and actually start doing something for independence.

    The poor turkeys would obviously never vote for Christmas because it would cost them their lives.

    The vast majority of the current SNP MPs and MSPs, the tractors and rogues that they are, will never do anything to get independence because it would cost them their comfortable living.

    Have SNP MPs achieved a single thing in favour of Scotland or Scottish independence since the independence referendum?

    They never will because they are vastly outnumbered by unionists.

  108. Kcor
    Ignored
    says:

    robertkknight says:
    6 December, 2022 at 2:59 pm

    “I’m old enough to remember those halcyon days when people, self included, thought the SNP was something different. That as a political party it stood head and shoulders above the other parties”

    It still was, until Alex Salmond resigned as leader.

    Now it has been corrupted beyond redemption by the biggest betrayer in Scottish history.

  109. Ricky
    Ignored
    says:

    Follow the money.

  110. Rab Davis
    Ignored
    says:

    The mighty Flynn.

    A’ll tell the jokes.

  111. Joe
    Ignored
    says:

    Robert Hughes says:6 December, 2022 at 11:43 pm

    ” The new leader of the SNP in Westminster just called Blackford ” A giant of the Independence movement”.
    That says it all. Thats where we are folks. “.
    C’mon tae , really ? Hahaha. Brilliant. He was kiddin’ , right ?
    —————————————————
    Perhaps He meant a giant consumer of the WM Canteen Pies ?

  112. Joe
    Ignored
    says:

    Maxxmacc says:6 December, 2022 at 11:27 pm
    Why do Sinn Fein get any money at all when they don’t turn up at the Big Hoose?

    ———————————————————-
    Because they still operate at Stormont as the SNP do at Holyrood

  113. mark evelyn
    Ignored
    says:

    “The vast majority of the current SNP MPs and MSPs, the tractors and rogues that they are, will never do anything to get independence because it would cost them their comfortable living.”

    Thank you.

    Been sure of this for many years now.

    A similarly false but lucrative role-play at Stormont.

  114. Dickie Tea
    Ignored
    says:

    Does anyone know how Mr Murrell is appointed to his position within the SNP and who it is that can remove him from that position?

    one thing is for certain…it ain’t the members.

  115. Iain More
    Ignored
    says:

    Bought and Sold for Foreign Gold. Oh the irony!

    The SNP are now no better than cowardly slaves. It breaks my Scottish heart. There is a bitter taste in my mouth at what they have become. I was once A branch organizer in the SNP but no more. I gave of my time to canvass and leaflet for the SNP for most of my adult life but no more.

    The treason sickens me and I can taste the bile rising again. I fear fro the future of younger generations being led poorly by Quislings.

  116. Robert Louis
    Ignored
    says:

    The question now needs asked, just what is the point of electing pro independence MP’s to Westminster?? They cannot achieve anything, they cannot form a government, so what is the point?

    In the past, and for almost all of my adult life, there was an absolute understanding, that should a pro indy MAJORITY of Scottish MP’s be elected, then it would mean independence would happen. That was accepted by Tories, including Thatcher. So, with that their is a point – although it was Nicola Sturgeon who put a stop to that. Otherwise their is no point.

    SNP MP’s can stand and shout and whine as much as they like in the English Parliament, but it will not make one iota of difference.

    So, the question needs asked, aside from making some supposedly pro independence Scots MP’s personally rich, just what is the point?

    If the SNP or any other pro independence party from Scotland will not puruse independence when they have a majority in both Holyrood and the English parliament, just what is the point??

    To my mind their is no point unless independence is pursued. Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP have had a majority in the English parliament and Holyrood for many, many years, yet still they beg England for ‘permission’. ANY other country would be independent by now. They would simply go for it. The opportunity would simply be taken.

    Maybe SNP MP’s and MSP’s don’t understand democracy? Maybe they have become completely self-unaware of their Scottish dominance in the English Parliament. I mean, if Holyrood does not have the power to pursue independence, according to the English pretendy ‘supreme’ court, then surely we must go back to democratic principles, and a pro indy majority at Westminster means independence?

    I really do not get it at all, just why the SNP and others are still twiddling their thumbs arguing the toss over whether they truly have a mandate for this and that. Could you imagine the Tories haveing the same dominance in Scottish politics? If they did, they would immediately do what they wanted to do, without a second’s thought. THAT is what democratic elections allow, so why are the SNP so terribly terribly meek, so very feart.

    They should be kicking up a stink every single day in Westminster. Not one day of ‘business as usual’ should be happening, or allowed. But we will have PMQ’s this week, and they will all sit there, whining and gently guffawing at other ‘honourable members’ quips and jibes. “Har de har old chap, see you in the Members bar later, eh, what what????”

    For Londons’ gold, bought and sold. Independence will just have to wait. Just ask the SNP’s pension Pete.

  117. Colin Alexander
    Ignored
    says:

    This seems an appropriate question for the topic:

    Question for Kenny MacAskill, Neale Hanvey or Alex Salmond (if he reads Wings):

    Explain Alex Salmond lining up with Nicola Sturgeon and Ian Blackford to declare King Charles III their “sovereign” and “liege lord” at the UK Privy Council following the death of Queen Elizabeth II of England AKA “Purring Betty”.

    Before you say it: Aye, I know they are Privy Counsellors and appointed for life and I think the article explains Sturgeon and Blackford’s actions. So, I will rephrase my question.

    Alex Salmond, in particular, is saying the people of Scotland are sovereign, so how come he is declaring England’s King Charles III sovereign and liege lord?

  118. Colin Alexander
    Ignored
    says:

    Two SNP MPs employ family members, says Insider website, based on MPs Register of Interests.

    “Ian Blackford lists his step-son John O’Leary as a member of his team on the MPs’ register of interests. He is employed as a senior case worker, registered on 3 June 2015.

    Argyll and Bute MP Brendan O’Hara employs his wife Catherine as an office manager, registered on 19 January 2016.”

  119. Billie Boy
    Ignored
    says:

    Colin 8.06. Brendan O’Hara does indeed employ his wife. He appointed her ahead of the rule changes that were being introduced to stop the employment of close relatives.

    Maybe connected, maybe not, but Brendan a few year after election as an MP was able to move and buy a new house in more rural Argyll.

    Just saying like. And he’s not the only one who after a few years of election, and a nice car, bought a new house and moved miles away to a new house.

  120. McDuff
    Ignored
    says:

    Colin Alexander,
    I think the reason AS and Co took the oath was so as not to alienate the royalist yes vote. I think it has always been understood that after indy was achieved a referendum on keeping the royals would be held.

  121. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    Robert Louis says:
    7 December, 2022 at 6:46 am

    In the past, and for almost all of my adult life, there was an absolute understanding, that should a pro indy MAJORITY of Scottish MP’s be elected, then it would mean independence would happen. That was accepted by Tories, including Thatcher. So, with that their is a point – although it was Nicola Sturgeon who put a stop to that. Otherwise their is no point.

    To me, it’s the equivalent of sending an army into battle, who carry the fate of the nation in their hands, then they sit on their arses refusing to fight, then lie in dirt and acquiesce to the enemy disarming them and taking away their weapons.

    We talked about winning Independence without as much as a nosebleed. Nobody anticipated it being lost the same way.

    It’s not even a terror in their hearts instilled by an enemy that is just too strong or ruthless in it’s cruelty, That could be excused, since even the strongest can succumb. But no. It’s an abject snivelling cowardice, because the enemy poses no threat to them whatsoever. The defeat comes from within.

    Scotland has the Claim of Right, a Constitutional light sabre against which the fat sophistry and fallacies of the Union are eviscerated in a stroke. “This” is the weapon these reprobates surrender without a fight.

    In the world of worthless, lying charlatan politicians, the SNP could provide a guard of honour for the Tories.

    You’re right to ask, what is the point of them?

  122. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    McDuff says:
    7 December, 2022 at 9:07 am
    Colin Alexander,
    I think the reason AS and Co took the oath was so as not to alienate the royalist yes vote. I think it has always been understood that after indy was achieved a referendum on keeping the royals would be held.

    I’m no Royalist, but as it stands, the new King of England, Charles III, has done more to affirm the Claim of Right and Constitutional Sovereignty of Scotland than the entire SNP.

    The Royals might be useless, but Charles has been of greater material use to Scotland than a legion of elected politicians.

    Sturgeon’s SNP should hide their faces with shame and embarrassment… but of course they won’t.

  123. Jeremy
    Ignored
    says:

    @David Hannah 11.34pm 6 December

    “Hopefully Flynn picks his pretend cabinet ministers based on ability and not ideology.

    I wish him well. In hope of saving the SNP from having to be replaced like the Irish Independence Party.”

    Do you mean the Irish Parliamentary Party, mostly supplanted by Sinn Fein in the 1918 General Election?

    They were never an independence party, it should perhaps be pointed out – the IPP was always a devolutionary Home Rule party – that was also what Parnell had been campaigning for when he was their leader.

  124. Geoff Anderson
    Ignored
    says:

    Dickie Tea @ 3:32

    Sadly, IT IS the members who keep Peter Murrell in place.
    The simple act of remaining a member is your acceptance of his “appointment”. They can manipulate votes via “Survey Monkey”, NEC elections, candidate selection, Conference debate, standing orders etc etc.

    The one thing they cannot control is your membership. Being a member signifies “ I accept everything being done”.
    The members obviously support GRA, Peter Murrell, Branches being ignored, et etc.

  125. Iain mhor
    Ignored
    says:

    MP’s expenses bill greater than the wage bill? Well I had to have a look at that astonishing *ahem claim..

    Hmmm. interesting how close all the expenses are.

    One might suggest collusion, or one may suggest it’s just coincidental duplication of office rates, travel expenses, accomodation, staff wages etc.

    Still, around 200K+ each, annually, that’s… well that’s a lot of ‘find the umbrella’

    Then again, you’re either commuting (a hell of a daily commute) or reserving a pied-a-terre in the greater London area. In which case maybe 200K is cheap.

    Yeah, it does sound a lot. Pragmatically though; why not pay MP’s healthy working expenses (all parties) They are our democratic representatives steering the Nation(s) after all.

    Maybe, lobbyist chucking magnitudes more than that at MP’s, explains why it’s them who really drive our legislature.

    I don’t know what my point is.
    That to to be less corruptable they should be paid more money than a horse can shite, or something? (aye right)

    No idea. No-one with any money wants Scotland to be independent for some reason.
    Any GlobalCorp, or Nation state could finance it (the process) and effectively end up running a private fiefdom.

    Maybe ‘they’ already have it all for nothing.

    I think that’s the curious bit for me.
    If you could bankroll every political party in Scotland to do your bidding, for less than the price of a social media platform *cough* but don’t – why not?

    It’s not difficult to outspend what Westmister hands them all (far less just then SNP) It looks a lot of wonga to most of us, but it’s the sort of money Corps and Investors lose down the back of a settee and don’t bother looking for.

    Why just own a bit of real estate in Scotland when you can really ‘own it’?

    Nae idea, probably they already do – if they own Westminster, Scotland is a BOGOF deal. Perhaps that’s the whole point.

  126. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    A wee perspective on expenses; I neither know nor care what wage and expenses Alex Salmond was on, but supposing they trebled it, or multiplied by a factor or 10, it was money well spent and he was worth every penny.

    The greatest irony of course, is that to whatever extent he could, Alex Salmond would likely have done the same job for nothing.

    When we generalise about expenses, it mostly comes from frustration and exasperation that a troughing MP is a waste of time and money. The money leaves a paper trail which the waste of time does not.

    Memo to MP’s. If you’re making headlines with your expenses, you’re not trying hard enough as an MP.

  127. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    Jeremy says:
    7 December, 2022 at 9:44 am

    Do you mean the Irish Parliamentary Party, mostly supplanted by Sinn Fein in the 1918 General Election?

    They were never an independence party, it should perhaps be pointed out – the IPP was always a devolutionary Home Rule party …

    Isn’t that just a minor detail in semantics / chronology? A devolutionary Home Rule Party sounds precisely what the SNP has become.

  128. stuart mctavish
    Ignored
    says:

    @Breeks

    In the alternate reality Matt Hancock has managed to imagine anything remains possible – at which point Stephen Bonner’s 10 minute motion on employment may yet prove to be a coded message about Scots mps giving themselves their P45 in time for its second reading next February.

    In that regard a reasonably good reason he didn’t make it the summary type favoured by the like of Luxembourg’s Scandinavian nuclear industry might be to give his new management time to distance itself from the covid heist* or the sordid attack on life, liberty and truth that came with it.

  129. Ruby
    Ignored
    says:

    Is it true that ‘A picture is worth a thousand words’?

    If you took the above picture of the SNP and photoshopped
    a ‘No Thanks’ badge onto each of their lapels

    https://tinyurl.com/3ym2uey9

    how many words would it be worth.

    What about a caption ‘No thanks I won’t be going on hunger strike!’

    In the event of a referendum would any SNP politician and their family vote YES?
    Would you be shocked to find out that ‘The Murrels’ said ‘No Thanks’ in 2014 and they needed to get rid of Salmond because he took the turkeys far too close to Christmas for comfort?

    We are the turkeys who have been served up on a big SNP platter Christmas after Christmas.
    Gobble! Gobble! Gobble!

    What are we going to do us turkeys?

  130. stonefree
    Ignored
    says:

    @ Frazerio at 12:50 pm

    A recent picture of the Smith Young Team in London , counter the number there are ,Now counter the salaries paid in London.
    And the photo doesn’t include all
    Those employed in Scotland from and ad seem to be on £25K but the ad suggested that was PT
    Every vote for the SNP is a vote to remain in the Union

    Someone posted about the financial standing of the party, there was mention of it was bankrupt, Well not quite but not a kick on the arse of it.
    It certainly I believe is not a viable business
    A serious audit would show up deficiencies ,but that’s never going to happen
    When will Sturgeon phone Mone ????

  131. James Che
    Ignored
    says:

    Joe.

    Just going by what is recorded by the proceedings of the house of commons records.

    Tell them there is no connection between the bank of England, members of parliament, members of the bank and Westminster parliament,

  132. Ruby
    Ignored
    says:

    Remember when there was debate about whether it was the UK Gov or the SNP who set Salmond up?

    At the time I couldn’t figure out why the SNP would do it and I was focusing on the UK Gov/Leslie Evans.

    Now I understand why the Murrells did it.

  133. Liz
    Ignored
    says:

    George Ferguson says:
    6 December, 2022 at 3:52 pm
    “At say an average monthly contribution of £10 per member 25000 members would net you 3 million per annum.”

    Not sure the average contribution would be so high. Minimum memberships are £12/year and £5/year for seniors/students/unemployed. So hard to guauge real figures. Best time was when they took a one off payment from each branch according to membership, in order to afford the election. Need that to happen again to confirm numbers.

  134. Frank Black
    Ignored
    says:

    Raising money for independence wouldn’t be a problem. Plenty of people willing to crowdfund it. But ain’t nobody gonna pay for suit and tie wankers like the SNP to keep them in castles and fancy London restaurants.

  135. Colin Alexander
    Ignored
    says:

    Breeks

    My understanding of the word sovereign, is ultimate power, supreme power, highest power. So, it can’t be two disparate entities. Either the Scottish people are sovereign or the English UK monarch is sovereign. It cannot be both.

    I understand you are referring to:

    “HIS MAJESTY’S OATH RELATING TO THE SECURITY OF THE CHURCH OF
    SCOTLAND
    “I understand that the Law requires that I should, at My Accession to the Crown, take and
    subscribe the Oath relating to the Security of the Church of Scotland. I am ready to do so at
    this first opportunity.

    I, Charles the Third, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of My other Realms and Territories, King, Defender of the Faith, do faithfully promise and swear that I shall inviolably maintain and preserve the Settlement of the true Protestant Religion as established by the Laws made in Scotland in prosecution of the Claim of Right and particularly by an Act intituled “An Act for securing the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government” and by the Acts passed in the Parliament of both Kingdoms for Union of the two Kingdoms, together with the Government, Worship, Discipline, Rights and Privileges of the Church of Scotland. So help me God.”

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1707/6

    I think a few eyes were opened regarding this that it’s not just history. Time to reference: http://www.SALVO.scot

    But, sorry if I disappoint any Scottish Protestants by pointing out ONLY practising ANGLICANS (Church of England) can be the UK monarch / UK head of state. So, Presbyterians are treated just like Catholics with regard to being UK head of state: they are banned.

  136. George Ferguson
    Ignored
    says:

    @Liz 11:05am
    True it is difficult to estimate what the average contribution of members might be. Further up the thread Stu commented that MPs and MSPs paid a substantial levy to the party. Overall I think it is safe to say that the 125000 members peak membership has long gone. If I was to guess I would say somewhere between 25000 and 40000. If only the SNP weren’t so opaque. An important consideration when thinking about electioneering, as I found out last week. Less members means less people on the ground.

  137. James Che
    Ignored
    says:

    It says an awful lot about the thinking towards independence and why we are in a rut, if when legal proceedings of records in Westminster are dismissed,

    When it comes to historical records of the past that are wrote down ( then ) with the surmise that the common man would never get to know what was said behind closed doors, or how decisions were made regarding Scotland and the creation of Britain.

    The following were interesting snippets of history from the proceedings of the first parliament of Great Britain.

    1: In the first session of GB parliament, Westminster repealed two Acts of the prior Scottish parliament,

    2: A bill was put forward to dissolve the Clans of Scotland. ( Later dropped).

    3: An Act Act to make further provision for electing and summoning sixteen peers of Scotland to fit in the House of peers in the parliament of Great Britain, and for further regulating of voters.

    4: An Act for establishing a Court of Exchequer in N Britain called Scotland,

  138. Colin Alexander
    Ignored
    says:

    “On Saturday 10 December 11am, the ALBA Party will have a Special National Assembly in Perth’s Salutation Hotel. The event will also be streamed live. (As it’s sold out).

    So, giving Alex the benefit of the doubt, let’s see what Alex Salmond and others say should be done when the UK Crown has prevented Scottish self-determination in violation of the sovereignty of the Scottish people / Scottish Constitution and UN Charter.

  139. Republicofscotland
    Ignored
    says:

    So, Flynn is new SNP MP’s Westminster leader, so what, it’s not as it makes a difference to Scotland leaving this prison of union, it’s just a new face at PMQs with the same old shite spewed out.

    SNP MPs are outnumbered at every turn and even if they weren’t spineless gutless troughing shits, who put self-interest ahead of Scotland’s interests, their small number means they’d be utterly ineffective.

    If this lot want to impress us, they need walk out of the HoC and never return, they serve absolutely no purpose in this foreign parliament, other than trying to give it an air of democracy and filling their and the SNPs coffers.

    But that will never happen, the SNP MPs are now embedded in the oppressive system that helps keep Scotland prisoner in this utterly f*cked-up onesided union.

  140. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    Colin Alexander says:
    7 December, 2022 at 11:08 am
    Breeks

    My understanding of the word sovereign, is ultimate power, supreme power, highest power. So, it can’t be two disparate entities. Either the Scottish people are sovereign or the English UK monarch is sovereign. It cannot be both.

    I agree, but I was careful to describe Charles as King of England; the sovereign King of England swore fealty to the Claim of Right; Scotland’s Constitutional Sovereignty.

    The religious aspect of the 1689 Claim of Right is absolutely peripheral to the main principle of sovereignty.

    Scotland’s Sovereignty, the “Right” in the Claim of Right, is a permanent and ongoing state of affairs; Scots are sovereign in Scotland every day, every month, of every year. It is a latent / dormant condition. Under the Union, it is very dormant.

    A Claim of Right, as happened in 1689, is something like a criminal trial held under a criminal court, except it’s a Constitutional trial held under Constitutional Law. The “crime” doesn’t define the law, the crime leads to the law being invoked.

    Say instead it was a 1689 murder trial, and the trial was held under criminal law, and both the physical and circumstantial evidence led to a conviction, The evidence securing the conviction would be specific to one murder and one murder only; it would not go further than the trial, and would not affect the generic law of the land which made murder a criminal offence.

    In 1689, the Sectarianism is of it’s time, and relevant to a King’s suitability to rule in a society where religion was pivotal. But if you will, it is “evidence” in 1689 murder case. It is case specific. It does not affect the generic Constitutional law of the land that a Scottish King can be removed from his throne by the people.

    There is nothing definitive in the 1689 Claim of Right which defines or codifies the Scottish Constitution. It is a case study, a historical example of the latent Constitutional Right put into effect.

  141. Geri
    Ignored
    says:

    O/T but Lolz at Moane…

    Feathered her own nest, like everyone else did during a pandemic, but finding out that the token Scot can be thrown under the bus.

    Couldn’t have happened to a nicer gob. Get her on the telly now, TV bosses!

    Groans at new SNP appointments…FFS. Flo will have a job soon.

  142. Johnny
    Ignored
    says:

    I see that Ipsos Mori poll states there is 56% support for independence.

    This sort of thing used to be very exciting but given nominally independence-minded MSPs and MPs seem unwilling or unable to find a way to convert this into anything, and certainly not if doing so doesn’t align with their own self-interest, it’s all so much more ‘and what….?’ than ever.

  143. Ottomanboi
    Ignored
    says:

    BREEKS.
    That Claim is essentially about keeping Catholics, in this case retain members of the Stuart dynasty, away from the mechanisms of power.
    To claim it is not requires a jump through many hoops blindfold.
    There must be better foundations for the popular sovereignty v parliamentary sovereignty principle that do not involve such digging into the Unionist substructure.
    Sectarianism in Scotland has not gone away, only those who do not encounter it may protest otherwise. The residual «cultural» variety is often the hardest to shift.
    «You’re too intelligent to be Catholic».

  144. Ottomanboi
    Ignored
    says:

    …in this case CERTAIN….

  145. Alf Baird
    Ignored
    says:

    Republicofscotland @ 11:50 am

    “If this lot want to impress us, they need walk out of the HoC and never return, they serve absolutely no purpose in this foreign parliament”

    That is precisely how independence/decolonization and the ending of a mankit violated treaty must be delivered, wi Scottis soveranety ower oor ain launds respectit an threapit.

  146. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    State of this.

    https://twitter.com/markthehibby/status/1600325812162416641

    Listen to the end.

    “We cannot underestimate the position which Nicola Sturgeon as First Minister has got us to…”

    I’m sitting here thinking we cannot underestimate what catastrophic and irremediably damage which Sturgeon has done to Scotland’s interests, but pinch me I’m dreaming, Mhairi Black thinks Sturgeon has led us somewhere, I dunno, … positive?

    Standing on the shoulder’s of giants like Ian Blackford and Kirsten Oswald? What the f….???

    Where can I buy some of this SNP KoolAid? Do you need a special prescription or license to get hold of it?

    Relax, I don’t want to drink the damn stuff, but I’d like to stick in a fume cupboard and have it analysed for the presence of heavy metals, opioids, and / or other hallucinogens.

  147. Jeremy
    Ignored
    says:

    Breeks says:
    7 December, 2022 at 10:26 am
    Isn’t that just a minor detail in semantics / chronology? A devolutionary Home Rule Party sounds precisely what the SNP has become.

    Oh sure, my point was mainly that whereas the SNP were at one time an independence party, the IPP never was one in the first place.

  148. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    George Ferguson says: 6 December, 2022 at 10:53 pm

    GRR is our Stalingrad for the sake of our women. Lot’s of resource needed to defeat this abhorrent leglisation. The Scottish Independence movement relying on the opposition..

    I’m genuinely surprised nobody has ran with what Sturgeon said at the Zero Tolerance conference.

    Firstly, she has admitted that men will abuse the system she is putting in place. There is no way that when this legislation is the absolute mess it is, she can’t go in front on any inquiry and plead ignorance.

    Secondly, she has contradicted what Trans Right Activits have been saying that men have the automatic right to change gender. The article I had posted yesterday afternoon puts the assertion that she is transphobic in the eyes of TRA’s. That’s cheap point scoring and worth a laugh for trolling but the principle is that she is going against what she and her minions has said in the past.

  149. KT Lorimer
    Ignored
    says:

    Pacman

    Many have on twitter and in various blogs.

  150. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    Ottomanboi says:
    7 December, 2022 at 12:40 pm

    There must be better foundations for the popular sovereignty v parliamentary sovereignty principle…

    It is NOT the foundation of sovereignty. That’s the whole point I was making.

    In 1689, a group who wanted to James VII removed from the throne called together a Convention of the Estates to make a case that James VII was unfit to rule so that a Claim of Right could remove him from the throne.
    They argued he’ d abandoned Scotland, and produced various Articles of Grievance, as the basis for his removal, and being Catholic was one of them.

    Yes, the sectarianism in 1689 is the same sectarianism we see today, but it’s an indictment upon the mentality of the sectarians, NOT a reflection of anything said or implied under the concept of Scotland’s sovereign Constitution.

    Sectarianism is a bigotry and weakness in intellect. It is NOT a thing that is anywhere enshrined in Scotland’s Constitution.

  151. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    KT Lorimer says: 7 December, 2022 at 1:13 pm

    Pacman

    Many have on twitter and in various blogs.

    Good.

    It would be funny if somebody quoted her, was accused of transphobia then reminded the complainer that it is exact words of Nicola Sturgeon 🙂

  152. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    Breeks says: 7 December, 2022 at 1:00 pm

    State of this.

    https://twitter.com/markthehibby/status/1600325812162416641

    Relax, I don’t want to drink the damn stuff, but I’d like to stick in a fume cupboard and have it analysed for the presence of heavy metals, opioids, and / or other hallucinogens.

    She does seem to go from nervousness to over-excitability at the blink of the eye, doesn’t she?

    Even if it is just natural, her performance isn’t exactly inspiring.

  153. Lucky
    Ignored
    says:

    What a daft article to write, that the SNP shouldn’t play within the rules, or max their income whilst part of the UK, is petty and absurd.

    What exactly would you prefer they do, this side of Indy? Would you refuse similar funding in an independent parliament?should they refuse what funding is on offer as a matter of principle?

    Why then even seek election in the first place, if it is your intention to financial disadvantage yourself from your opponents

    Utter nonsense of an article.

  154. stuart mctavish
    Ignored
    says:

    Paraphrasing some interesting answers from Sunak:

    1. Route to indy – Whit you asking me fur (happy to work with scottish government regardless)

    2. Proudest achievement – locking up the country pending roll out of experimental drugs for common cold

    3. Effect of impoverishing Scots with support for indy at 56%? – whit you asking me fur, see question 1

  155. Johnny
    Ignored
    says:

    Lucky @1:28pm, try not to be a disingenuous twat.

    The point of the article, as I am sure you know only too well, is not to suggest that parties should not accept public money or the likes but to suggest that a fondness for these riches means a certain inertia has crept in meaning that they are in no hurry to get to ‘the other side of indy’ and that they would keep taking these funds forever if they could keep getting elected without delivering on “their core aim”.

  156. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    PacMan says:
    7 December, 2022 at 1:24 pm

    Even if it is just natural, her performance isn’t exactly inspiring.

    When you don’t see anything wrong with a drag act performing in a Primary school, you consider Blackford and Oswald to be “giants” in the Independence Movement, and you think Nicola Sturgeon is playing a blinder, there seems to me to be some seriously impaired / delusional levels of judgement.

    I have no doubt Mhairi is sincere in what she believes, but it’s the bizarre things she believes in that give me such a bad feeling.

  157. Colin Alexander
    Ignored
    says:

    “the sectarianism in 1689 is the same sectarianism we see today”.

    Is it?

    The UK Crown in 1600s independent Scotland was committing mass murder, torture and false imprisonment against Protestants. Take a tour round South-West Scotland and you can find many Martyrs’ graves or monuments remembering those who were persecuted by those acting on behalf of the Anglican or Catholic monarchs of the Crown.

    “John Howie`s The Scots Worthies is an often quoted source for the numbers of Presbyterians who died or were subject of `the utmost hardships and extremities`. The total number given is 18,000 which is for the twenty eight years of persecution from 1660 to 1688.”

    Catholic James VII / II was trying to usurp or overthrow Scotland’s Presbyterian / Covenanter govt and like Charles II wanted a state-controlled Episcopalian religion imposed on Scotland.

    So the sectarianism of the 1600s and use of the Claim of Right must be considered in that context.

  158. Hatuey
    Ignored
    says:

    The rise in support for independence to 56% is entirely in line with everything this website and most of us have been arguing for over the last few years. And it proves that when political leaders argue and agitate for independence, support for independence grows. It’s not fucking rocket science.

    The Supreme Court ruling essentially forced the SNP to act like a a pro-independence party for what was really a few moments. They’re working tirelessly in the background right now to convince the BBC and British State to call off the dogs, that it was all just the usual politicking and that there’s nothing to worry about — the Defacto Referendum idea will be rendered completely harmless and kicked into the long grass in a matter of weeks.

    The next polls will show that it was all just a flash in the pan. Support for independence will fall back to the baseline 47% level, where it has been consistently since Sturgeon took over, and it’ll be business as usual.

    The only difference this time is that a lot of more you will be sitting cold and hungry, and the steady trickle of people that Sturgeon’s politics renders totally demoralised will turn into a stream — don’t misunderstand that, though, they want you to turn away totally demoralised, give up, become apathetic, with no expectations, leaving them to enjoy their selfies and lavish lifestyles in peace.

    Your hopelessness and misery is success for the SNP, the sweet spot.

  159. Shug
    Ignored
    says:

    Charles’s accession oath was not worth much anyway since Westminster politicians including starmer have already ignored the sovereignty of the people of Scotland. They don’t give a hoot about the kings oath

  160. Curious
    Ignored
    says:

    Genuine question. Stu messed up calling the Flynn appointment, and he has not normally been wrong before. How do we know, then, that his current backstage political contacts are unassailable, or even relatively reliably informed? If there is – and I stress IF – some sort of vague movement in THE SNP towards some new hierarchical configuration – do we really need just links posted to old stories about how things have been said before? How can we be assured that new political announcements will be reliable? Genuinely curious.

  161. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    Shug says:
    7 December, 2022 at 3:13 pm

    …. They don’t give a hoot about the kings oath

    Maybe they don’t, but the distinction could be very important under International Law.

    I know the SNP bottled Brexit and sold Scotland out, but remember Barnier labouring the point that Brexit had to be lawful and Constitutional? The Constitutional hierarchy of the UK is a Westminster Parliament beneath a UK Monarch who is sovereign in England, but swore fealty to Claim of Right in Scotland.

    Nobody can legitimately overrule Scotland’s Claim of Right in the Realm of Scotland.

    All we have to do is depose the idiotic charlatan in Bute House running a Vichy “Government” which routinely capitulates to Westminster’s colonial encroachment and abdicates Scotland’s Constitutional Rights.

  162. Curious
    Ignored
    says:

    ‘PacMan says:
    7 December, 2022 at 1:24 pm
    Breeks says: 7 December, 2022 at 1:00 pm

    State of this.

    https://twitter.com/markthehibby/status/1600325812162416641

    Relax, I don’t want to drink the damn stuff, but I’d like to stick in a fume cupboard and have it analysed for the presence of heavy metals, opioids, and / or other hallucinogens.

    She does seem to go from nervousness to over-excitability at the blink of the eye, doesn’t she?

    Even if it is just natural, her performance isn’t exactly inspiring.’

    I like in that video when Black looks up at Flynn’s bald head, then reassures herself she still looks hairy and lovely by running her fingers through her thick mannish hair. She seems more fascinated by his shiny pate than by the contents of the interview. Hilarious and weird.

  163. Robert Louis
    Ignored
    says:

    Thinking about the constitution and sovereignty of Scots and the treaty and respective acts of union. Wayyyyyy back, did not the then very young charlie windsor have a dalliance with a girl that was a catholic?

    You see I recall that at that time the orange lodge in Scotland went ballistic. I mean really, really nuts. They went to great lengths, including writing to newspapers that should the future king marry a catholic, not only would it immediately end the treaty of union, but would also be in breach of Scotland’s inherent claim of right and sovereignty. Now, I am no anti catholic bigot, but religion aside, is that not quite instructive?

    There we had the orange lodge, uber unionist, no surrender, ‘obey your queen king’ etc..etc.. literally citing the union treaty and claim of right. Now, of course they did it due to their inherent religious hatred of catholics, but for the current indy movement, it just shows that the orange lodge regards both the union treaty and its specific terms, and the Scottish claim of right as legitimate and relevant documents.

    Of course that was many decades ago, but I do remember it. They literally threatened that the union would be at an end with immediate effect.

    So why can unionists use such documents when it suits them, but Pro indy folk seemingly can’t??

    Why can the SNP not start banging a drum about England’s repeated breaches of the treaty (and their are many, not least the English pretendy ‘supreme’ court in England). Why are the SNP so feart to rely on these intact and actual documents? Do they think they no longer matter? Try telling an Englishman, for example, that the English bill of rights no longer matters, or that the English Magna Carta is no longer relevant, and see how far you get.

    So why oh why are Scots, and especially, the SNP so very feart to do the same?????? I just don’t get it. Is it a classic case of the Scottish cringe, whereby English things like the English bill of rights ARE still important, but Scottish things like the Scottish claim of right, sovereignty and treaty act are not, just because they are Scottish???? That is what it does seem like.

  164. William G Walker
    Ignored
    says:

    Sorry Luigi and Scott,

    The “missing £600,000” should be $667,000! (according to SNP “accounts”)

  165. sarah
    Ignored
    says:

    Robert Louis – very interesting about the Orange order knowing the power of the Claim of Right AND threatening to use it!

  166. stuart mctavish
    Ignored
    says:

    @sarah

    Especially if it transpires the King’s current wife is same lady as the one the old OO were said to be so excited by

  167. Breeks
    Ignored
    says:

    sarah says:
    7 December, 2022 at 4:30 pm
    Robert Louis – very interesting about the Orange order knowing the power of the Claim of Right AND threatening to use it!

    Gonna repeat my earlier point; the Claim of Right is not defined by what happened in 1689.

    In 1689, a Convention of the Estates was convened to essentially put the king on trial in a Constitutional “court”, a court claiming it’s authority through the Claim of Right; the rudimentary sovereignty whereby the King answered to the people.

    So you had the 1689 “Claim” upon that perpetual sovereign right, and you also had the Articles of Grievance, in other words the charges levelled against the King, but the sectarianism has no bearing on the issue Constitutional sovereignty.

    The sectarians of 1689 saw being Catholic as being incompatible with the Scottish throne, so cited his Catholic religion as a grievance against James VII’s reign.

    The sectarianism / religious prejudice was of it’s time. In 1689, it mattered profoundly, but you cannot properly judge what happened in 1689 by our 21st Century standards.

    But that’s the point. The sectarianism behind using religion to indict the King in 1689 is fixed in time; to the 1689 case against the King.

    The Constitutional Sovereignty, which is “the Right” in the Claim of Right, is not fixed or defined by what happened in the 17th century. It is permanent and ever present.

    If we Scots were persuaded that our King First Minister in 2022 was unfit for office and had sold Scotland out, we could legitimately form our own Convention of the Estates, and make a 2022 “Claim” against the Sovereign Rights of the people, and impeach Sturgeon with our own Articles of Grievance.

    Our 2022 Articles of Grievance would have NOTHING in common with the 1689 Articles of Grievance.

    Instead, our grievances against Sturgeon would be;

    1. Her failure to defend Scotland from Brexit subjugation.
    2. Overruling the emphatic democratic will of Scotland.
    3. Repeatedly ignoring sovereign mandates from the people.
    4. Submitting Scotland’s Rights to the ruling of an alien “Supreme” Court.
    5. Bearing False Witness against her predecessor.
    6. Financial Irregularities.
    7. Capitulating to Westminster’s Unconstitutional Encroachment inside the Realm of Scotland.
    8. Recognising a foreign government as Sovereign over Scotland’s rights and territory.
    9. Dishonesty.
    10. Bringing Scotland’s Leadership into disrepute.

    All of these charges relate to Sturgeon’s failure to defend Scotland’s interests as a Leader is required to do.

    You will observe, her religion is not on the list.

    Her crank theories about biological sex and exposing Scottish women and girls to threat very well could be added as a grievance, but a person’s mental insanity is not a constitutional matter.

  168. Geri
    Ignored
    says:

    Breeks 1pm

    I heard there’s an app. Get it delivered within 5 minutes, wherever you are. Out of the gob of arses (Thompson) a grain of truth can sometimes emerge.

    Shes always had an annoying habit of touching her nose. Yer almost waiting on her gobbing one oot through habit.

  169. PacMan
    Ignored
    says:

    Curious says: 7 December, 2022 at 3:53 pm

    ‘PacMan says:
    7 December, 2022 at 1:24 pm
    Breeks says: 7 December, 2022 at 1:00 pm

    State of this.

    https://twitter.com/markthehibby/status/1600325812162416641

    Relax, I don’t want to drink the damn stuff, but I’d like to stick in a fume cupboard and have it analysed for the presence of heavy metals, opioids, and / or other hallucinogens.

    She does seem to go from nervousness to over-excitability at the blink of the eye, doesn’t she?

    Even if it is just natural, her performance isn’t exactly inspiring.’

    I like in that video when Black looks up at Flynn’s bald head, then reassures herself she still looks hairy and lovely by running her fingers through her thick mannish hair. She seems more fascinated by his shiny pate than by the contents of the interview. Hilarious and weird.

    Just to show that I’m not misogynist and only commenting on Black, Flynn looks like that character from Despicable Me.

    These two individuals are on mega bucks. At least they can afford decent dress sense to make them look media friendly and relatable to the ordinary public.

    It really is embarrassing have them as the face of Scotland’s voice in Westminster.

  170. Mark Boyle
    Ignored
    says:

    Colin Alexander says:
    7 December, 2022 at 2:30 pm

    “the sectarianism in 1689 is the same sectarianism we see today”.

    Is it?

    The UK Crown in 1600s independent Scotland was committing mass murder, torture and false imprisonment against Protestants. Take a tour round South-West Scotland and you can find many Martyrs’ graves or monuments remembering those who were persecuted by those acting on behalf of the Anglican or Catholic monarchs of the Crown.

    “John Howie`s The Scots Worthies is an often quoted source for the numbers of Presbyterians who died or were subject of `the utmost hardships and extremities`. The total number given is 18,000 which is for the twenty eight years of persecution from 1660 to 1688.”

    Catholic James VII / II was trying to usurp or overthrow Scotland’s Presbyterian / Covenanter govt and like Charles II wanted a state-controlled Episcopalian religion imposed on Scotland.

    So the sectarianism of the 1600s and use of the Claim of Right must be considered in that context.

    I’m sorry but this claim of “mass murder, torture and false imprisonment against Protestants” is complete piffle. By 1600, Roman Catholicism was at its nadir in Scotland. James VI was on the throne – three years later he was to add England to his lands – and had so many Presbyterians to spare he was planting them in Ireland at a rate which made Queen Elizabeth look an amateur. Betweeen 1609-16 a series of measures were put in place to effectively exterminate Gaelic and anything else that wasn’t the approved state version Protestantism (ie. Presbyterianism) – with Anabaptists and others also suffering the same fate as those remaining Catholics.

    What did follow was an attempt by the 1830s by Anglicans to impose their prayer book and way of Christianity upon Presbyterians and others – little more than what the Stuart monarches had got away with in Scotland, now trying to impose a different Reformed Christianity across the whole nation. Make no mistake, this was Protestant fratercide – something they excelled at once there wasn’t enough Catholics or Jews to bully, and the so-called “Covenanters” were certainly no martyrs, never mind heroes, but blind bigots with the intolerance of today’s Taliban.

    That they rejected William of Orange as a “sell out” and carried on a guerilla war against him in Scotland until there were too few left says it all, and it’s only thanks to Sir Walter Scott’s romanticising of them – in particular elderly bigot Robert “Old Mortality” Paterson, the graveyard David Irving of his day, that history has been twisted beyond belief to making heroes from zeroes.

  171. sarah
    Ignored
    says:

    @ Breeks at 5022: the point is the Claim of Right is not defined [by the purpose for which it was used in 1689 i.e. religion].

    Yup. And wouldn’t we love to see it used as you suggest against Nicola Sturgeon? In fact I have a not-so-little list of suitable targets.

  172. Jeremy
    Ignored
    says:

    Robert Louis says:
    7 December, 2022 at 4:11 pm
    Thinking about the constitution and sovereignty of Scots and the treaty and respective acts of union. Wayyyyyy back, did not the then very young charlie windsor have a dalliance with a girl that was a catholic?

    You see I recall that at that time the orange lodge in Scotland went ballistic. I mean really, really nuts. They went to great lengths, including writing to newspapers that should the future king marry a catholic, not only would it immediately end the treaty of union, but would also be in breach of Scotland’s inherent claim of right and sovereignty. Now, I am no anti catholic bigot, but religion aside, is that not quite instructive?

    Pretty silly thing for them to say in those circumstances, even from their point of view, because at that time marrying a Catholic would have instantly excluded him from the succession to the throne anyway. So they’d have had nothing to worry about.

    Albeit that’s no longer in force, and hasn’t been for nearly a decade – nowadays an heir can legally marry a Catholic and still become monarch.

  173. Jeremy
    Ignored
    says:

    Should stress perhaps, just for the avoidance of doubt, that I don’t share the Orange Order’s attitude to Catholics.

  174. stonefree
    Ignored
    says:

    Sinn Fein WM salaries
    I look at what was paid to the MP without a seat, Not taking the oath and not taking the seat means they don’t get paid, BUT they claim expenses which covers the office type costs Plus the claim housing costs, the folk who are employed by SF seem to get a salary
    “recommended party wage”

    https://archive.ph/ctFBK

    There is one other party in NI who adapted the oath ,which meant they took up their seat , but don’t attend so they get the full salary
    They’ll be some flaws in this, I did have the whole thing written out, but it’s gone

  175. Geri
    Ignored
    says:

    Jeremy
    He’s defender of the faith & head of the Church of England. He can’t marry a Catholic unless he plans to abdicate because the new rules were a bit of a con. A Catholic wife, if they’re strict, is to bring her children up in the Catholic faith so would effectively rule out any heirs becoming a monarch so I think this new rule is only for lesser Royals waaaay down the line so as not to frighten the shite out of anyone in the queue to the thrown.

    Diana courted Catholicism, her mother had converted & her relationship with Mother Teresa & then there with islam if she’d lived to marry Dodi.

    Then she was bumped.. how convenient was that? Drummers everywhere in the orange walk breathed a sigh of relief..

  176. Geri
    Ignored
    says:

    Jeez, I must learn to proof read before submitting. Ignore typos. *Throne..

  177. Socrates MacSporran
    Ignored
    says:

    That headline got me thinking. Years ago, on a previous Wings thread, I read a list of the bribes paid to the high heid yins in Scotland: Burns’ “Parcel o’ Rogues” which helped get the 1707 treaty through.

    The prices paid varied, to upwards of £2 million in modern money to the de facto Speaker of the Scottish Parliament.

    This got me thinking – what about today’s main bribe – that ermine robe and a seat in the House of Lords. So leaving aside chancers like The Fallen Baroness With The Big Boobies, I looked at five prominent Scottish politicians – four Labour, one Tory – who had “taken ermine”, or, if you like, been kicked upstairs.

    I chose Lord Jack McConnell, enobled 2010; Baroness Helen Liddell also 2010; Lord George Foulkes, 2005; Lord Alistair Darling 2016 and Lord Ian Lang 1997.

    Since being kicked upstairs, allowing them the average £300 per day over the average 166 days per parliamentary session and allowing them 66.6% attendance – roughly >b>£50,000 per year they have pocketed, since enoblement:

    McConnell and Liddell – £600,000
    Foulkes – £850,000
    Darling – £300,000
    Lang – £1,250,000

    That’s just five names I plucked out of my memory banks, I could have chosen others such as Lord James Reid who is all for a reunified Ireland, but, not an Independent Scotland, or Lord Jim Wallace of the Liberal Democrats.

    Given that level of Establishment largesse – no way will there be House of Lords reform any time soon.

  178. Rev. Stuart Campbell
    Ignored
    says:

    “I don’t trust those figures that the SNP got SFA in donations this quarter, I think they are merely not disclosing it properly. I think a few of us should donate 0.03 quid or something just to prove a point and still watch the figures come out as nothing next quarter”

    Those figures are for REPORTABLE donations, ie over £500/£7500.

  179. Rev. Stuart Campbell
    Ignored
    says:

    “I started giving you a monthly donation a few weeks ago, but do nit even get your blog sent toy email address, I only see it when others retweet it. Are you able to ha e it sent to me please?”

    Unfortunately this is a fault with WordPress, there’s nothing I can do about it.

  180. Rev. Stuart Campbell
    Ignored
    says:

    “I see no figures for Alba. Do they not receive any finances from Westminster?”

    Nope.

  181. Jeremy
    Ignored
    says:

    Geri says:
    8 December, 2022 at 2:38 am
    He’s defender of the faith & head of the Church of England. He can’t marry a Catholic unless he plans to abdicate because the new rules were a bit of a con. A Catholic wife, if they’re strict, is to bring her children up in the Catholic faith so would effectively rule out any heirs becoming a monarch

    While I’m aware of that, that isn’t something that the Catholic Church has any legal power to enforce, and if the monarchy refused to allow a woman who married into it to bring her children up in that faith, realistically there wouldn’t be anything that either she or the Church could do about it.

  182. Ailsa
    Ignored
    says:

    Did you clock that Peter Murrell lent them 100k+ in June 2021 ?
    (Info published Sept 2022)

    Link to entry http://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Loans/AL0559123

    50kish repaid since then.

    Could they not get an overdraft at the Bank ? How very interesting !

  183. Rev. Stuart Campbell
    Ignored
    says:

    That’s some alert reading. Am having a poke around and will put something up tomorrow.

  184. Monty Edwards
    Ignored
    says:

    I think you have it wrong here Rev: in the event of Indy there is *no way whatsoever* these parasites will be out in the cold. They will immediately vote themselves some spurious per diem / “Continuity grant” / fund onto which they will all batten on like vampires and ticks while hoovering up comfortable iScotGov positions while the country goes to hell.
    Giving this lot the actual cash levers of power of a full state would be like watching a donkey eating strawberries.

  185. Monty Edwards
    Ignored
    says:

    I think you have it wrong here Rev: in the event of Indy there is *no way whatsoever* these parasites will be out in the cold. They will immediately vote themselves some spurious per diem / “Continuity grant” / fund onto which they will all batten on like vampires and ticks while hoovering up comfortable iScotGov positions while the country goes to hell.
    Giving Angus Robertson et al the actual cash levers of power of a full state would be like watching a donkey eating strawberries.



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. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.


  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)

    Stats: 6,609 Posts, 1,192,572 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

  • RSS Wings Over Scotland

  • A tall tale



↑ Top