The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Geese and ganders

Posted on September 25, 2018 by

Tory MSP Miles Briggs was yesterday cleared of sexual harassment claims by an internal Conservative Party inquiry process. We haven’t the slightest idea of what the facts of his specific case may or may not be, and as such express no view on it, but the nature of the process has been severely criticised by Rape Crisis Scotland, and with what in this instance appears to be extremely good reason.

An obvious question does rather leap to mind, though.

Many on social media contrasted the rather low-profile coverage of the case with the feeding frenzy that greeted similar allegations concerning Alex Salmond. But Salmond was accused under entirely different rules focused on government ministers. In fact the circumstances of the Briggs case are much more analogous to those of former SNP MSP Mark McDonald.

McDonald was reported to the Standards Committee of the Scottish Parliament, for a case which amounted to his mobile phone autocorrecting the word “dingied” to the word “fingered”.

For that crime – no other allegation of sexual misconduct against him was proven – he was the subject of page after page of absolutely excoriating media coverage over many weeks depicting him as something akin to Jack The Ripper, suspended from the SNP while the inquiry took place, and eventually kicked out, suspended temporarily from Parliament and banished to a basement office far from other MSPs.

He’s now invariably referred to as “shamed MSP Mark McDonald”, was ludicrously castigated by former colleagues as a risk to the safety of staff, and is widely expected to lose his seat at the next election.

We’re sure there must be a reason why Miles Briggs – a backbench MSP accused of sexual harassment, just like McDonald – hasn’t been subjected to the same procedure and treatment, and has been allowed to be dealt with by his own party via a process so obviously horrifying in its nature that it scared the complainant away – something which also happened this year with Labour’s Alex Rowley.

We’d quite like it if someone could tell us what it was, though.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 25 09 18 12:56

    Geese and ganders | speymouth

378 to “Geese and ganders”

  1. bobajock says:

    I wonder if this will get … oh no, no coverage.

    Its the system, its the mess, its the UK all over.

  2. Giving Goose says:

    Although this doesn’t answer your question, it occurs to me that the Conservative Party (The Tories) appear to regard themselves as above the law, any law, and that the subject of sexual harassment does not apply to them.

    Perhaps because they are BritNats and therefore not bound by the same scrutiny that other mortals have to abide to?

  3. Athanasius says:

    The McDonald case was an absolute scandal. I have said many times that the great Achilles heel of the SNP is their pathological mania to be perceived as “respectable” by an establishment and media who want to kill them just to see them fall, and whose hatred of them is predicated on their simple existence, not on anything they have or have not done. Nothing they can do will ever gain them a fair hearing in the media, so why in God’s name are they internalizing the absolute visceral hatred they face into every day and doing their enemies work for them?

  4. dakk says:

    C’ mon Stuart that doesn’t seem difficult to answer.

    Because unionist voters, politicians,and entire media have an infinite capacity for hypocrisy and lies.


  5. INDEPENDANT says:

    Just wondering, could the complainant just go to Police Scotland???
    With someone in the media ie The National covering / monitoring the treatment she recieves.

  6. ScottishPsyche says:

    I do get frustrated by the lack of support the SNP appears to give to party members and employees. Contrast the support given to the Civil Servants in the Alex Salmond case and the lack of support and party ownership of this researcher. Of course, due process (whatever that is in this case) must take place but it was Rape Crisis Scotland supporting this woman.

    It’s as if when you get involved in a legal matter, no matter what your status, you get thrown under the bus like Michelle Thomson.

  7. Macart says:

    Double standards is what they do best.

  8. Grendel says:

    BBC Radio Scotland at great pains yesterday to highlight that he had been cleared and that he had thanked the SNP staff for their assistance.
    I don’t think they mentioned that this was an internal party inquiry, nor was there a “critics say” comment from Rape Crisis Scotland.

  9. I have observed before, and pose it again; according to this man’s wiki profile, he is a nobody who ‘rose without trace'(attrib: John Major) to be second only to Ruth Davidson on the Tory List.
    I can find nothing on his background, or any logical explanation as to why he was given such a Gold Ticket cert job in Davidson’s Party.
    This ‘enquiry’ seems oddly dubious.
    Any background notes on M Briggs?

  10. PotatoBob says:

    The tiny story tab on the Sun website links to a Whoops there isn’t a story here search again page. Maybe they are gearing up to do a bigger story but why delete what they have already published? And it was way down the page hidden to the side too….go figure

  11. Capella says:

    It is a puzzle.
    Are you certain of Mark McDonald’s “list” status? I heard that he had won the seat with the biggest majority in Scotland – Wikipedia says the same:

    In the 2016 Scottish Parliament election, McDonald contested the seat and was successfully re-elected winning 56% of the vote and increasing the SNP majority to 11,630 – the largest majority in the whole of Scotland.

  12. Bob Mack says:

    What? Are you serious Rev? How on earth could the Unionist media give Mr Briggs a hard time?

    He’s a Tory for goodness sake. Best forgotten. A storm in a Unionist teacup

    The equation is simplicity itself .Politician + Unionist= guaranteed immunity.

    Politician+ Indy supporter= guaranteed persecution.

  13. galamcennalath says:

    Rules aren’t for the elite (or those who believe themselves entitled to be), they are for the ‘little people’, the common folks. Some of the more feudally orientated Tories perhaps believe behaviour like Droit du Seigneur should still apply.

  14. CameronB Brodie says:

    The world is benighted by prejudice and discrimination. Don’t believe anyone who tries to tell you we live in post-racist and post-sexist times. This is the future that Scots can look forward to, subjugation as second class subjects of an English elite.

    Misogyny, feminism, and sexual harassment

    The term “misogyny” is derived from the Ancient Greek word “m?soguní?” which means hatred towards women. Misogyny has taken shape in multiple forms such as male privilege, patriarchy, gender discrimination, sexual harassment, belittling of women, violence against women, and sexual objectification.[1,2] The roots of misogyny can be traced back to ancient Greek mythology. According to Hesiod before women came into existence, men were coexisting peacefully as companions to Gods until Prometheus decided to steal the secret of fire from the God which angered Zeus. Zeus punished mankind with an evil thing for their delight called Pandora, the first woman who carried a box which unleashed all evils such as labor, sickness, old age, and death.[3]

    As mythology spilled its vices about women, every religion had their own viewpoint. Hinduism presents diverse view about the position of women and some text place women as the highest goddess and some restrict them to the role of a mother, daughter and wife, as described in Manusmriti.[4] Tertullian, the father of Latin Christianity, said that being a female is a curse given by God and they are the Devil’s Gateway.[3] In Islam, the holy book Quran has a 4th chapter called An-Nisa meaning Women. The 34th verse is a key verse in feminist criticism of Islam which reads: Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient… But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance-[ first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them.[5]

    Misogyny over years has evolved as an ideology which has engulfed the society as a smog which diminishes their site to aurora. Great philosophers, socialist, and thinkers of golden era were subdued by roars of male dominant society which narrowed their vision and made them a supporter of patriarchal society. Aristotle who was an ancient Greek philosopher and scientist was also a misogynist. He thought of women as a deformity, an incomplete male. He preached that men should always command and women should follow as they are the inferior being created by God.[6] Misogyny at its front had male supporters, but over years, few females also supported the ideology as stated by Sociologist Michael Flood.[7]

    Over centuries, women have been suppressed, their rights were neglected as a human being, they were treated as an lower part of the society, and their roles were restricted to household chores and birthing. Prolonged oppression raised many voices and collectively led to a concept of feminism which started the longest movement in history which still continues….

  15. Muscleguy says:

    I expect he has friends in Establishment places which is how he got where he is and why he is being protected so assiduously.

    Note jobs are always for the boys. Though a male myself being raised with 3 sisters (2 older) and having two bolshie daughters I am a thorough feminist. I must get myself the t-shirt.

  16. Dorothy Devine says:

    it ‘s bloody ludicrous and just underlines our utterly disgusting media.

    I wish them all a day of judgement.

  17. Josef Ó Luain says:

    The person in-question is obviously some class of protected spook.

  18. Petra says:

    I don’t know about anyone else but I’ve just about had enough of this. Grrrr! Pulling my hair out now. Enough of British Nationalist politicians just taking it for granted that they can say and do what they like. Add to that Scotland being lumbered with the dregs of the World’s journalists: Blatantly biased and twisted as a corkscrew.

    Well it won’t be too long now folks until the Scots have control over their own Parliament, housing politicians that serve us, not vice versa. Ridding ourselves of racists, misogynists, sectarian bigots, perverts and skivvers. Then we’ll set up our own version of IPSO and have a massive clearout of our propagandists. Post Independence I can see a large number of politicians and journalists signing up for their JSA.


    Do you reckon that Labour will win the next GE taking into account that they’re proposing another in/out EURef? They’ll no doubt lose support in England, so may not win at all, but it could lead to us losing SNP seats. If this comes to pass (in/out EU Ref), I think we should just ditch the idea of using a GE as a route to Independence.

  19. jfngw says:

    Ruth Davidson is content with the judgement and is now focused on becoming FM. Of course the only prospect of this is if she is supported by Labour. Is there anywhere in Scotland that Labour are enabling a Tory as being say a council leader. Surely not, it would be against their principles wouldn’t it?

  20. robert alexander harrison says:

    It makes me want to vomit how the media especially the bastard bbc still claim to be impartial.

  21. Archie (not Erchie) says:

    @ capella : I was wondering to, as well as, also.

  22. John Lamb says:

    The Tory party dealt with this ‘in-house’. Or they think they have. If the allegations are serious enough the lady in question should make the complaint to the police.

  23. Petra says:

    @ Capella at 12:14pm ……”Mark MacDonald …. the biggest majority in Scotland.”

    Some of the “treatment” that he received makes sense now.

  24. S.Perspective says:

    Because the SNP has not yet spawned an ecology of reporters that will dig unionist dirt and scream and ball when they‘ve something.

  25. Effijy says:

    I’d like to put forward that the abused Lady, Tory or not should never have been subjected to the alleged offence nor the closed ranks Tory Kangaroo Court proceedings.

    I would be willing to contribute to any fighting fund this lady requires to seek justice from the abuser and his party accomplices

    Daily frustration for me in seeing the UK Media make mountains out of mole hills when an issue arises in the pro Scotland camp and the 3 not so wise monkey routine is adopted when god’s chosen elitist need any crime covered up.

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing!

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of the Tory Party is for
    UK media to do nothing.

  26. Corrado Mella says:

    One more example of how the BritNazi Establishment is vile, corrupt and dangerous to the point of being a danger to humanity.

    I’m tired of repeating my Cassandra calls: it’s not too late to stop the rise of sociopathic Nazism in this wretched island.

    March on Edinburgh this 6 October, in the hundreds of thousands.

    Send a message: we’re coming for you.

  27. William Nicoll says:

    But it is still a case of guilty until proven innocent, and mud sticks regardless of what is proven or not proven. It is also a case of anyone can accuse anyone of almost anything but remain anonymous. Going to the newspapers for money and continuing to accuse seems also to be a trend which kind of spoils the anonimity bit.

    RCS is not doing real rape victims any favours by sensationalising what in a past era would have been solved by a slap in the face.

    If this had been an actual accusation of rape then anonynimity is needed, but for both individuals.

  28. Legerwood says:

    In one report that I read the inquiry into the allegations were to be held in an hotel. Hardly an appropriate venue I would have thought if this was being treated in any serious way.
    Petra @ 12.31pm.
    Are Labour proposing another in/out ref on the EU? I have no idea what Labour is proposing and from what I have seen and read in the last few days especially I don’t think Labour has any idea what they are proposing.

    A shambles to the nth degree.

  29. Capella says:

    AFAIK Labour are proposing a referendum on the Tory “deal”, which is not a deal, but are specifically ruling out a referendum on whether to leave the EU – as at close of play Monday.

    UK is ruined whatever UK party is elected.

  30. Jim Morris says:

    Petra at 12.31: There will be no further voting on Brexit. It is a done deal due to the Financial implications. The Tories don’t care about its impact, and the fact that Labour keep up this charade kind of shows they don’t care either.

  31. jfngw says:


    Labour trying to make a big deal about Richard Leonard being English after Richard Leonard mentions it in his speech.

    Not seen any comments about his Englishness but it’s not a good look to become Labour leader in Scotland and then demand that no matter what the vote in Scotland Labour would not allow a referendum vote. Because this makes him look like a colonialist rather than have any interest in Scotland as a country. If he goes down that route then we have the write to ask questions.

    Just to clarify I’m 50% English (parents), (75% English grandparents) and 0% Scottish if you go back further. I feel that I have the right to question MSP’s from England that don’t make Scotland a priority.

  32. Capella says:

    Oops – spoke too soon – apparently Keir Starmer is proposing to keep the option of a “People’s Vote” open. There’s to be a vote on whether to allow a vote later on in the conference. Updates to follow.

    I notice the BBC website is keeping the Labour Conference very low profile and off the Home page.

  33. galamcennalath says:

    Ruth Davidson is … now focused on becoming FM…. the only prospect of this is if she is supported by Labour.

    I have no doubt their greatest hope for their Union is to get an anti Indy majority in Holyrood2021. Heaven forbid they do, but if that disaster unfolds, they will undoubtedly form a government even if the SNP was the biggest party. Who would be their FM? Suppose it depends on which BritNat branch gets most seats, but could be Davidson.

    OT Oil price $82. Norwegian coffers will be filling up nicely. Shame Scots never got their act together. Time yet, though.

  34. Capella says:

    @ Nana link on previous thread – interesting item about Viktor Orban writing to thank the Tory MEPs for their “solidarity” in the EU sanctions vote. Endorsing the alt-right is what Theresa May does.
    She notably offered her hand to Viktor Orban to kiss at the Salzburg dinner. Here’s the video of her entrance to the dining room to a staccato drum solo.

    Oddly, the Conservatives have chosen to feature this video in their website Conservative Home – but I won’t link to that! They characterise the EU leaders as a “round table of Bond villains”.
    But their admiration for Viktor Orban is easily explained. The i newspaper on 13th September had Guy Verhofstadt as Quote of the Day:

    “Orban has openly said he wants to destroy the European Union. We need to stop him – now.”

  35. call me dave says:

    Tory MSP Miles Briggs. ‘Smiles’.

    A disgrace, and the Tories think it’s all over. I hope it is not all over.

    Labour darn Sarf… 🙁

    almost guarantee that..there is a near possibility that…and so on and on and on says the BBC! FGS!

  36. Arbroath1320 says:

    The National are saying that the lady who was “accosted” by Briggs was an S.N.P. worker according to the Times.

    Unbelievably the victim of this allegation was asked to attend the “enquiry” WITHOUT legal representation and was to be questioned by Briggs himself!!!

    I think though THIS from Brindley of Rape Crisis Scotland is THE most telling point of the whole Tory cover up fiasco:

    Brindley added: “The fact that the Scottish Conservatives issued a press call for journalists to interview Miles Briggs about his reaction to the outcome of today’s hearing, prior to the hearing even starting, raised significant concerns for us about whether the woman in this case ever had any possibility of justice.”

    For me alarm bells are ringing extremely loud here. This says all that needs to be said … the Tories were going to find Briggs “innocent” no matter what!

  37. jfngw says:

    O/T again, hopefully without spelling mistakes this time.

    BBC News Scotland trying with the blood transfusion scandal to give the impression the Scottish Government was somehow involved. As these transfusions were in the 1970’s and 80’s it is a tenuous link to any of the devolved governments.

    Not sure what Holyrood could add to this enquiry as the SNHS was run by the Scottish Office at the time, I would look to Mr Mundell to answer for Westminster run policy with the SNHS at the time.

    Not sure why this has taken so long, it was clear they were buying in blood because it was presumably cheaper than increasing the blood donor service. They went for the chlorinated washed blood but didn’t bother to check if there was other contaminants.

  38. HandandShrimp says:

    I can’t comment on any of the cases because I don’t know the details but it is clear that the press went into a rabid feeding frenzy over Salmond and McDonald and much, much less so over Rowley and Briggs.

    By all means pursue such claims vigorously but to do so over only one party looks like partisan smearing not campaigning journalism.

  39. Mike Lothian says:

    I’m surprised Miles has been accused of sexual harassment by a woman, I’m pretty sure he’s gay

    Obviously it’s possible to harass someone you’re not attracted to but I’m pretty sure it’s less common

  40. Jack Murphy says:

    This Wing’s Geese and Ganders article should be sent to the editor of the BBC TV One Show ASAP—–I understand Ruth Davidson will be sitting on their Green Sofa at London HQ 7pm this evening.

    Scotland awaits……

  41. HandandShrimp says:

    Starmer’s speech pretty much gives Labour a full set of policies depending upon who you listen to. McDonnell ruled our Remain. McCluskey wants hard Brexit and Jeremy? He definitely and unequivocally wants something.

    So which is it to be? Holding all positions and staying on the fence is pretty cynical.

  42. Robert Peffers says:

    This whole episode clearly shows the complete bias of the three unionist parties and the support they get from the British/English Nationalist media.

    It is now all out in the open to the extent tat anyone, no matter who, that still claims it doesn’t exist is vey obviously in denial.

    If the case now being fought by Alex Salmond isn’t proof enough that of former SNP MSP Mark McDonald most certainly does. However, this present Tory whitewash is beyond all credibility.

    Talking of credibility, what about this YouTube video of around 22 hours ago?

  43. Petra says:

    @ William McNicol at 12:56pm ……… “…RCS is not doing real r*pe victims any favours by sensationalising what in a past era would have been solved with by a slap in the face…”

    William we have no idea of what happened or …. not. For all we know it could have been an attempted r*pe. And we’re no longer living in a past era. If men don’t know by now what constitutes sexual harassment they should, and be cutting that type of behaviour out. Not waiting to see how far they can go before they get a slap in the face.


    Astonished too that William’s post got through when mentioning the r*pe word in full!

  44. Meg merrilees says:

    Can the victim still go to the Police if she , and R@pe Crisis Scotland, feel the ‘internal examination’ ( really inappropriate term given the circumstances) has not resulted in a fair and just result?

    I don’t like the sound of the Tory Party procedure whereby the MSP accused gets to question the ‘victim’ .

    No wonder they don’t have a problem with the r@pe clause if they think it’s acceptable for a ‘victim’ to be directly questioned by the ‘perpetrator’ – why, there’s no problem talking about it to a 3rd party then is there. Easy, peasy.

  45. Meg merrilees says:


    have a quick look at the BBC N.Ireland website – Arlene Foster is in the hot-seat testifying in Court about the Heating scandal in N.Ireland. Currently blaming some other Minister whom she regrets not having sacked 3 months earlier.

    Sorry Missus, if you’re the Boss, you have to take the hit for your team. You can’t blame someone else and try to excuse yourself by saying you should have sacked him earlier. You didn’t, so you called it wrong – bingo, accept the consequences.

  46. Robert Peffers says:

    @Mike Lothian says: 25 September, 2018 at 2:02 pm:

    ” … I’m surprised Miles has been accused of sexual harassment by a woman, I’m pretty sure he’s gay. “

    I’ve not really been following the case very closely but has not the complainant’s details been anonymous to date?

    That being so it may be media assumptions that the complainant is a woman. Not only that but isn’t it acknowledged there are many shades of “Gay”?

  47. Bob Mack says:

    @Mike Lothian,

    Rabbi Jacob Staub PHD ,who is gay, wrote an article on this very thing. He noticed that his own behaviour with women often made then uncomfortable ,although he being a gay man perceived no threat at all. He realised that he was acting towards them as he would with other gay men, but the instinctive fear among the females involved,perceived somewhat threatening sexual signals coming from a male personna. They did not know he was gay in any event.

    He has since modified his behaviour.

  48. Meg merrilees says:


    Old habits die hard. I thought the same as you re the word r@pe ut then read the heading about the R@pe Crisis Centre – I guess the Rev has suspended his filter today

  49. Donald MacDonald says:

    I believe the expression you seek is “corruption”.

  50. Auld Rock says:

    Remember how you were lied to in 2013/14 about the oil/gas running out? Remember how they keep referring to West of Shetland as ‘THE NORTH SEA’ instead of its correct name the ‘Atlantic Margin’? Remember when in the month before the Referendum Cameron tried to sneak into Shetland but was caught by a ‘YES’ activist with a camera and then all the drillers on Clair Ridge field were sent home to US on full pay and told to keep their mouths zipped?

    Back in 2013/14 ‘Big Mac’ McLaughlin had revealed the true extent of Scotland’s Oil/Gas Reserves and few people listened. And yesterday yet another huge gas find was confirmed in the Glendronach Field part of the huge basin of oil/gas in the ATLANTIC MARGIN, West of Shetland.

    We are about to be ROBBED AGAIN, FGS would you all waken up.

  51. Dan Huil says:

    More britnat media hypocrisy. Boycott all britnat media. Let the Rev expose their deceit.

  52. Petra says:

    I’m having problems copying / pasting but if anyone cares to do so there’s MUCH more detail about this case in the National. Strange too that it was reported earlier that the complainant had witnesses supporting her version of events! See what you make of it (when someone posts it).

  53. galamcennalath says:

    OT From the Express …

    “TWO-thirds of those who voted Leave in the referendum two years ago are not bothered about the details of Brexit – just as long as the UK gets out of the EU.”

    So, a third of Leave voters have changed their minds completely or are beginning to think conditionally about Brexit? Presumably some leavers therefore don’t want a crash and burn Brexit.

  54. Jim Lynch says:

    I do not fully understand the report – was Mr Briggs appearing before a Scottish Parliament committee – or a Tory Party one?

  55. Graf Midgehunter says:

    As far as I can understand it, the Miles Briggs “internal examination” is purely what it is, an internal Conservative group “enquiry” with no legal standing whatsoever.

    It’s basically a group of friends meeting and conniving with the brit. to get one of their cronies of the hook.

    There is nothing AFAIK to stop the woman who was harassed and R@pe Crisis Scotland from taking this to a lawyer and pressing charges with the police.

  56. starlaw says:

    This Tory investigation was properly set up as would any formal interrogation, staffed by appropriate members chosen by the Tory party and chaired by the ET HON SKippy.

  57. Dorothy Devine says:

    Auld Rock , they are being kept in the dark by the duplicitous media – they can’t react as they are ignorant of the facts.

  58. Gary says:

    No, Salmond was First Minister and leader of a party for 20 years. It was right that, once in the public domain, the allegations received maximum coverage.

    However, this MSP should have had SOME coverage, certainly as much as McDonald did. And the reason that the press decided NOT to cover it are undoubtedly partisan.

    But it’s difficult to read the article without it feeling like ‘whataboutery’ when you raise the issue of the Salmond allegations. When you compare like for like, THEN the point is valid.

    As proponents of Indy we can’t defend someone simply because they share our point of view or lead the party we voted for. I have no idea of the truth, or not, of those accusations but we MUST allow them to take their course…

  59. Marie Clark says:

    This is an absolute disgrace. Cleared by a Tory party internal inquiry, well, well, there’s a big surprise. NOT.

    I think that this lady, as she appears to have witnesses should go to the police. Let them do a proper investigation.

  60. stewartb says:

    Auld Rock @3:05 pm

    You wrote: “And yesterday yet another huge gas find was confirmed in the Glendronach Field part of the huge basin of oil/gas in the ATLANTIC MARGIN, West of Shetland.”

    Indeed it was. And remember this is IN ADDITION TO what we learned about Scotland’s future assets in terms of natural in gas in 2016 when two other major new fields west of Shetland were announced: “… peak production at the Laggan and Tormore fields could satisfy average demand across the whole of Scotland. In total, the two new fields, which have a lifespan of 20 years, will produce about 8% of the UK’s gas needs. A pipeline carries the gas from the huge new Shetland Gas Plant, part of a £3.5bn investment by French firm Total, down to the mainland and into the national grid.”


    And of course there have already been announcements of major new oil field developments in Scottish waters earlier this year. See this summary from Prof John Robertson:

  61. jfngw says:

    As every speaker at the Labour conference contradicts the last speaker on their Brexit position, Labour supporters on twitter say it is us that are blind. We just don’t see the subtlety and genius of their policy. And I have to agree with them, I can’t see any real difference between them and the Tories position on Brexit.

    So either I’m too thick or they are talking nonsense, I have a feeling it’s not because I’m thick but who knows. Maybe Corbyn is a genius and I just can’t spot it (he has hidden it under a bushel for some time though).

  62. Andy-B says:

    I wonder if the Daily Record will run and run and run with the Briggs story until the complainant is given a fair crack of the whip.

    Don’t be silly its the DR, a vehemently anti-SNP rag.

  63. Hamish100 says:

    All watching the one show tonight on BBC1 to see Davidson being interrogated on her day job. Do you know she’s having a baby.ahhhhj

  64. HandandShrimp says:


    Yes I see Thornbury has added seek an extension of A50 to the myriad of policies they are offering. Basically no matter what your view on Brexit from hard No Deal to Remain in the EU someone is offering something as the Labour policy.

    They are either in meltdown or are utterly cynical in trying to attract every demographic.

  65. Petra says:

    The National: ‘R*pe Crisis Scotland raise concerns over Miles Briggs hearing as more details emerge.’

    ”More details have emerged of the night that saw Tory MSP Miles Briggs accused of sexual harassment by an SNP worker.

    The shadow health secretary was cleared by an internal party hearing yesterday, but Rape Crisis Scotland, who represent the complainant, say they have serious doubts about the robustness of the inquiry.

    Reports in the Times say that an SNP worker had originally accused Briggs of putting his head between her breasts, draping himself over her and making lewd sexual comments.

    The two had been in a heated discussion about the r*pe clause at a house party in Edinburgh, following a reception at the French consulate.

    Briggs said that his life had become a “living hell” after the allegations and admitted that he had left the party calling the “complainant” a crazy bitch, but he insisted he never sexually harassed the woman.

    At least one other SNP staff member gave statements supporting Briggs’s version of events.

    On the day of the alleged incident, politicians and party staff had attended a reception at the consulate in Edinburgh after a rugby match between the Scottish and French parliaments. Guests then drifted off to a house party.

    The woman claimed Briggs “draped himself” over her at the reception, pinned her against a wall, caressed her hair and made lewd comments about her state of arousal.

    According to his version of events, the woman had sought him out at the reception and started an argument about the r*pe clause policy which limits child tax credit to the first two children with an exemption clause for “non-consensual” conception.

    Briggs said she continued berating him about the policy over the course of the night before he lost patience, called her a “crazy bitch”, and went home.

    The panel found his account “more probable”.

    A witness also said that the complainant had originally claimed that Briggs had “motorboated” her — vigorously rubbed his face between her breasts — shortly after the alleged incident, but that she had then not included that allegation in her final account.

    An SNP staff member gave evidence in person on behalf of Briggs and eight other witnesses backed his account.

    The panel considered written evidence from the complainant and two people who supported her account. They refused to take part in the hearing as it would mean being cross examined by Briggs.

    After the two-hour hearing Briggs said: “The allegations are completely false. I was able to supply the party’s disciplinary committee with several witness statements from individuals who were with me the entire evening and which not only challenged but contradicted these allegations and events that evening. I am especially grateful to the SNP parliamentary researchers who were among those who supported my case.”

    Sandy Brindley from R*pe Crisis Scotland was furious about the process.

    “This is why women are reluctant to come forward with sexual harassment complaints,” she said. “The woman is this case faced a process which was intimidating and inappropriate.

    “She was asked to attend a hearing, without representation, to be questioned by the MSP she had made the complaint about.

    “When we raised concerns about this, the Conservative party offered for her to be ‘cross examined’ by the chairman, who would put Mr Briggs questions to her, along with questioning from the rest of the committee.

    “We pointed out repeatedly that an adversarial approach such as this was not appropriate in a case of this nature.”

    The charity boss said they had “such significant concerns about the process being followed” that they advised the complainant and her two witnesses not attend the hearing.

    Brindley added: “The fact that the Scottish Conservatives issued a press call for journalists to interview Miles Briggs about his reaction to the outcome of today’s hearing, prior to the hearing even starting, raised significant concerns for us about whether the woman in this case ever had any possibility of justice.”

    The complainer said: “I’m gutted that Miles has been found to have done nothing wrong. I’m sad and angry that the process was so terrible that it felt as though this end result was written from very early on.

    I want to focus on changing the process so anyone in future can have confidence that someone’s power will not protect them and that they will be treated better than I have been.”

  66. Brian Powell says:


    “We just don’t see the subtlety and genius of their policy.”

    Did they explain why it needs to be so subtle?

    Do they not know that what people want is a clear policy put slimly as Nicola Sturgeon did from the beginning?

  67. Tackety Beets says:

    I’m slowly catching on here, I have to admit , I missed the Fat Fingered Donside Mark …”dinghied”
    I thought he was treated a bit rough at the time.

    Back on track with the Tory let off on here.

    Libdems & Labour have a golden opportunity to get one over the Tories ……..silence.
    Confirming much more about them.

  68. Socrates MacSporran says:

    The more I see of Small Dick Leonard, the more I am reminded of that old Eric Morecambe one-liner:

    “This boy is a fool!!”

  69. yesindyref2 says:

    What’s wrong is trial by media, and exposing the name of an alleged harasser. Whether that’s McDonald, Salmond – or Briggs.

    That in itself prevents a fair hearing, not just for the suspect, but any victims. And in that respect the FM does appear to favour the female alleger (s), and pay less attention to preserving the rights of the male to be innocent until proven guilty.

  70. manandboy says:

    Miles Briggs? The people in Iceland can probably smell the stink of corruption from this Tory kangaroo Court.

    If I was employed by the Conservative & LAB-DUP Unionist Party Ltd., in their strategic communications office, I would be working hard to develop all known methods of maximising our results at both elections and Referendums.

    We have all seen how, with plenty of money, the electorate can be bombarded with multiple mail-shots and micro targeting straight to your phone, tablet, laptop or PC, and all to winning effect. Not overwhelming mind, but enough to get a win. And the Tories in particular, are learning new ways all the time to beat democracy.

    There is so much pressure on the British Establishment and Government right now, that a GE and/or a couple of Referendums are entirely possible. Just a little more pressure, and possible will become necessary.

    I, of course do not work for the Tories, or any other part of the British Empire, so no worries. But plenty do. I just hope the SNP are growing their ability to compete with all the modern methods now being used to win votes. As we are often reminded, it’s not who votes that counts, but who has access to piles of dark money and has the phone number of Aggregate IQ in their smartphone.

    Just another year or two under the Tories, with no effective opposition to create any meaningful constraint, and things will be much worse.

    Hail Alba.

  71. Macart says:

    Been out all day and just thought I’d catch up. Where are we at with Labour on Brexit currently? For, against, in without being in, out without being anywhere near in, or moved to the outer rim of the solar system?

    Y’know, seein’ as how the (not even remotely) United Kingdom is under six months away from yer (currently) akchul date of commencement? It might be good if HMG’s less than honourable opposition could let the rest of the populations on these island know.

    Ta much! Oh and not in their own time. Now would be good.

  72. manandboy says:

    From Liverpool – a heartbeat from the Labour Conference.

    “Nobody,” said Starmer, “is ruling out remain as an option.” The response in the hall to that was immediate. First an instant volley of applause, but then, from deeper in the hall, and somehow also from somewhere deeper in the gut of the party conference, came the cheering, prolonged and surging, and then the standing ovation.

    It was a powerful moment. As someone who has been reporting party conferences for a very long time, I can’t remember all that many like it in any party. It’s rare for a politician, even addressing their supporters, to hit the spot with something truly unexpected and powerful. But Starmer’s embrace of the possibility of remaining in the EU hit that spot unerringly. It was, it seems, an improvised addition to the speech. The words weren’t in the planned text. But the words mattered – and so did the response in the hall. Most were on their feet. The applause went on and on. “

  73. Dr Jim says:

    Everybody is the SNP knows before they go into Holyrood or the HOC or indeed any position within the SNP that they have to be *Bleach clean* and continue to be so because the media will dig microscopically to the Nth degree to find anything they can smear them with and even then they are prepared for the media and opposition just making it up

    The opposition parties have no such scrutiny and never will unless whatever they do happens to be on a public high street on CC TV with two dozen witnesses, and even then they still have a good chance of getting away with it

    There is one particular MSP in Holyrood who when in attendence appears let’s say is well refreshed quite regularly and for obvious reasons I won’t say which party she/he represents but I can cut it down by saying it’s NOT the SNP
    and it’s not a medical condition either

    Y’see if they don’t speak you don’t notice but the Presiding officer probably knows yet does nothing in clear breach of Parliamentary rules

    I mean who do these people think they are? Lord George Ffoukes or many other members of the House of Lords

  74. Robert Peffers says:

    @Jim Lynch says: 25 September, 2018 at 3:44 pm:

    ” … I do not fully understand the report – was Mr Briggs appearing before a Scottish Parliament committee – or a Tory Party one?”

    Neither. In the beginning the complainant was asked to appear before a Tory Party enquiry that included being directly cross-examined by the alleged perpetrator.

    The complainant, understandably, objected and the Tory party then offered the complainant the chance to be cross-examined by the alleged perpetrator via the Tory Chairperson of the Tory party panel.

    The complainant also refused to take part in that and the Tory Party panel sat and vindicated the alleged assailant.

    The complainant then protested to R@pe Crisis and the story was hardly covered by the SMSM and broadcasters.

    In short the Tory Party wanted to put the complainant on trial and to be cross-examined by the person that was complained about.

    To me the Scottish Tories are the absolute scum of the Earth.

  75. No more news on the Red and Blue Tory councillors in Falkirk ‘and a third man’ arrested by the police over ‘planning’ irregularities.
    If this were two SNP Councillors, it would run and run.
    perhaps the fact that they are brother Masons in the same Lodge, and register their interests as members of the OO has been instrumental on this potential scandal disappearing from the Media.
    I read Tom Gordon’s version of this the other day.
    Scoop Gordon couldn’t find out the name of the ‘Third Man’?
    Triple cover up? Brit Nat shield of invincibility, the masonic web of secrecy, and Loyal sons of Will I Am?
    Anybody know who ‘the third Man’ is?
    Is he too big to name?

  76. Dan Huil says:

    Labour, like the tory party, is imploding over brexit. Britnat parties are at their weakest. Time for Scotland to get radical. Time to kick the britnats when they’re down. It’s what they deserve.

  77. manandboy says:

    Gisela Stuart demonstrating the skewed and dishonest thinking of the Government and the Brexiters. It is similar to the darkened logic of someone preparing to commit suicide, convinced they are making the right decision.

    Gisela Stuart is chair of Change Britain and the former Labour MP for Birmingham Edgbaston

  78. Calum McKay says:

    Not only are SNP treated differently, but the opposition know they will be treated favourably.

    tories are sticking two fingers up in this case, irrespective of whether Briggs is guilty or not, I have no view as to his guilt, but the process to find him not guilty by his own mates is biased and stinks to high heaven.

  79. JGedd says:

    Interesting article, CameronB Brodie @ 12.15pm

    It is difficult to ascertain whether the historical inferior status of women has always existed or is a consequence of the changing power dynamic of later human societies.

    The major monotheistic religions had their origins in the crucible of early human civilizations – Mesopotamia. In that region, it is possible to see in succeeding civilizations – Sumer, Babylonia through to the Assyrian Empire – the deteriorating status of women. The Assyrians actually regarded women as not being human and they were subjected to the most cruel punishments in the Assyrian Law Code. It was also the Assyrians who decreed that women should always be veiled to separate them from ‘harlots’ who were the only women ‘permitted’ to be seen unveiled.

    Religions often simply reflected in codified form, the development of power structures in society and as well as Assyria being highly centralized in an aggressive, expansionist empire, the religion was moving towards having one dominant deity.

    It has been said, in the development of religion through the ages, that yesterday’s deity becomes today’s demon. That might have been the case for women also, in that the demoting of mother goddesses had gradual consequences for the status of women generally. Or even vice versa?

    ( Sorry, a bit off-topic but you can always ignore.)

  80. Lenny Hartley says:

    Tricky Dicky getting asked on Misreporting Scotland what Labours six tests are for Brexit, he did better than I expected being able to eventually get three of them. Total car crash Interview.

  81. Robert Peffers says:

    I came across a YouTube report by some foreign TV company about Brexit. It was interviewing an apparently well known professor who certainly sounded British.

    Unfortunately by the time I finished what I was doing the YouTube video had gone and I couldn’t find it again.

    However, in the bit I did watch this professor made a very good point and it was this.

    Once Theresa has handed in the formal request for the United Kingdom to the European Union the date is set and the United Kingdom will exit whether there is a deal or no deal.

    There isn’t any second chances in this matter. The exit is certain and the time when it could be withdrawn has passed.

    There will now be a United Kingdom exit – deal or no deal – the United Kingdom will no longer be an European member state.

    Furthermore, the professor made the point that in fact the European Union cannot agreed to any of the EU Freedoms being eased in any way.

    What is more he said that certain, none too friendly to the UK, member state leaders had expressed publicly that they would be very glad to see the back of the UK as the UK, since they joined, had been nothing but trouble for the EU and had always seemed to imagine they had some special rights to get better treatment than everyone else.

    He then said, as every state has a veto, no matter if the European Commissioners, (the EU Civil Servants), tried to agree to a deal there were member states who wanted the United Kingdom gone and were ready to veto any deal.

    I’ll have another search but have failed to find the video and it was labelled as being only 22 minutes old when I watched part of it this morning.

  82. Gerry says:

    @Robert 7:09

    Hit ctrl + H and look it up in your browsing history. I always thought that it could be extended by agreement, so would be interested in seeing that.

  83. yesindyref2 says:

    That is a party political one show on behalf od Ruth Davidson.

  84. cearc says:

    Robert Peffers,

    …’ UK, since they joined, had been nothing but trouble for the EU and had always seemed to imagine they had some special rights to get better treatment…’

    An unnamed expert has confirmed that the seismic disturbances and strange noises in the Haute Marne region over the last couple of years are definitely caused by the ghost of de Gaulle jumping up and down, shouting ‘I told you so!’

  85. ronnie anderson says:

    Half an hour of book advertisement for Wee Ruthie , aye Bbc the advertisement free public forced payment subscription channel .

    Dont pay the Bbc Licence Fee TAX.

  86. starlaw says:

    I have also understood that we leave the EU on march 29 , ready or not. By the time IF labour win a GE it will be to late to do anything, but I expect that they will know this, but wont be in any hurry to inform the Electro-late.

  87. naina tal says:
    How come this wee song has been rattling roon ma heid ever since I saw yon Rick Dotard making his “speech”?

  88. Robert Louis says:

    So, Channel4 news, the team that vigorously chased the Tory party over election spending in England, have just had the Tory leader in Scotland on. Not one difficult question. Not one. Just soft fluffy nice questions, with a wink and a smile.

    Either Krishnan Guru Murphy is completely ignorant of the rampant racism, corruption and sectarianism at the heart of the Tories in Scotland, or he is just a tory political stooge.

    Hey, here’s an idea Channel 4, why not cut out the middleman, and just give Ruth Davidson a free party political slot of her own every single day.

    P.S don’t ask about the dark money she willingly received, in the full knowledge that the donors were unknown.

    Channel 4 news, what an absolute freaking joke. An utter sham.

    It is blindingly obvious, that UK media is completely complicit in trying to push Ruth Davidson as a kind cuddly sort of Tory, who runs Scotland and ‘won the last election (she actually has less than half the number of seats the SNP have. Total propaganda.

  89. mike cassidy says:

    Robert Peffers

    Was it Professor Michael Dougan?

  90. galamcennalath says:

    JGedd says:

    It is difficult to ascertain whether the historical inferior status of women has always existed or is a consequence of the changing power dynamic of later human societies.

    My understanding is that hunter gatherers were and are more egalitarian in every way including gender status. Both genders contributed similar levels of food and resources to the tribe.

    When agriculture was taken up, people specialised, resources were accumulated, hierarchies developed, warrior and ruler classes, power and wealth. Most women spent their adult lives pregnant or breast feeding, as before, however this new order disadvantaged women from the new power and decision making roles.

    Also, men became obsessed with lineage and passing on their wealth. This meant women’s reproductive activity became strictly controlled by men.

  91. CameronB Brodie says:

    JGedd @6:30pm today
    Fascinating, I tend towards the power dynamic thesis, as I reckon the development of monist cultures essentially ensured the exclusionary social power dynamics we live with today. 😉

  92. CameronB Brodie says:

    I think we’re on the same wavelength.

  93. mike cassidy says:

    ? More

    From the twitter account of the Head of Communications for Channel 4 news.

    “THREE blockbuster political interviews on Channel 4 News tonight:

    The Prime Minister, the man who wants to be prime minister and the woman who says she’ll never be prime minister”

    And you can here the missing bit screaming to get out


    Never won an election in all the time she’s led her party up here.

    They just don’t get Scotland, do they?

  94. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Robert Peffers @ 19:09,
    Gerry @ 19:19,

    You seem to be forgetting that there was a judgement on that very issue delivered in the Court of Session just the other day, due to a legal challenge mounted by Alyn Smith among several others.

    It seems it will now go all the way to the ECJ for final judgement, and expeditiously too.

    (That’s not to say that in the event the prof. may be proven wrong. If it was Michael Dougan, he seems to know his stuff, EU-wise.)

  95. Rock says:

    “suspended from the SNP while the inquiry took place, and eventually kicked out, suspended temporarily from Parliament and banished to a basement office far from other MSPs.

    He’s now invariably referred to as “shamed MSP Mark McDonald”, was ludicrously castigated by former colleagues as a risk to the safety of staff, and is widely expected to lose his seat at the next election.”

    There is nothing more shameful than an SNP MSP literally getting into bed with Dugdale the enemy, in my humble opinion.

    If the SNP could treat innocent SNP MSP Mark McDonald in this way, it should have treated the SNP Tractor in a much worse way.

    The SNP is fast becoming an Establishment party – its Westminster leader recently sided with Saint Theresa in attacking Alex Salmond and RT.

    Mark my words – Establishement lawyer Nicola will not dare call an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed and Scotland is at the mercy of Westminster.

    To the EU, Scotland will have the same status as Catalonia.

    The EU didn’t quite rush to defend Catalonia did it?

    Challenge to the clueless pompous armchair pundits posting here:

    Does a single one of you have the guts to go on the record and state that there will definitely be an independence referendum before Brexit has been completed?

    Robert Peffers?

    Liz g?


    Dave McEwan Hill?



    Brian Doonthetoon?

  96. jfngw says:

    I think I can were Labour are going. When out canvassing they see what the voter wants and gives them the quotes from the speech that matches their opinion. They have a quote for every opinion now, whether you want to remain, leave or have another referendum, they have a political quote to make you feel they have a policy that matches your concerns.

    Youtube to the rescue tonight, the thought of half an hour with the mouth was too much for me. Watched some clips of Shania Twain at the Hydro last week, impressive set design.

  97. Petra says:

    I see that another two of my posts haven’t appeared and I’m not going to try to post the link again (and lay the article out in full as I’m on my IPad now). It would be well worth everyone’s while to read the report on the Briggs case in the National. It’s a bit of an eye-opener to say the least.


    Another scunnersome thing about Ruth Davidson is that she’ll probably make a load of dough with her book, because it’s not just about her, as I thought ……. boring. She’s interviewed at least 17 women including her boss, Big T, Professor Sue Black (whom I really admire – and suffered from sexual abuse as a child), and so on. Typical Tory “user” lining her own pockets. Imo, she came out about her prior “issues” to promote this book. How much of the proceeds of her book do you think she’ll donate to mental health charities?

  98. Ghillie says:

    My heart goes out to the woman who had to disclose that she believes she was subjected to sexual harassment by Tory MSP Miles Briggs.

    Her treatment at the hands of the Tory Party in Scotland is frightening and typically despicable.

    Thank goodness she is being supported by Rape Crisis Scotland.

  99. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    manandboy @ 17:52,

    I think Starmer deliberately went off-script to put one over Corbyn, McDonell and their puppetmaster McCluskey. And very niftily done, it was too.

    However, the outcome of all that bravado and high principle seems to have morphed this evening into that it’s only after a UKGE isn’t called that Labour will support a “Peoples’ Vote”. Which rather begs two questions:

    What platform will Labour actually stand on if a UKGE does happen?


    How can Labour possibly ensure an EURef2 will come about if the Tories remain clinging to power?

    Help me out here. It’s sometimes very hard keeping an eye on the ball over Labour’s policy on the EU and Brexshit.

    Maybe it’s even Schroedingers’ ball. Sometimes it’s in one place and sometimes it’s in another, depending on when you look.

  100. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    me @ 20:56,

    Oops, I seem to have lost a close-italics after “isn’t”. Apologies for that.

  101. Petra says:

    @ Robert Louis at 7:44pm ….. “Davidson on TV AGAIN.”

    She’s not interested in being a politician now especially as she sees that the Tories are ready to implode down south. Bunch of morons etc. She’ll never become FM of Scotland either and she knows that too. She’s got her eye on being on television every other day in the week as some kind of political presenter, imo.

  102. Daisy Walker says:

    I once was told from someone with connections, that published authors get a special deal / rebate from the tax man due to some obscure historic bit of legislation to try and help poor authors sustain themselves.

    If true, it could explain rather a lot.

    I wonder if you get it for ghost writing the scribblings of over promoted, 9th rate, placement or placewomen in politics?

    Peace and love.

  103. Cubby says:

    On C4 news tonight Davidson actually says she has her own mandate in Scotland. Not challenged or asked to explain what she means. Not aware she has ever won any political election. Perhaps she has been elected chair of her local mother and baby group. Incredible how Davidson is always given such soft interviews on all tv channels. It was like a Ruth Davidson is brilliant party political broadcast.

    Davidson the self promoters ultimate self promoter.

    Contrast this interview with Corbyn in the same programme where he is given an extremely hard time.

  104. Bob Mack says:

    Somebody been licking the bottom of the birdcage again and inevitably talking sh#te

  105. Col says:

    Robert peffers have you tried your YouTube search history?

  106. jfngw says:

    Despite the attempted beautification of Ruth Davidson by the media, seems to be mostly the government controlled channels (BBC & C4), the people of Scotland know the truth and how little she has done for Scotland. Merely a self publicist that hopes she can jump into a major role down south. They need to line someone up as the current cabinet are toxic and she can be sold to those down south as a winner, despite her only success is winning a seat in Edinburgh (ably assisted by Labour).

    She has no experience of any role carrying responsibility, unless you consider being a branch manager ample qualifications for a PM.

    They need to realise her party came second in Scotland not because she was good, it was because Labour was so bad and still are. I can think of no unionist politician in Holyrood that I would say, what an asset they would be to the SNP, totally unimpressive bunch.

  107. Cubby says:

    Labour Rebuilding Britain

    For the many (ENGLAND) not the few (SCOTLAND, WALES, N.IRELAND)

  108. Meg merrilees says:


    I’ve heard various interviews around the labour Conference this week and last week.
    Various different opinions but the two that have stuck out are David Milliband last week who basically said that unless labour offered to fight for Remain it couldn’t call itself an Opposition and Keir Starmer today who sounded like the next Leader of the Labour Party to me. I’ve heard him speak over the last year or two increasingly frequently and he always speaks logically and in a well-measured way.

    Tonight I heard a discussion between two delegates one, ( young, well-spoken female) for a 2nd EU ref arguing that the young, overwhelmingly want to Remain and Labour would gain 1.5 million votes if they support that view and the other delegate, with the obligatory northern ( english) accent who was going on about if Labour backs a 2nd vote and Remain it will betray the working class which is the bedrock of the Labour party. All labour MP’s in a swathe from Birmingham to Sunderland and across to the Valleys of Wales would be unseated.

    These are both valid points and shows the dilemma for Labour but I tend to agree with David Milliband/Keir Starmer they have to take that chance and go for it.

    The second delegate said that if they backed Remain Labour would become a middle-class party but didn’t Blair take them there anyway?
    I’m not sure that the working class he refers to actually support Labour now either.

    Maybe it’s time for the Party system to disappear.

  109. msdidi says:

    jfngw Re Ruth winning her seat in Edinburgh with the help of Labour……she still only just managed it because Patrick Harvey decided to stand his one and only Green candidate in that same seat effectively splitting the pro indy vote (many SNP voters even gave Greens their 2nd vote!)

  110. Haggishunter says:

    The British establishments twisted, corrupt and control over all the media is widely known and its going to strongly contribute to the end of their ‘union’ with region Scotland. Even when they are trying to be subtle, hardly anyone except the most pompous of yoons is taken in.

  111. CameronB Brodie says:

    Re. social structure in contemporary Britain. Traditional, Marxist, class-based analysis is soooooo 1970s. These are post-feminist, post-modern, globalised times we live in.

    The fall and rise of class analysis in British sociology, 1950-2016
    The decline of class analysis 1970-2000

    I have argued that the great tradition of class analysis established in Britain in the immediate post war decades was unsustainable. It was premised on a model of the white male worker which could only be seen as nostalgic in the context of late 20th century Britain. It is therefore completely explicable why growing interests in gender inequality and changing position of women, and concerns with racism and the position of ethnic minorities could only appear to undermine the project of class analysis as a whole.

  112. Craig P says:

    Daisy Walker says:
    25 September, 2018 at 9:04 pm

    I once was told from someone with connections, that published authors get a special deal / rebate from the tax man due to some obscure historic bit of legislation to try and help poor authors sustain themselves.

    If only… there once was a law to that effect in Ireland but never has been here to my knowledge.

  113. Gerry says:

    @Robert J @ 8:42

    I’m not forgetting about that at all, or underestimating The legal opinion of Lord Carloway. Pay particular attention to note 7 which is the crux of the matter really. (ie whether or not there is a 3rd way in the event of no deal)The matter will still be in the hands of WM regardless. Have you actually read the judgement ?

    The judgement I am more interested in and I believe will be a catalyst to indyref2 being called is the supreme court one in a month or so.

    Considering the potential of both of these rulings, the move to have the claim of right recognised by WM (more specifically the tories) was actually genius. Rulings aside, the way that the UK govt negotiations are going we are heading toward being in a position where the EU easlily can and will, and I quote from Jens Zimmermann member of the German Parliament from Jan 2017, “Regulate the sh*t out of the UK”. Which he said in response to May’s empty threat to play hardball.

    As for the ECJ ruling that you refer to (which I agree is significant). How do you seriously think that will play out in WM even if it lands in our favour ?

    That said, the reality of the situation is that the worse things look for the UK, the better the chance we have of attaining independence.

  114. Cubby says:

    Surely the only way to pass labours 6 tests is never to have left in the first place.

  115. Fred says:

    Anent the Briggs whitewash, why did the complainant take her problem to the Tories instead of to the Scottish Parliament? A crew shot through with bigots & dodgy cash were never going to give her a fair hearing?

  116. sassenach says:

    WOW, what an honour(?), I’ve now appeared on Rock’s repetitive list once again.

    He/she/it must have a degree in cut&paste by now.

    Scroll on bye…..!

  117. Rock says:

    Petra says:
    25 September, 2018 at 8:51 pm

    “I see that another two of my posts haven’t appeared”

    Please learn from your past mistakes and don’t repeat them:

    Petra says:
    9 October, 2017 at 12:55 am

    “Well I’ve tried to post this on numerous occasions tonight, to no avail.”

    Rev. Stuart Campbell says (to Petra):
    6 October, 2017 at 11:09 am
    (“Have I Got Evasion For You”)

    “I’m going to say this one last time and then, with the very greatest of reluctance, I’m going to ban you for NOT FUCKING LISTENING.








    If it falls foul of the filters the first time you try, THE SAME FUCKING THING WILL HAPPEN EVERY OTHER TIME. OBVIOUSLY. The filters don’t change from one comment to the next. All you do is create a giant mess for me to clean up behind the scenes. You do it over and over again. I don’t know how many times I have to say it.

    Sometimes I have to go out. Sometimes I’m just taking a break for a few hours. When I get back, I’ll check the comments needing approval and your comment will be approved. That’s how it works. That’s how it’s always worked. That’s how it will continue to work. Everyone else manages to follow the rules.

    Your posts are enormously long, and when I get in and find 20 of them in the approval queue, all several screens high, I have to scroll endlessly up and down trying to work out which ones are new and which ones are the same ones posted five times in a row. It’s UNBELIEVABLY tedious and time-consuming and soul-destroying and I’ve FUCKING WELL TOLD EVERYONE NOT TO DO IT A HUNDRED TIMES.

    Do not do it again. We clear?”

  118. Meg merrilees says:


    RE: T May standing in front of the carefully folded Union Flags in Downing street the other…

    Did anyone else think that it almost looked like those red crosses might open into a swastika.


  119. Dan Huil says:

    Britnats fighting amongst themselves in the britat media. Great fun. But we must use their internal squabbling to Scotland’s advantage.

  120. schrodingers cat says:

    msdidi says:
    25 September, 2018 at 9:41 pm
    jfngw Re Ruth winning her seat in Edinburgh with the help of Labour……she still only just managed it because Patrick Harvey decided to stand his one and only Green candidate in that same seat effectively splitting the pro indy vote (many SNP voters even gave Greens their 2nd vote!)

    i campaigned hard for a 2 vote for green. i admit now i was wrong.
    more fool me/
    apologies to heedtracker, where ever he maybe

  121. Cubby says:

    Fred 10.30pm

    I suggest the complainant is a Tory.

  122. JGedd says:

    galamcennalath @ 8.09pm

    Yes, I agree with everything you say. It’s what I would have said had I had time to expand. So yes, in early, smaller human groups with close personal connections, the value of women in the survival of the tribal group would probably be well understood.

    As you say,in modern tribal groups the importance of women in child-rearing and food-gathering is obvious. In early tribal groups their acquisition of herbal medicine as well as having the special role of presiding over childbirth would have awarded women a specialist, arcane knowledge of life and death – hence the concept of Mother Goddess.

    But the status of women obviously eroded over time marked by the replacement of mother goddesses with male deities. The growing evidence of warrior cultures and increased warfare probably had something to do with the steady demotion of the status of women to mere chattels and burdensome collateral casualties in time of war.

    Anyway,before I blether on again I will simply finish with an observation with which Cameron would probably concur and that is that once these power elites had established their hierarchies they were extremely reluctant to allow any change. Once women had been neutralised and awarded a lesser status they were policed by the institutions of religion and society and ironically by other women too.

  123. Daisy Walker says:

    Dear Rock, @ 10.36pm

    I’m quite sure that the Rev Stu, in fact I know, the Rev Stu can and does post his own comments, as and when he feels the need.

    The fact you cut and pasted a previous one and then hit out at Petra, is not appropriate. Bullying in fact. It’s not your site to Police.

    I will never forget the post Petra put out, sketching out a bit of Scottish History regarding the women carers who had been robbed and discriminated against, and their shoddy treatment by Labour and the subsequent long drawn out legal battle.

    I knew women who worked in that field and in that area, and although they got out to other occupations, they witnessed it. That was their friends and colleagues. That was another bit of Scottish History swept under the carpet.

    And Petra was there, and she fought, and she’s still standing, still fighting yet. Quality.

    In accordance with the rules, I will contact The Rev and report your conduct.

    Kindest regards to all. Best wishes, and a computer free from glitches future, to all.

  124. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    And back to politics…

    I see Sir Keir Starmer just seriously undermined Jeremy today.
    Not by accident.

    Starmer is the establishment’s man to lead Labour. He is no threat to it.

    If he gets there there will be a General Election.

    I don’t think Brexit will happen.

  125. CameronB Brodie says:

    Indeed. I also think a woman’s historical place in the word mirrors Scotland’s place in the ‘Union’, which is to be subordinate to the political concerns of another nation. Subsequently, Scotland lacks effective agency and suffers an emotional dissonance.

    Woman’s Place: A Critical Review of Anthropological Theory


    Primitive societies and barbarous societies and the historical societies of Europe and the East exhibit almost every conceivable variety of institutions, but in all of them, regardless of the form of social structure, men are always in the ascendancy, and this is perhaps the more evident the higher the civilization … so far as I can see, it is a plain matter of fact that it is so. Feminists have indeed said that this is because women have always been denied the opportunity of taking the lead; but we would still have to ask how it is that they have allowed the opportunity to be denied them …


  126. jfngw says:


    If people want to vote Greens we can’t stop them. Also not a good idea to ask other parties to stand down to help you out. You could make the same argument for the unionist side, only stand the party that could win. We need to persuade people to vote for independence and SNP, it is really the only way to win independence.

    Also if SNP voters moved to the Tories because of Brexit then we could be locked in this union forever, there will always be some division the UK can play on. I sometimes feel Scots are their own worst enemies, bickering about trivia whilst Westminster make off with the jewels.

    If we don’t choose independence now I fear we never will, in my lifetime anyway.

  127. crazycat says:

    @ Cubby at 11.04

    I suggest the complainant is a Tory.

    She’s being described as an “SNP worker”, eg here:

  128. Thepnr says:

    @Robert J. Sutherland

    “What platform will Labour actually stand on if a UKGE does happen?”

    That is a very good point, we’ve had two different versions of the Labour view on a peoples vote already this week, Remaining in the EU won’t be an option and Reamining in the EU will not be ruled out and is an option.

    Only one can be true of course but even worse is that Stammer is saying they will only support a “Peoples Vote” if they can’t force a General Election. As you say what will be in their manifesto then on the most important topic facing the UK?

    They don’t appear to have a clue, personally I think they’re all fecking idiots bending whichever way the wind blows.

  129. Footsoldier says:

    stewartb @ 4.23pm and Auld Rock @3:05 pm on our significant new gas and oil reserves.

    Have not heard a cheap from anyone in the SNP on this and especially when any of the hierarchy are live on air. Are they ever going to grasp the mettle of seizing opportunities for the use of message soundbites. So many chances lost in not rocking the establishment boat, one could almost think they are part of the establishment.

    I like many others waited in vain at indyref1 for the great SNP push that never came.

  130. Thepnr says:

    Civil War breaks out in the Tory Party over Sexual Harassment Accusations”

    Guess I must have missed these headlines, they just passed me by.

  131. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Petra @ 20:51,

    O/T I just want to say that IMO you are a real asset to this site, unlike the Neolithic One who is a dead loss. I’m also fairly confident that virtually everyone here shares this opinion, with only one likely exception.

    “Numquam illegitimus carborundum.” Keep on posting!

    PS: I’ve also had the occasional lost posting of late. Submitted virtually the same message later which got through without a problem. Sometimes I’ve seen postings appear immediately after being sent (as in days of yore), other times it seems to take absolute ages.

    Try to make sure though that name and e-mail address are spelt correctly, since typos there are the obvious main reason for “disappearances”.

    (Incidentally, that may possibly include wee finger-slips onto control keys that might then get included without being visible. Or am I just being paranoid?

    The other apparently arbitrary source of loss may be down to some issue with the site.)

  132. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Thepnr @ 23:48,

    As DMH hints upthread, Starmer is the Brit Establishment’s last best hope. Both at least do seem recognise the total car-crash that Brexshit represents, and that the Tories serial self-harm is going to rebound on us all. Like it or not, believe it or not.

    The panic is definitely setting in, and confidence in UKGov clearly plummeting by the day, though it’s still all largely happening on the QT. Unlike the situation back in 2014, when they were eager to use a loudhailer to predict every plague under the Sun for us, and then some.

    It’s not in the least clear though even at this late stage if Labour (esp. its so-called leadership) is capable of mastering and avoiding the upcoming disaster any better than Mayhem & Co. Their current strategy seems to amount to little more than “vote for us and we’ll do it better than the other lot. Somehow. Just don’t ask.”

  133. Dr Jim says:

    Everywhere you look every day of the week you see British Nationalist parties obsessing over the SNP and constantly claiming the SNP keep banging on about Independence

    Yet everywhere you look you never see the SNP talking about any of these things at all
    When you look even at the FMs twitter there are more Britnats trolling and abusing her most of them moaning about her banging on about Independence when she never mentioned the word and all she’s doing is visiting a school or opening a business or a building or attending something medical

    Of course it’s all to force it into the minds of the easily led but the trouble is they are easily led
    My granddaughters teacher told her class to remember to wear warm winter clothing next week because of the expected blizzards, my granddaughter asked how she knew about this and the reply came *The Daily Express* and of course I laughed out loud immediately then after a nano seconds thought realised the obvious that my granddaughters teacher is a moron who just advertised the Daily Express as a truthful and accurate document of news which instantly threw up murderous thoughts in my head for a teacher who would behave this way, because you can’t tell me that’s an accident

    Teachers are trusted to impart information and pupils accept it as true because the teacher said so and it doesn’t matter that her grandfather *me* is wiser far more educated and compared to the average teacher in high school well let’s say more extensively qualified, I don’t know what I’m talking about because I’m a silly old grandad

    We have a lot of teachers in our schools who are imparting their opinions instead of teaching the pupil how to form their own opinions and that bothers me a lot

  134. North chiel says:

    Looks like Establishment duo of Starmer & Thornberry are slowly but surely
    influencing the more radical Corbyn & Macdonnel as regards their positioning on Brexit. The
    Westminster establishment now have the necessary “ backstop” in place to thwart the Independence referendum . There is a lot more water to “ flow under the bridge” and now we can see why our FM has “ held her wheesht “ for so long. She is so rightly holding her cards to play late in the day .
    TM is now under the most severe pressure and it was noticeable tonight during post UN interview she appeared to be perspiring and sounded somewhat nervous and unsure whilst swiping away any possibility of “ Canada type deal”. What is absolutely crystal clear now is that the “ credibility “ of herself and her disastrous Tory government is at absolute rock bottom with the EU member states. Her mission now at the behest of JRM & co is to get the U.K. out of the EU at any cost , after which she will be shunted off into the HOL ( job done). However, if she fails and HOC votes against Brexit surely GE to follow and possible Labour minority gov.? ( looks like Corbyn has been “ partially cleansed “re A.S. smears due to acceptance of international definition & could have thumbs up for 2nd eleven Britnat gov. if required and necessary by the establishment).
    If May succeeds then Scotland gets Indyref2
    If May fails, and Corbyn gets keys to no. 10 our FM can demand a very high price for any required support.
    If the final outcome is EU2 and a remain vote , the Westminster government would have to go “ crawling back to the EU on its knees “ totally discredited. Scotland & Northern Ireland would certainly “ have most favoured status” in the eyes of the EU if this came to pass . The “ tax avoiders& money launderers “ would most definitely be on the “ radar “ of the EU authorities& courts.
    The plot thickens.

  135. yesindyref2 says:

    @Meg merrilees and others
    Havevn’t noticed Keir Starmer before, surprisingly I don’t follow party politics that much. But I did hear him on the news at the conference, and he was instantly very impressive, including that “little bit” about the referendum that he inserted and wasn’t in the version given to the journalists.

    Solid pedigree, QC, knows how to use just a few seconds to maximum advantage. If Cirby goes and Starmer stands, good chance he’s in and yes, fair chance of no Brexit.

    Fuck off and leave people alone you bullying bastard.

  136. yesindyref2 says:

    Corbyn not Cirby! I’m not that ignorant honest, but my keyboard is.

  137. Petra says:

    You never know what you’re going to find on arrival on here, LOL. Wee Chippie’s not getting any attention, not happy and desperation is setting in. Pathetic. He / she can now see that their beloved Union is over and out. Suffice to say thanks to Daisy, RJS and yesindyref2.


    BBC News: WOW nothing negative.

    No deal Brexit bad for Scotland, Edinburgh tourist tax, new research shows that teenagers in Scotland are drinking less (from 41% to 11/14% – girls/ boys over the last 10 years), scientists have created a new botanical gin library and fitba.


    However your daily dose of BBC propaganda.


  138. yesindyref2 says:

    The National really needs to get a grip on its headlines. Front page on link: “Capital AUOB march blow as use of Holyrood Park is refused

    No it isn’t, the march can go through, it’s stalls and stage are a problem (so far).

    And article headline: “Holyrood Park ruled out as a venue for Edinburgh AUOB march

    No it isn’t, the march can go through, it’s stalls and stage are a problem (so far).

    Get a grip Callum Baird, are you reading this? I’ll be there, will you?

  139. yesindyref2 says:

    Apologies for my language 😎

  140. Petra says:

    Oops spoke too soon. Main BBC news (not from where you are). Research shows that teenage drinking has dropped particularly in England. Then they spoke to a Scottish researcher based at St Andrews. I’m sure there’s a “story” in there, somewhere, for Professor John Robertson.

  141. yesindyref2 says:

    I’m just putting this here, in case AUOB organisers haven’t made the connection already.

    From the Hearld (5th August this year)

    Judge Frances Eccles ruled that sovereignty and self-determination are weighty and substantial aspects of human life and the merits of McElenys case can now go forward to a full hearing.

    So HES are on shaky legal ground here, classing it as political in nature.

    I suggest they be gently informed of the error of their ways – and possibly an interdict sought to allow stalls and stage to go ahead.

  142. Willie says:

    The SNP will show the seeds of their own destruction if they continue not to defend their politicians grievously mauled by a biased press on theflimsiest of allegations.the

  143. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi yesindyref2.

    My understanding is…

    Originally, the rally was to be in the grounds outside the Holyrood Parliament – the green bit with the big puddle where previous rallies have taken place. This is under the control of the parliament authorities.

    When the numbers like “100,000+” started to be mentioned, it was deemed unsafe for stalls to take up space needed for people.

    It looks like permission was been sought to use the larger Holyrood Park, which is administered by Historic Scotland.

    It has been suggested that with the numbers expected, Calton Hill would have been a better venue, due to having more space.

  144. yesindyref2 says:

    Hi Brian
    As long as it’s communicated in time, I guess it doesn’t matter where it is, as long as not too far from the pubs city centre.

  145. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Willie @ 7.19am

    Your point is fine, in theory, but, in practice – how does the SNP persuade “a biased press” to print their defence of the biased attack?

    If, as we know they are, the Unionist press is sent a press release, defending the SNP against that same Unionist press’s biased attack – there is no way that defence will go in, unless so-heavily censured and altered as to make it useless.

  146. Dorothy Devine says:

    can someone tell me why the Daily mail in the guise of the metro is allowed to infest every bus and train station ?

    Getting rid of propaganda that is foisted freely on the public would be nice

  147. Meindevon says:

    I hope the snp are keeping a list of all their articles of defence that don’t see the light of day in the Unionist press.

    One day the truth will out. Hopefully very soon.

  148. sassenach says:

    With the press and broadcasters so greatly antagonistic to all things Indy, it is sometimes very difficult to see how we can ever ‘win’. Yet, for all that, it appears that support for Indy remains quite firm (if you believe the absolutely ‘fair’ pollsters!) – that cheers me up.

    The good thing is that when a former No voter sees the light, they will not go back – it’s a one-way street once the scales are lifted.

    But all this waiting is costing me a fortune in popcorn!

  149. Rick H Johnston says:

    So Tory poster boy Myles Briggs defends the rape clause, calling a woman a crazy bitch then is cleared of any wrongdoing by the Tory party. Will that convince the public that they’re fit for public office?
    I hae ma doots.

  150. frogesque says:

    @ Brian Doonthetoon, yesindyref2

    Or maybe a starfish procession. 5 arms; Leith walk, Haymarket, Royal Mile, Bridges and Broughton Street. All converging on Princeses Street Gardens.

    Should please the City Fathers!

  151. Nana says:

    Over the past few months, Forward as One has been working on pushing the Scottish Parliament towards a section 30 order. This process has revealed several matters of concern, namely the lack of information and the misconceptions surrounding what a Section 30 order is and what asking for one actually achieves.

    Recycled household waste overtakes landfill in Scotland

  152. Clootie says:

    Edinburgh March

    Changing the venue is “giving in”. Who are these people who deny access and use. Take a look at their background and you will find Unionist placements. It is the same people who will tell you that you cannot have a Referendum. You will find the background of these people to be VERY political but that sums up the last 300years of Scottish History.

    I would rather keep the March to the park as planned and forego stalls and make the point of being in the park.

    Do not give in to Unionist bullying.

  153. Nana says:

    Will not archive

    German chancellor says terms of trade deal need to be made ‘concrete’ in next eight weeks

    A Nasty Brexit Threatens the West

    Contaminated blood scandal: many medical records disappeared, inquiry hears

  154. Scotland`s Brent crude is trading at $82,

    Brent Crude is a major trading classification of sweet light crude oil that serves as a major benchmark price for purchases of oil worldwide.

    This grade is described as light because of its relatively low density, and sweet because of its low sulphur content.

  155. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Footsoldier at 12.40

    Because the SNP has got a lot wiser but lots of others haven’t. Many of us in the seventies recognised that the oil was the biggest impediment to our independence and banging on about oil (which was a godsend to the broke UK)would make it easy for our opponents to suggest that our independence dream was totally reliant on oil.
    And then tell us it was running out and we would be reliant as it ran out on UK subsidy which has been their story for decades.

    Any oil or gas discovery is a “bonus”. Our economy is perfectly viable without it and that is the sensible and politically sensible position. We will not be “banging on “about oil and gas”

  156. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    frogesque at 9.19

    Maximum capacity at Princess Street Gardens is about 30,000. Far too small.

  157. Breeks says:

    Socrates MacSporran says:
    26 September, 2018 at 7:58 am

    Willie @ 7.19am

    Your point is fine, in theory, but, in practice – how does the SNP persuade “a biased press” to print their defence of the biased attack?…

    The SNP is Scotland’s government in waiting. If Scotland was already an Independent Nation, we would require a robust defence in all matters from how the name of our country is spelt on the map, right through to actual military defence of our land in time of all-out war, – maybe even alone and on our own.

    If our government in waiting cannot get creative about delegitimising the distorted narrative and rampant propaganda which creates such a false and artificial political landscape in Scotland, then unfortunately that is 1-0 to the propagandists who are successfully doing precisely what propagandists do, and the awkward truth is, for it to continue so long without even any formal challenge becomes a poor reflection on the government which allows it, and condemns a government which cannot prevent it as weak.

    It begs the question whether the SNP’s feet are big enough to fill Sovereignty’s shoes. Sadly there is still a lot of growing required I fear.

    It’s a state of mind thing. Too few of us have it.

  158. gus1940 says:

    Re Historic Env. Scotland banning AUOB from Holyrood Park on 6/10 – when Scotland had a thriving Mining Industry The Scottish Miners Gala was held every year in Holyrood Pk complete with political speeches.

    If that as OK so is AUOB.

  159. HandandShrimp says:

    Calton Hill is a fine spot and the weather forecast at the moment is set fair so other than being a bit of hike for those less mobile it should suffice. However, it is tad unreasonable of Historic Unionists to pull the plug so late. Clearly a deliberate ploy and one they should be pinged over.

  160. Clootie says:

    @Scot Finlayson

    Brent Crude is a legacy title from the time when the Brent field did produce oil.

    In the latter years the Brent field was depressurised to switch to gas production. Due to poor Water Injection quality management the field was sour and pipeline production was often limited due to high values of H2S. As the field entered final production stage from the Brent Charlie platform it is the Oil from the remote Penguin field which kept it on spec.

    Brent Crude is a “historic legacy title” only.

  161. ronnie anderson says:

    Every AUOB march has been mired in controversy Before & After . The 1st advert stated Holyrood Park , the SPCB initially given permission for parliaments grounds Auob again tried to put up barriers for some stalls taking part , Spcb was contacted to seek permissions to accomodate those of us who were being excluded that was refused.

    Auob have from the outset ( Glasgow Green ) inflated the numbers expected to rally at every march then claim their being obstructed by Councils ect ect.

    Every one of us Grassrooters who helped Auob at the start were disillusioned by the way Manny Singh & Neil Mackay dictated & bullied people into submission + the online abuse of their acolytes on anyone who dares to ask questions , its their way or the highway.

    Auob highjacked the Bannockburn event which was organised by Donald Anderson & John Mellon of the (Scottish Socialist Republican Movement) .

    Dundee event & the local people who were organising that march didn’t fit in with Manny Singh’s strategy when dealing with City council , they were sidelined . Again the nonsense of dictat of Manny Singh ( all stalls had to register for permission to put up Stalls on Magdelene Green ( common land ) citing Dundee City Council as the authority making the rules . I received a copy of a E Mail on the Thurs evening before the Sat march , as with any organising body you would expect a accompanying form to apply for permission .

    As with Bannockburn I refused to pay pitch fee & was threatened by Manny Singh that the stall would be removed ( Laughing loudly ).

    Inverness was organised by Neil Davidson & Judith Reid but the Ego’s of Auob project themselves as the people who put in the hard work & nothing could be further from the truth . Neil Davidson fell out with Auob egotists within 2 weeks of Inverness .

    Dont be fooled by Auob .

  162. Stravaiger says:

    The AUOB march should end in Holyrood Park. Screw the stalls, not that important. We march where we want to march. No compromise on the route. Fuck ’em.

  163. Cubby says:

    Hey Rock @ 10.36 pm

    I have said many times that you are a boring Britnat who just repeats the exact same crap.

    Your last post shows you are also a bullying diddy who contributes nothing but negativity to this site.

  164. Robert Peffers says:

    @Nana says: 26 September, 2018 at 9:23 am:

    ” … Over the past few months, Forward as One has been working on pushing the Scottish Parliament towards a section 30 order. This process has revealed several matters of concern, namely the lack of information and the misconceptions surrounding what a Section 30 order is and what asking for one actually achieves.”

    Hi, Nana, of all the important links you work so hard to seek out for us the one above may be the single most important one of all. While it is a long and very detailed read it does get the whole process explained.

    The many Wingers who have castigated Nicola Sturgeon, the SG, the SNP and who have all obviously failed to understand the Edinburgh Agreement and a Section 30 are not, and never were, the same thing nor indeed that they require Westminster’s permission.

    I’m not alone in being sick and tired of refuting these people’s misguided attempts to side-track the issue and force the FM/SG/SNP/YES Movement to act in haste and thus totally destroy the chance of gaining Scotland’s independence.

    Neither am I alone in doubting the detractors true motives are to win independence but instead are to urge a senseless charge at a superior armed enemy head on and have the real indy supporters mown down by the superior armed and numerically superior forces of English/British Nationalism.

    Anyway I’m probably still wasting my time for these people seem rather disinclined to accept any reasoned arguments in their eagerness to see the whole SNP/SG strategy thrown away by premature actions. They will probably never read:-

    Much less engage in debate about it here on Wings.

  165. yesindyref2 says:

    AUOB Oct 6

    Mmm, “3 There was, in addition, a much larger transfer of historic national properties from the Crown to Scottish Ministers at devolution. In 1999, 26 properties held as ancient possessions by the Crown in Scotland were conveyed on behalf of the Crown by the Crown Estate Commissioners (CEC) to the Secretary of State for Scotland. As a result, the ownership of these properties, listed in Fig. 10, transferred to Scottish Ministers under the 1998 Act.

    which includes Holyrood Park.


    Fiona Hyslop:
    The Historic Environment Scotland Act 2014 created a new public body, Historic Environment Scotland (HES) to carry out the regulatory and other functions which were formerly delivered by or on behalf of Scottish Ministers.

    HES acts as the lead public body on matters relating to Scotland’s historic environment and as guardian of Scotland’s historic environment, including responsibility for delivering Scottish Ministers’ functions relating to the properties in their care, of which Holyrood Park is one.

    Since your query relates to an operational issue, this is a matter for HES, the answer to which is not held centrally. I have therefore referred your question to the HES Chief Executive who will reply to you

    So the answer is to take it up with Fiona Hyslop and she can urgently refer it on.

  166. manandboy says:

    Nana, I know it is only occasionally that I put here in print my huge admiration and appreciation for what you do here on Wings, but please be assured, these sentiments are constant and undiminished. I hope you are well and that you continue to be so as you go on giving us so much to advance the Independence cause which is uppermost in all our hearts. Love,xx.

  167. galamcennalath says:

    Labour’s latest position. Rebecca Long-Bailey, the shadow business secretary, said Labour would not include a commitment to a second referendum on Brexit in its manifesto if there is an early general election.

    Well, if there isn’t a GE for a few years, then Brexit will have been completed by the Tories-DUP.

    If there is an early GE it will have been because of Brexit chaos. And Labour intend standing on a ticket of what? More of the same?

    With the Tories is such a mess, Labour have an opportunity. What do they do? Waffle about everything.

    Still, by perverse logic, if Labour aren’t a threat to the Tories, then they aren’t a threat to the Indy cause!

  168. Robert Peffers says:

    @Socrates MacSporran says: 26 September, 2018 at 7:58 am:

    ” … Your point is fine, in theory, but, in practice – how does the SNP persuade “a biased press” to print their defence of the biased attack?”

    Very big nail hit on the head there, Socrates –

    Ye can take a horse Press release to the water MSM but you cannot make the horse MSM drink print it.

  169. yesindyref2 says:

    Personally the only reward I want for my unstinting efforts on behalf of Independence, my current 6 week plan considering the losses made by them to own 28 newspaper titles for the princely or vice-presidently (depending on preference) sum of £1 each, the 628,392 people I personally single-handed with one tied behind the back will have converted to a YES according to the schedule of 14th March 2019 for Indy Ref 2 which I will persoanlly supervise in all its 4,132 polling stations, the 77,777 trolls I will have uncovered and the 132 million approximately words I will have wrote on behalf of it, is to see Scotland Independent around 35 years before I pop my clogs, if I eat healthily and do a little exercise.

    Mind you, if someone filthy in fact obscenely rich wants to give me 1p Scots per word what I wrote I can retire early …

  170. Nana says:


    I posted the petition support request from Martin Keatings a week or so ago only to have some wingers saying “we don’t need one” etc etc

    Here’s the link for the petition once again for anyone who has read and now understands why we do need to request a section 30 order

  171. Dan Huil says:

    I think I’m right in saying the AUOB march can still go through Holyrood Park. If so, just make it a very deliberate, slow and, at that point, very loud march.

  172. Dan Huil says:

    @yesindyref2 11:17am

    Cheque’s in the post.

  173. Fireproofjim says:

    Edinburgh March
    The March is the most important thing.
    It’s a pity about the stalls but there is nowhere other than Holyrood Park to end the Rally.
    Anyway there are lots of mounds and rocks in the park perfectly suitable for groups of people to gather round while speakers with portable sound systems tell us what they think. No permission neede.
    The Covenanters used rocks as pulpits in the 17th century. That would work.
    I’ll be there regardless.

  174. HandandShrimp says:

    Well the Starmer buzz didn’t last long. Labour’s intent to hold every possible position on Brexit without actually leading on anything is exhausting to watch. I can’t imagine what it is like to actually front up as an activist.

  175. Robert Peffers says:

    @sassenach says: 26 September, 2018 at 9:05 am:

    ” … With the press and broadcasters so greatly antagonistic to all things Indy, it is sometimes very difficult to see how we can ever ‘win’. Yet, for all that, it appears that support for Indy remains quite firm.”

    It is better than that, sassenach. One of the largely unreported news items suppressed by the antagonistic media is the slow but ever growing movement of the Scottish electorate towards independence. Wasn’t there some opinion polls a few weeks ago that went almost unreported that showed independence clearly ahead?

    Thing is that the reactions of the antagonistic media can only take two directions and both reactions are positive for independence.

    If the antagonistic media continue to fails to report the swing to independence the slow but sure trend will continue because voters are now aware the trend is going unreported by the antagonistic media.

    If the antagonistic media do report the growing trend toward independence the voters are encouraged so the result is the same and the trend continues. The only downside is the voters are not aware just how far in front the indy vote already is – and thus they do not become complacent and stop campaigning.

    However, from the unionist POV it has them ramp up the lies, omissions biased and exaggerated propaganda that thus becomes even more detectable as lies, omission bias and exaggeration and thus easier to be seen as propaganda.

    It’s a bit like a demented Jack Russel obsessed with catching its own tail – the faster it spins in attempting to catch the tail the harder it becomes for the Jack Russel to catch the appendage. I hope that description conjures up a wee mental picture of the unionists heads chasing their own unionist tails. Need I state which unionist party is the head and which is the tail being chased? Not to mention the wee arse that is at the base of that unionist tail?

  176. yesindyref2 says:

    @Dan Huil
    Yay, celebration time!

    Well, a few months to go yet I guess …

  177. manandboy says:

    This is of huge importance. But, it is quite a read, so if you don’t have time to read it, or are disinclined to read it for any reason, then take my word for it. I have read every single word, and the only conclusion that anyone doing the same can come to is that Nicola is on the right track and is doing the exact right thing on the question of the Referendum and Brexit. You can bet your house and life savings on it!

  178. ronnie anderson says:

    Stravaiger [ screw the stalls ] stalls play a important part of any march or rally , helping to fund Yes Groups/FoodBanks ect ect . The Wings stall for its part give out free information cards leaflets as it always does . Auob are a embarrassment to the Grassroots movement in the way they conduct themselves ie Gary J Kelly saying last week the stalls could be erected on the strip of land at the car park across from Parliament grounds ( accidents waiting to happen ) with people crossing busy roads .

    There is NOW a new estimate on numbers 35.000 being the latest that could have been done from the start instead of inflating numbers but as I said in my last post Auob cause controversy to rile people up to increase attendance’s .

    Stravaiger you might inform us as to what position or insight if any U have in Auob or just adding your tuppence worth as a uninformed supporter of Auob .

  179. Nana says:


    Each of us does what we can for the indy cause. I do my wee bit behind the keyboard and I can and do talk the hind legs off any doubters I happen to meet 🙂

    I’ve visitors staying at the moment hence morning links are a little late due to late nights. Never too old to party!

    I will carry on linking for as long as possible which hopefully won’t be for much longer. I would like to get back to some kind of normality as I’m sure we all would.

  180. Liz g says:

    Fireproof Jim @ 11.37
    The march may be the important thing,but toilets and first aid stations are a bit essential too!.
    I’ll take bets that marchers will no be allowed into the local facilities either!!
    Not forgetting,this would have been a huge fund raiser for for the stalls…
    Having said that even I could have told AUOB that anything with a sniff of politics about it is forbidden by HES.
    So I guess the real question is why did this information only come out now….. Edinburgh Council could have told the organisation this at the start of the application,did they just hand out a permission form for HES and sit back waving through the march knowing fine well HES had to refuse ??
    There’s many ways to block a movement!!!

  181. Macart says:


    Heh! Quite the selection Nana. Couple of standouts in the independent piece on repeating historic errors and the Scotsman comment on FOA’s support of the FMs approach to Brexit.

    Sadly, I think the masses are beyond the point of listening. Said for a long time now that this is going to have to run its course and/or burn itself out. Whichever analogy works (shrugs).

    The meeja and political class have a runaway narrative. It was started and promulgated by a few, to benefit a few and they were quite aware of the chaos that would ensue. They have and had no interest in managing the chaos they created either. Just light the blue touch paper and stand back till it was all over.

    When the dust settles though? People really should be reminded why they came to that place. Their political class, their practice of politics and a very willing section of the media.

  182. jfngw says:

    Good grief! Voilet Elizabeth-Bott is all excited about the new pass. He/she (don’t want to gender identify and annoy anyone) is just screaming and screaming, perhaps (he)she’ll make her(him)self sick.

  183. Robert Peffers says:

    @Nana says: 26 September, 2018 at 11:26 am:

    ” … I posted the petition support request from Martin Keatings a week or so ago only to have some wingers saying “we don’t need one” etc etc”

    I think you misunderstand the claim, “We don’t need one”, Nana.

    We don’t need a petition for I’m certain that Nicola, the SG and the SNP are very well aware of what they are doing and are very much sure to do it and will do it at the correct time.

    It doesn’t mean we do not need to request a Section 30 for has not Nicola already made the first step by requesting one and got the exact reply she expected to get from Theresa May. Mad did not refuse the request she just said, “Not Now”, which is exactly what the FM wanted her to say.

    I may be wrong, but I believe it to be a bad thing to publicise the SG’s apparent tactics – you do not send a message to your enemy of what your next move will be. However, you do need to be sure your own side are not acting against you because they don’t know what you are doing. There is a big difference between, “Not legally needing a Section 30 Order to legally hold a referendum,” and it, “Not being a good tactical move to request a Section 30 Order”. Put another way the SG needs no one’s legal permission to hold a referendum but it is a great tactical move to do so”.

    The petition might alert Westminster to take evasive action.

    Surprise is always a good tactic and wins many battles.

    ” … Here’s the link for the petition once again for anyone who has read and now understands why we do need to request a section 30 order.

  184. Ottomanboi says:

    Re the AUOB, from what I understand of the independence demos in Barcelona they just fill the streets with people. They effectively bring the city to a halt. Ending up ‘kettled’ in field, out of sight, isn’t hitting hard where it counts. This might be an opportunity for a radical and constructive re-think.
    Stuff the ‘wee Scotch lawyers’ on the council.

  185. Fireproofjim says:

    Liz g
    Yes you are right. Didn’t think about toilets.
    Well, I await the outcome. Is Calton Hill also embargoed? There have been lots of rallies held there in the past.

  186. defo says:

    Isn’t the swashbuckling ‘historian’, him of the swishy flowing locks, on the board of Historic Scotland, along with other place-men/women/other?

  187. galamcennalath says:

    The SG announced they would be seeking a Section 30 last year, then didn’t. Anyone know why not?

    If the answer is the GE, then I don’t see what difference that made.

    Asking for a Section 30 ASAP with expiry date 6 May, 2021 makes perfect sense to me since the current Parliament has a cast iron democratic mandate to call an IndyRef. It can be used when SG/Parliament decides there is Brexit clarity, which of course means what the SG decides it means.

    As is being pointed out elsewhere, the value of asking for a S30 is perhaps that the Tories will delay or deny which would be a massively undemocratic move of their part.

  188. Stravaiger says:

    @Ronnie Anderson

    I have no bun in your fight with AUOB. I have no connection with them at all. I’m merely stating my opinion that it’s a good route and we should not let it be messed with for some petty reason.

    Maybe I’m just getting fed up with being told what to do and am getting a bit bolshy. I’m Scottish so I can’t help it 😉

  189. Stravaiger says:


    Yes, that’s kinda where I’m coming from.
    Robert the Bruce didn’t call off the Battle of Bannockburn because there were no toilets.

  190. Lenny Hartley says:

    Defo no he is not he is on another Nazi Organisation called The National Trust.

  191. Capella says:

    @ Galamcennalath – the Michael Keating article linked to above spells out the timeline for what is happening. He says that Nicola Sturgeon did write to Theresa May requesting a Section 30 order but Theresa May did not reply.
    Extremely rude but then they are a rude bunch of chancers.

  192. Proud Cybernat says:

    “I may be wrong, but I believe it to be a bad thing to publicise the SG’s apparent tactics – you do not send a message to your enemy of what your next move will be.”

    Indeed. But there’s a good bit more to this strategy that is not being placed in the public domain and I suspect Mr Keating knows what it is but is keeping it well under wraps. As well he should.

    My lips are sealed. The SG absolutely know how best to ‘play ‘ the situation and are doing it masterly, step by step by step.

  193. defo says:

    Ta for correction Lenny. National ‘Trust’!

  194. Breeks says:

    “Anyway I’m probably still wasting my time for these people seem rather disinclined to accept any reasoned arguments in their eagerness to see the whole SNP/SG strategy thrown away by premature actions. They will probably never read:-“

    I read it Robert, but I still have serious reservations.

    Not to go into detail, because people won’t read it, but I fail to understand why the Section 30 path towards a referendum, and all the arguments about injustice when it’s refused etc, etc, is pursued to the exclusion of all other strategies. As a strategy, it is linear, one dimensional, and dangerously close to having all our eggs in one basket. God willing Plan A won’t fail, but what is Plan B if it does?

    I DO get it that the SNP wants to be uber-cautious, and choose the path towards Independence of which any Librarian would be proud, but jeezo, it’s a slow and joyless trial-by-endurance.

    Sooner or later, whether it’s a referendum, Constitutional Law Court, repeal of the Union, the issue of Scotland’s deliverance from this Union must and will go back to the people. It’s very possible, indeed likely, that events could move very fast, and we will require those people to be more animated and motivated than we were in 2014…. NOT exasperated, disillusioned, and resentful of a leadership which refuses to take the lead. In what possible respect does that help our cause? We need people enthused, motivated and buoyed up like 2014, not bored, anaesthetised, and disinclined to vote.

    If we truly are being wily and sophisticated, then why does it read to so many people as being pedestrian, myopic and timid?

  195. Macart says:

    “I may be wrong, but I believe it to be a bad thing to publicise the SG’s apparent tactics – you do not send a message to your enemy of what your next move will be.”

    I’d agree with that principle.

    It also requires a great deal of trust and patience from an electorate that has been hard won over Robert. Folk that have every reason to be suspicious of any in the political class. They’ve only just had the scales removed in most cases and what they’re seeing today both enrages and scares the bejeebus out of them. A very human and understandable reaction.

    You’re a long time political anorak. You know about the necessity for discipline, political strategy and such. Most folk, especially those either rediscovering an interest in politics or who simply want their government to work, don’t. They’re just folk who are impatient, frustrated and most importantly afraid. They’re just folk who see a bad situation developing around them and feel powerless to do anything about it. Mainly though, they’re just folk and a lot is being asked of them, especially in terms of patience.

    I agree. I reckon the SG do have it in hand and I’d say they’ve got their hands full t’boot. 😀

    Worth bearing in mind though, when we’re talking to people online.

  196. ronnie anderson says:

    Av heard it aw noo Indycar Gordon Ross ( forget standing on rock to speak) at Auob You’s can take a IrnBru crate an ah Megaphone , an no need of stalls we can do what the Usherettes did at the pictures go round with a tray selling merchandise lol

  197. manandboy says:

    Theresa May announces end of Freedom of Movement, date tba.

    Pressure, under pressure is the Nasty Party methinks.

  198. Bob Mack says:

    I do not believe in armchair strategy for indyref2. We have a great leader of the party, and like all armies we must put faith in that leader to move us forward.

    Since Nicola has led the party ,membership has risen. She is biding her time for the optimum moment. We should not kid ourselves that we think we know more than she does. She is dealing with a fully informed deck whilst we guess at what strategies and events will precipitate indy.

    Faith is never misplaced with Nicola. She is a resolute and honest leader who makes decisions others often baulk at in the party.

    That is a prerequisite of leadership I’m afraid.

  199. Liz g says:

    Fireproofjim @ 12.31
    I don’t know about Carlton Hill Jim.
    All I do know is that Historic Scotland are not allowed to let their venue be used for anything political.
    It’s not a new thing… in the sense that it’s just one of the many things they have rules about!
    It might be like Ronnie said and be part of an engineered controversy…. because I cannot see how AUOB can claim the march isn’t political??
    Of course it’s Political, that’s just a stupid position…

    On the other hand I would want to know if and when Edinburgh Council and the Police, both of whom would know this fine well, told the organisers about this.
    This park also has special rules around the British Royals and can be shut and cleared at short notice, so it’s not a place that I think should have been factored into planning anyway.

    I would also ask that any Wingers who are contacting HES stay polite, the tone of the communication so far has been awful….. not a good look People… the staff getting the emails are not the ones who made these rules….
    The rules cover ALL Historical monuments and our marches are UNUSUALLY peaceful and nondestructive…. the same cannot be said of others… that’s why there’s a blanket bann!
    While I don’t necessarily agree with it… I do want these monuments protected….So…
    Cool heads and solutions… like exploring things such as Carlton Hill … me thinks??

  200. Tackety Beets says:

    Ref Oct 6th Edi March #AUOB

    This is a pinned Tweet for last 2 hours, dated 26th Sept (today)

    My Q is simply why has it taken this long for a statement to be issued, if this is POLICY.
    I assume most of us can guess the answer.

  201. Thepnr says:

    I’m not surprised really that the Independence movement has had another obstacle erected in front of it at the last minute. The organisers can keep making last minute apepals but you have to assume that will be be without success.

    So why not a proposal to have the stalls set up in Princess Street Gardens before the march? Not ideal but they’ll be thousands gathering there hours before the march starts and it will take a long time to empty.

    In an ideal world I’d prefer the route be reversed staring at Holyrood and finishing in the gardens, I can see why the powers that be might not have been attracted to that idea though LOL.

    The most important thing is that the march IS going ahead, hope to see you there. Be early, there’s going to be a party 🙂

  202. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Ronnie Anderson –

    We can take turns holding the corner poles and shuffling in very small circles while you do your stuff.


  203. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    galamcennalath @ 11:15,
    HandandShrimp @ 11:40,

    Yes, the Starmer interlude does seem to have been a brief flash in the pan. There was some Labour dork on the R4 lunchtime news today explaining that they want to have a GE so they can do a better Brexit! I kid you not. (McCluskey’s obviously been on the phone to Agent JC again.)

    He warned that the Tories are taking us over the cliff edge. Labour obviously have a better cliff edge to offer. =sigh=

    It also seems they believe they can have their own very special customs union, not yer normal everyday Customs Union, of course. (Y’know, the one everyone else has.) Cake possessing and eating is just as much a Labour fantasy as a Tory one, it seems.

    Oh, to be a fly on the wall when Barnier gently puts the Leavers’ Saviour right when they meet next week!

    I truly pity the English. The only political choice they have on this issue is between two variants of the selfsame exceptionalist idiocy.

    High time to bail.

    Thanks BTW, nana for referencing that petition for a Section 30 order. Keating’s article made a lot of sense. I think we’ll need to get that ball rolling in fairly short order now. Getting time to up the ante.

  204. Baldeagle58 says:

    A bit O/T, but not much as Nana supplied the original Link to the twitter question….

    So, Ruth Davidson appeared on lbc this morning.
    How much of an easy time was she given over the one hour program by Iain Dale?
    Did he ask ANY of the requested questions from the twitter link below?

  205. ronnie anderson says:

    The march and rally’s named organiser, Gary Kelly of AUOB, said: “We are an avowedly non-party political organisation, and though we obviously campaign for independence, surely we have as much right as anyone to use on a very temporary basis what is, after all, the land of the sovereign people of Scotland.”

    Gary J Kelly has repeatedly said that Auob are non political , yes they were non political 2 weeks ago at Buchanan st stall with their Solidarity flag .

    The reasoning behind Auob staging at Holyrood parliament is for Tommy Sheridan to rant about implementation of the mandate . Solidarity have long since wanted to control the Grassroots movement Auob are that arms length body .

  206. ronnie anderson says:

    Ian Brotherhood Whit dey you want ah Choc Ice or ah Mivvi oh fur fek saky ah need tae go back tae the stock room ah furgoat the Popcorn lol.

  207. Abulhaq says:

    In his keynote speech the Anointed Great Leader Jeremy mentioned Scotland, where the local branch is bringing ‘hope’ to the despairing populace. Aren’t we lucky!

  208. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Sorry there has been some turmoil over the end point for the upcoming AUOB march. But you have to put things in perspective. We have a longstanding family occasion for all that weekend, so I just groaned when they announced the Edinburgh date, because I had especially wanted to add that one to my “campaign medals”.

    So puir all of us and lucky all of you, since it’s going to be great fun, with a great turnout anyway, isn’t it?

    (I don’t suppose they would still be willing to shift the date to the weekend after, would they…? =twitch eyebrows=)

  209. harry mcaye says:

    It doesn’t help Mark McDonald that nature hasn’t blessed him with a nicer demeanour. The news reports were accompanied by footage of him scowling and skulking along the Holyrood corridors whereas Miles Briggs looks like a happy, cheery guy. And I speak as someone who has had complete strangers tell him to cheer up. Like McDonald, I have that kind of face!

    I recently quit as an SNP member, nothing to do with Alex Salmond. I have to say I have been very disillusioned with the party over their treatment of Michelle Thomson, their repeated failure to stand up for themselves against the media and their couldn’t care less attitude to animal welfare, encapsulated by Fergus Ewing’s insistence earlier this year that Scotland wouldn’t even consider stopping the live transport of animals.

  210. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Ronnie Anderson –

    5 Woodbine?

  211. Fergus Green says:

    @ ronnie anderson 2.07. Plenty opportunities for creativity and to stick 2 fingers up to the authorities. Instead of stalls use barrows to sell merchandise. Spivs with large overcoats sold merchandise during the war, so we can do the same. If they want us to leave the park we can all just sit down, Speakers can stand on milk crates and shout or use megaphones. It worked for Major and Murphy, so we can do the same. If the Polis want to intervene,they might just find a few thousand people innocently blocking their passage.

    All good fun, as long as we stay within the law.

  212. Ottomanboi says:

    Beware of people and organizations that claim to be ‘non-political’, just scratch the surface and you’ll get politics a-plenty, usually of the opposing, status quo supporting sort.
    Everything in Scotland is political now.

  213. Robert Peffers says:

    @galamcennalath says: 26 September, 2018 at 12:41 pm
    The SG announced they would be seeking a Section 30 last year, then didn’t.

    Far as I’m aware May simply said, “Not Now”, in other words she did NOT say no but refused it for the time being. Which is highly likely exactly what Nicola wanted her to say.

    Nana posted a link upthread that explains the whole thing in great detail. It is long and involved but is really quite easy to understand. Here is the link:-

    You will get an explanation of what a section 30 order really is and not what the MSM and Westminster wants you to think it is.

    What it is NOT is Westminster’s permission to hold a referendum. The whole article is long, but quite clear and easy to understand, and explains the reason that Nicola is not treating this matter like the bull at a gate some people would like her to do. If she did it could set back independence for decades or even forever.

  214. Fred says:

    “You’ll have had your tea!” as far as Holyrood’s concerned. I wonder if some official approached Bonnie Prince Charlie & his heavily-armed retinue to ask if this was political when they occupied the park? What’s up with the “Meadows!” anyhow?

  215. stewartb says:

    Thepnr @ 2:35 pm

    Re- the AUOB march in Edinburgh: what is this about Princes Street Gardens you mention?

    No mention of the Gardens here: : according to this, the march is from Johnston Terrace to Holyrood Park. Or have the arrangements changed?

    (If the Facebook info is right, then the tourists thronging the Royal Mile will be in for a treat: pity the locals, the voters, thronging Princes Street may be left blissfully unaware – unless we all shout out VERY loudly on the day!)

  216. Thepnr says:

    The Scotsman reports today that the SNP will not oppose a second referendum on the EU. In truth if Westminster decide to have a second vote then the SNP opposing it wouldn’t stop it going ahead of course and they would have been left looking rather stupid since they would appear to be opposing the only possibility of nullifying the original vote or at least providing an opportunity for a Norway type deal.

    I don’t understand though why they have shown their hand at this stage, I can’t see any need to have done so unless it is some kind of attempt to put pressure on Theresa May but that seems unlikely as if she would be likely to listen.

    Mr Russell told MSPs the SNP would not block another public vote on Brexit.

    “The Scottish Government is not opposed to a second referendum on the final negotiated deal if that’s the will of the UK Parliament,” he added.

    “However, we are concerned that those in favour of such a vote have not demonstrated how they would address the serious democratic challenge that if the people of Scotland voted clearly and decisively to remain within the “European Union as they did in the 2016 referendum, they would still not face being removed from the EU against their will.”

    So something is at play here, you don’t do this without a reason. I guess things are hotting up at the coalface which will make for much turmoil, frothing and merriment too.

    We are getting down to the endgame and as an interested observer I’m finding it great fun to watch. The serious business of working for Independence for Scotland isn’t too far away I would imagine, the more fireworks now the better as far as I’m concerned. Chaos in the Red and Blue Tory parties won’t do our cause any harm.

    You can do your bit too, get along to Edinburgh on the 6th, let’s have a show of strength that will make the British Nationalist parties tremble 🙂

  217. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    harry mcaye @ 15:12,

    I’m not a member of the SNP (or any other party), Harry, so maybe it’s not my place to say, but there’s no way any umbrella pro-independence party could possibly satisfy every political aspiration of every indy supporter. We have to be realistic, it’s just not humanly possible.

    Politics as it normally works isn’t possible right now. That’s just a fact. Everything under the Sun has become political at the moment, so we have to choose the ground on which to fight. Once that is won, as we all hope it will, and not long now, we can return to some kind of normality and be able to judge support for our individual preferences.

    Your comment does however highlight the risk that the longer we wait to act, the more likely it will be that some issue will arise that offends or upsets people. That is the inevitable nature of politics. The SNP doesn’t have any more monopoly on power than its Lab-Lib predecesssor, even though it is clearly far more competent.

    Membership of the SNP is your free choice to make, of course, but let’s not place unnecessary obstacles in our way. I’m sure you also realise that indy “a la carte” won’t get us there.

  218. yesindyref2 says:

    @Stravaiger / @Ottomanboi
    It’s peaceful and law-abiding is the theme, a reason why you only get a couple of polis at any event basically, and they turn up to have a blether.

  219. yesindyref2 says:

    @Fergus Green “If the Polis want to intervene . . .

    The Polis aren’t allowed to be part of political parties (they can vote of course), or campaign politically. It’s just a guess, but I’d say the Polis are well over 50% YES, and it wouldn’t surprise me if they’re as much as 75%.

    So why piss off and fight wth YES voters?

  220. Shinty says:

    @ harry mccaye

    Horses are transported live for competitions every day of the week all throughout the UK, Ireland, Europe and beyond. Where is the outrage there? (Often far longer journey times than cattle or sheep). Is it ok because they have blankets and leg protectors?

    A ban on live transport of farm animals would seriously affect all our farmers, not least our island farmers. (Do you know how many islands there are in Scotland?)

    As for animal welfare, you may care to note that there is currently a Scottish Government consultation on the regulations for breeders of domestic animals.

    Farm animals are heavily regulated as to their welfare here in Scotland. Without it we would not be able to demand such a high premium for our beef & lamb.

  221. Thepnr says:


    Yes apologies as the route has definitely changed from that originally advised. I can’t find the facebook page that gave the original route but you can see it at the website below which has been the same for weeks now.

    It seems now that it will start from the same location as the march in 2013. A chance to play this again which is well worth a watch. Nicola and Humza leading the way.

    The next in Edinburgh will be at least 3 times the size 🙂

  222. Stravaiger says:


    I totally agree. I don’t believe I said or implied anything else.

    See you all there. I’ll be the one waving the large Saltire. 🙂

  223. stewartb says:

    harry mcaye @t 3:12 pm

    You wrote: “… their (the SNP/SG’s) couldn’t care less attitude to animal welfare, ..”

    Wow, that statement stood out as I skimmed through today’s posts! It seems like a pretty extreme point of view.

    Whilst this is not a policy area I’m familiar with, but as I anticipated knowing something of the ways the SNP and the SG have operated in Government for more than a decade, it didn’t take much effort to find that such an outright condemnation is not one that is universally held! So for perspective (or balance):

    The leading animal protection charity OneKind has welcomed (5 September, 2018) the animal welfare commitments in the Scottish Government’s Programme for Scotland.


    And the British Veterinary Association has welcomed (5 September 2018) the Scottish Government’s plans to establish a new Animal Welfare Commission to advise on the welfare of domesticated and wild animals in Scotland and ensure that standards are maintained post-Brexit.


    Also, has the SG not just completed a consultation on introduction of compulsory closed circuit TV recording of slaughter at abattoirs in Scotland?

    “.. couldn’t care less attitude to animal welfare ..”: not wishing to dispute any specific objection you may have here but maybe this statement of yours is not quite absolutely accurate?

  224. yesindyref2 says:

    Indeed, I’m just wary of those who seem to promote illegal activities that could result in confrontation with police and even violence. It’s happened to peaceful demonstrations – like the student tuition fees demo in London years ago.

  225. Robert Louis says:

    Here is why the British nationalist politicians and their stooges keep pretending a section 30 order is ‘permission’ to hold a referendum in Scotland.

    The first point to note, is that section 30 is not permission. The Scottish Government can hold a referendum as they please. Holding referenda is NOT a reserved power. The constitution is. But they are two very different beasties.

    The second point is this, other above have explained in detail what section 30 does and does not, so I won’t badly repeat it all here.

    So Scotgov does not need ‘permission’, all they need is the vote from the parliament in Edinburgh – which they already have.

    So, here’s why British Nationalists get so anxious about all of this, and have their puppet ‘journalists’ constantly assert a section 30 order is ‘permission’. Let’s say the First Minister requests a section 30, and Downing street says ‘no, or ‘not now’, the FM can just hold a referendum anyway, as was done in 2014. However, British Nationalists from Labour, tories and the orange order will all scream ‘oh you can’t do that you didn’t get permission, so the vote will not be respected’. That is quite literally just ‘noise’. It comes under the category of ‘they would say that wouldn’t they’.

    So let’s say the vote comes in and YES win. This is where it gets interesting. Westminster says ‘oh but we don’t respect that vote, as you don’t have section 30’. However (and British Nationalists know this), once a YES vote is secured, with a full democratic mandate from the Scots Parliament, the results WILL be internationally recognised, and from that minute onwards, Scotland can declare independence. The alternative, which British Nationalists suggest is that somehow, with the whole world watching, London in England will unilaterally impose martial law on Scotland, sending in troops etc..effectively usurping democracy in what by then would have become a foreign country.

    You must remember, Scotland is a country within a bipartitie treaty with England, a treaty which either party can end. Scotland is not a region. That is a critical difference, when compared with say Catalunya (although they have my full support).

    You see, once a country, which is in a bipartite union like the one we have between Scotland and England, decides of its own free will to become independent, the second party (England, or rUK, or whatever) to the bilateral treaty ceases to have ANY authority upon Scotland. If London decided to send in troops, they would in effect be invading an independent country.

    The upshot of all of this, is that if troops come in, the desire for independence would go through the roof in seconds. London and the British Nationalists already know all of this. They know once the vote is in, despite all their bluster, their is literally nothing they can do. Sending in troops would simply not be sustainable long term, so independence would happen. Such a move would merely inflame and antagonise the situation to England’s detriment.

    London would at the time of the result have a choice, work constructively with the Government of Scotland or commit English soldiers long term to another ‘ulster’ – but actually more akin to what they did in Ireland in the 1920’s – and we all know how successful that was for them. Such a move would make no sense, and Scotland would never ever want to have anything to do with England ever again. It would absolutely be in England’s interests to work with the indy Scotland.

    This is why all the hubris and bluster by the British Nationalists and their chums from the orange lodge is about stopping a referendum. They know full well, that once the vote is YES, they lose control with immediate effect.

    That is why Ruth Davidson bangs on about nothing else. She knows it too.

    Anyway, long story short, Scotland can hold a referendum whenever it pleases. Section 30 is NOT ‘permission’.

    And yes, the British nationalists are feart, and more so with each passing day.

  226. Ian Foulds says:

    Shinty at 4.17pm

    Much appreciate your input in giving an apparently more balanced viewpoint, in regard to animal transportation.

    This kind of reinforces my MP’s feedback, albeit as expected other representatives covering my Constituency seem, for some reason(!), to prefer the worn out SNP bad position.

  227. heraldnomore says:

    Thanks for that Thepnr, the memories come flooding back. Five years ago. What will we be watching in five years time I wonder.

    The Wings handed to me by the man himself that morning remain in the lapel. And the rest is very firmly in both heart and head.

  228. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Welcome to Britwonderland, folks. In his closing speech today, JC the Saviour offered to support Theresa May over Brexit! Provided only she signs up to his version of the next fantasy Brit offer to the EU.

    Cherry-picking is still in season, it seems. But only for the next week or two.

    Hard left and hard right becoming increasingly indistinguishable in their dislike of furriners.

    High time to bail.

  229. Famous15 says:

    If my memory srves me correctly Holyrood Park has”hosted” many political events.

    I am sure that I attended NUM miner’s gala there on a number of occasions. Many other events of a Unionist nature also. I contribute to SEH by membership and taxation. I have a say.

    The Royal Parks in Scotland like Holyrood and the Botanic Garden get hugeScottish Government grant so my next question is who made the decision to ban? Who is the Cabinet Secretary that the Trust have to report to?

  230. yesindyref2 says:

    So the big glaring headline is that Scotland only has 4 out of the top 200 universities in the world (out of about 26,000 worldwide though they don’t tell you that) and the big news is that it was 5 last year so it’s slipped from 5 to 4. Dundee left the top 200 completely. A little google shows that’s from 187th to joint 211th with UCD (Dublin).

  231. gus1940 says:

    Re HES and the 6/10 AUOB March and Rally it is high time that Holyrood had a good look at this Royal Park nonsense.

    If I am not mistaken HES and its management report to The SG.

    Who decided to ban political activity at HES site, when and on what possible justifiable grounds?

    Is it not a fact that most of HES properties are buildings – Holyrood Park aint a building.

  232. yesindyref2 says:

    Oh, Aberdeen University which the all-knowing and highly respcted Which? University langers slated for falsely advertising it was one of the world’s top universities rose from 185th to 158th.

  233. Colin Alexander says:

    I have the utmost respect for the good intentions behind this petition.

    But, I won’t be wasting my time signing it. The SNP got voted in on promises of another indyref, it’s up to them to deliver.

    They either will or they won’t. I hope the former and expect the latter.

    Scotland will never be independent if we hope to achieve it by getting permission from the ruling masters at Westminster.

    To achieve independence, we need to get off our knees and grab it with both hands.

  234. ronnie anderson says:

    Ian Brotherhood [ 5 woodbine ] Ya whimp ah only dey Capstan Full Strength lol .

  235. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    Oh, there’s that smell of sulphur in the air again…

  236. Thepnr says:


    Yes hard to believe it’s already 5 years ago. I wasn’t there in 2013 but wish I had been. I spotted a few wingers I’ve met since then being handed badges by the Rev in the Royal Mile.

    Also do you think that was a young Ross Greer handing out Yes leaflets on the road up to Calton Hill? I’m sure it was 🙂

  237. ronnie anderson says:

    Fergus Green Whatever you think of the Police on a day to day basis is up to you but as a person who has contact with Police Liaison re other events Policemen/Women have Families same as us & like us are concerned with their futures . I have asked Police many times for low profile policing & I was accommodated , so I would advise any Hotheads not to look for confrontation with our Policemen/Women .

    I had a half hour phone call this morning re the Bbc Bias Protest 27th Oct 2018 job done . Daily Record flash mob/Stv/Bbc , only stipulation for people to stay on the pavements from daily Record to Stv then the Clyde Walkway to the Bbc no controversy .

  238. Legerwood says:

    yesindyref2 @ 5.35pm

    I am surprised about the Dundee University result given this from last year

  239. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Colin Alexander at 5.48

    When exactly did the SNP get “voted in ” and to where on a promise of another referendum?

  240. Andy-B says:

    Why are the SNP blocking Craig Murray’s indyref2 fringe meeting? Come conference time.

  241. wull says:

    Hello ‘Thepnr’ at 3.55 pm.

    I think it is pretty clear what Mike Russell’s intervention is heavily hinting, and in fact signaling. Basically this: the SNP will not stand in the way of a second vote, but this time – unlike the last time – what Scotland votes for, Scotland will get. That will be the SNP’s understanding when it does not block a second vote, and the rest of you can like it or lump it – that is what is going to happen.

    He has not said the SNP will support a second vote, only that it won’t block it. That leaves open the question of how exactly the SNP MPs will vote if a motion on a second vote comes before Westminster. There are two possible ways of keeping Russell’s pledge: either the SNP MPs will vote for the motion, or they will abstain. The only thing it rules out is that they will vote against it.

    That leaves plenty of options open for the SNP. Since it is still a hypothetical scenario, it will all depend on what the motion actually says, and what exactly it can achieve. If or when it happens, it may look as if the vote in Westminster is going to be very finely balanced, in which case the way the SNP MPs vote will be crucial to the outcome. In that case, the SNP will be in a strong position to influence the matter.

    The government will have to be very wary about the way they word the motion. And those who want to overturn the ‘Leave’ vote altogether, or who wish to block whatever the terms of the exit by then are (whether ‘poor deal’ or ‘no deal’), may need positive SNP support at Westminster to win the vote. In which case the SNP will be in a strong negotiating position with them.

    We can’t foresee all the possible ways in which this situation might eventually turn out. And neither can the SNP. In that circumstance, Mike Russell’s statement is in fact very canny, as indeed it should be. By saying ‘we won’t block a second vote’, he has given nothing away. But he has, at least potentially, increased the negotiating power of the SNP at Westminster if a motion on a second vote does come forward. They will still have leverage with which to put pressure on those parties that might by then be in favour of a second referendum on Europe, in order to extract from them commitments regarding Scotland’s future relationship with Europe. This in order to ensure that the SNP go through the lobbies with them at Westminster on this motion, and do not simply abstain.

    The SNP could not oppose a second referendum on Europe without contradicting their stated, often reiterated minimum position. Namely, in view of Scotland’s clear option for ‘Remain’ during the first European referendum, that Scotland must at least stay within the Customs Union and the Single Market, even if the rest of the UK – or just England-and-Wales – leave both of these. This gives us a clue what price the SNP might exact from those who want a second Euro vote (in return for the SNP voting positively for the motion, and not just abstaining).

    The SNP’s negotiating position for such positive support might well be something like this: give us an absolute guarantee that if Scotland again votes along the same lines as she did in the first Europe referendum, she will REMAIN FULLY WITHIN the customs Union and the Single Market, no matter how the other constituent parts of the UK vote.

    So, even if other parts of the UK vote in such a way as to indicate that they are still totally committed Brexiteers, who refuse membership even of the Customs Union and/or the Single Market, Scotland will have a different deal which keeps her inside these.

    I suppose that basically means that what the EU is currently proposing for Northern Ireland will become a reality for Scotland. That will have two further results. First, Scotland will very quickly and very evidently be in a better economic position than the rest of the UK, which will stutter badly and pretty much immediately when the Leave vote takes its effect (from March next year onwards). Second, if Northern Ireland is excluded from the same deal with Europe as Scotland, she will very soon vote to join the Republic, provided the Republic offer good terms on which they can do that (which it will).

    And there will be a third benefit. The manner in which Scotland continues to flourish while our southern neighbour struggles will convince plenty of waverers to stop wavering, and to wave the pro-Scottish independence flag instead. It will make it obvious to them that we are better on our own, in a positive relation with the EU, whether as full members (which i would support) or, at least, in a Norwegian- or a Swiss-style arrangement (Customes Union + Single Market etc.). The independence movement will have moved forward, and independence will be all the closer, and very much within reach.

    I am not saying this is exactly the SNP’s / Mike Russell’s calculation. But I expect it must be something like this.

    What also strikes me is how consistent the pro-Indy Scottish arguments always are. The arguments against independence always shift. They have no stable base. They move not only from one point of attack to another, but from one premise to another. This only shows that they have no basis in principle – or, indeed, in law.

    There is a parallel here with what happened in the 1290s and the early 1300s. The Scottish arguments then were well-founded, consistently repeated, they developed on sound principles and they never contradicted themselves, even over decades. The English arguments were always built on shifting sand. They had no proper foundation from the beginning. Even at their most subtle – or, rather, contrived – they were merely an expression of opportunism. The position of the English crown of the day was nothing more than sheer willfulness: ‘Scotland is mine, because I want it.’

    There is a saying in French: ‘Plus ca change, plus ca reste la meme chose’. (With my apologies to those who know real French – my typing skills are limited, and I don’t know how to insert the cidilla in the word ca, or the circumflex in ‘meme’ …). That means ‘the more a thing changes, the more it still stays the same thing’! Amazingly, the England-Scotland issue hasn’t really changed in seven centuries, even despite the Union which has been there for the last three of these seven …

    Of course, what really hasn’t changed in all these hundreds of years is the attitude of the leaders of the English political class – call them ‘the establishment’ if you want – towards Scotland. If ever that became overwhelmingly apparent, it was during the campaign for the 2014 referendum. Amazingly, and most powerfully so. There is a book to be written there – just drawing the many parallels between what is happening now, and what happened then …

    And not just based on popular conceptions of what happened back then, which are often over-romanticised. Nothing romantic at all – just plain, properly researched facts … Maybe someone will do it one day …

  242. Liz g says:

    Gus1940 @ 5.37
    That’s right, HES carry out their Holyrood remit.
    Royal Parks UK wide have different “rules” rules that are actually Laws!!!
    They are not public spaces, they belong to the Monarch/Crown.
    Now I don’t think that’s right, but that’s a different debate.
    AUOB could have easily checked this… and if they didn’t… they should have.
    Either way the one thing that’s no going to happen in the next week or so is a change in the Law.
    We need to be getting our facts right over this and keep the information accurate!
    I hate people being played like this… we get enough of that from the British Nationalists!!
    So the questions really are.
    When did AUOB check the parks rules?
    Do they understand that the park rules are Legislation?
    Do they think a Law can be changed in a week?
    Do they think the Law is not for us?
    They are making us look stupid!

  243. Ottomanboi says:

    Scotland needs to get out of the suffocating relationship with England irrespective of the prescriptions of establishments, bureaucrats or the law. And that applies equally to the calling of a second independence referendum. Nothing much of value has ever been achieved by staying nicely, comfortably, unthreateningly within establishments’ laws.

  244. Dr Jim says:

    @Andy-B 6.39pm

    Craig Murray knows perfectly well why and it’s not about his disengenuous tittle tattle to get folk to read his dummy chucked out the pram blog

    If you’re the SNP do you want the media focussing on what he says at your conference then reporting it on national TV as though you support what he says thus making Craig Murray a focal point at a SNP conference which is exactly what Craig Murray is doing right now and has done ever since he was rejected by the SNP as a loose cannon with a big mouth and a foot stamping baby attitude

    Or in easier language *the guy’s a liability*

  245. yesindyref2 says:

    Nothing much of value has ever been achieved by staying nicely, comfortably, unthreateningly within establishments’ laws.

    So is it your intention to go to Edinburgh and break the law?

    Could you wear a lapel badge please with your monicker to make it easy to have you identified, watched, and arrested the moment you break the law and then removed from the peaceful law-abiding march?

    Thanks in advance.

  246. Brian Powell says:

    Many people leave as soon as the march is over. The point is to show common purpose and the gathering at the beginning and the march through the streets does that.

    If they find a place for speeches great, people will go there, everything else diverts from the point.

  247. starlaw says:

    famous fifteen 5:34pm

    You are correct the annual miners gala’s were held in Holyrood park I was at the one that the great Paul Robson sang at. These galas were political events and many Labour politicians spoke at them.

  248. Thepnr says:


    Thanks very much for that thoughtful post, I believe you are definately on the right track with those thoughts. I posted in haste with no thought at all, just a question, why now?

    Reading what you have written though I see the obvious thing I missed and that is “not blocking” is nowhere near the same as supporting a second referendum on the EU.

    Despite what a small number of others may think I see the SNP as handling this Brexit bag of ferrets very well indeed.

  249. stewartb says:

    Those posting here on the subject of access to Holyrood Park by the AUOB event may be interested to read rules/guidance published by The Royal Parks (TRP) for the Parks in London.

    Firstly, for background, the TRP is described as follows:

    “The Royal Parks is a charity created in March 2017 and officially launched in July 2017 to support and manage 5,000 acres of Royal parkland across London. …. In 2017, we took over the role of managing the parks from The Royal Parks Agency – a former executive agency of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), as well as fundraising and some education from the Royal Parks Foundation. … The parks are owned by the Crown with their responsibility resting with the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. The Royal Parks charity manages the parks on behalf of the government.”

    And this is what the TRP’s guidance states:

    “The Royal Parks (TRP) has a long tradition of accommodating public demonstrations and protests. In 1866 there were riots when the authorities prevented people demonstrating in favour of the Great Reform Bill from entering Hyde Park. Since 1872, assemblies have been allowed in Hyde Park so that people might demonstrate their support for social and political causes or other rights and freedoms.

    TRP maintains this ‘traditional’ right of people to assemble for rallies and demonstrations in Hyde Park, and we will be happy to consider requests and accommodate them where we can. However, TRP retains the right to determine where in Hyde Park the assembly takes place. Organisers should also contact the Metropolitan Police and other relevant authorities.”

    There are some logistical restrictions imposed but the permissive nature of the guidance – the principle – seems pretty clear.


  250. Liz g says:

    Starlaw @ 7.31 & Famous 15 @ 5.34
    I don’t doubt that you did attend such events.
    And I cannot speak to what the position was pre Historic Scotland and then Historic Environment Scotland, being formed and charged with the care and management of the monuments.

    But right now there’s Legislation in place governing these “Royal” Parks and they are not public spaces. This Legislation says that the park may not be used for Political events (mibbi some kind Winger, who knows how could find and post it)?
    I’m actually surprised that the march is being allowed to go through it..

  251. stewartb says:

    yesindyref2 @ 7:26 pm

    Completely agree with the sentiment you express.

    As the critical time for IndyRef decision making gets closer and the British Nationalist Establishment become ever more concerned that matters may get out of their control, the potential for false flag actions and the role of agent provocateurs become, intuitively. more likely.

    So, yes, let’s stay alert, stay calm, stay legal, let’s not be riled – we are on the cusp of winning by sticking with our best, peaceful democratic values.

  252. Andy-B says:

    “Or in easier language *the guy’s a liability*”

    Dr Jim @7.03pm.

    I would be grateful if you could elaborate on Craig Murray as a liability. In my opinion and that of others, we think he’s done a fairly good dissemination of the Skripal event.

    Craig has also spoken at many indy events over the years always receiving a good round of applause. The SNP are the route to independence but the people are the driving force. The SNP shouldn’t be isolating those who have goodwill with the public such as Murray. One day he may become a MSP.

  253. yesindyref2 says:

    HES aren’t preventing the march, it’s the stalls and stage – static fixtures.

  254. yesindyref2 says:

    Yes, there’s been a flurry of them. Craig Murray’s blog article for instance seems at a rough guess to be about 90% full of them!

    The Autumn leaves are falling, and Winter’s coming for the Union with no Spring in sight for it, and it’s the last feeding time for the Union bugs before they volunteer to be the first Manned Mars Mission buggy (Mmm for bugs). Or something like that.

  255. Thepnr says:

    @yesindyref2 @ 7:26 pm

    Totally agree, there is nothing, I’ll say it again NOTHING more likely to stop the progress of support for Independence growing than for it to descend into a rabble holding rammy’s on street corners.

    This is a grown ups movement that know exactly where we are going, so what if it s slowly but surely because we are getting there much to the consternation of our opponents.

    Just think about it for a minute, what is with all the “cybernats”(demons) business? What is it about the all divisiveness(demons) and hatred caused by the referendum?

    Why were so many wishing in the media and among politicians wishing it to be true that the SNP were in “CIVIL WAR” over Alex Salmond being accused of sexual harassment?

    It’s obvious isn’t it? They need something exactly like that to turn others away from joining support for Independence. Thankfully even since before 2014 I’ve seen no evidence whatsoever of our campaign being nothing other than a peaceful one that want’s to encourage those not yet ready over to our side.

    If this is all they have left in order to discredit the Yes grassroots movement then I’m sorry to have to inform them, “You are on to Plums” suck it up.

  256. Ian Foulds says:

    Mei Devon says:
    26 September, 2018 at 9:04 am
    ‘I hope the snp are keeping a list of all their articles of defence that don’t see the light of day in the Unionist press.

    One day the truth will out. Hopefully very‘

    That might be an ideal (giveaway?) book of fact (with references) to be produced alongside whatever the Rev might produce for the occasion. Whether our fellow travellers could help finance such information is another matter, as would obtaining such facts from those sitting in Holyrood.

  257. Rock says:

    I was only politely reminding Petra to avoid her previous mistakes so she doesn’t have to run away from this site again and then having to sneek in again through the backdoor. Sorry if I offended anyone.

    Petra (24th February – “The makings of a deal”):

    “My last post didn’t appear on here. Maybe it was considered to be absolute rubbish?

    Meanwhile the last few posts since 11:26pm other than KOF, Robert Peffers, Brian, yesindyref2 and Hamish have basically made me decide that it’s time to move on. Made me realise that I’m wasting my precious time on here.

    If this is the calibre of posts that’s supposed to attract people to supporting Independence, I give up.”

  258. galamcennalath says:

    Channel Four ….. “Jeremy Corbyn makes offer to Prime Minister over Brexit …. come up with the right Brexit deal, and we will support you. His two tests? Preventing a hard border with Ireland and protecting jobs and workers’ rights. And he said if those tests weren’t met, Labour would push for a general election.”

    He had six tests, now just two. No Brexit will protect jobs, and having a bonfire of Brussels ‘red tape’ including workers’ rights is a big part of the raison d’être of Brexit.

    So more meaningless waffle.

    Two of the four nations don’t want it, the vast majority of Labour members and voters don’t want it, and probably a majority of UK voters don’t want it …. there’s a golden opportunity sitting there!

  259. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi yesindyref2.

    From my reading, HES are content with the march on the roads skirting the park but don’t want a rally on THEIR ‘green grund”.

    Which leads me on to…

    Hi stewartb says at 7:48 pm.

    You typed [edit],

    ““The Royal Parks (TRP) has a long tradition of accommodating public demonstrations and protests. In 1866 there were riots when the authorities prevented people demonstrating in favour of the Great Reform Bill from entering Hyde Park. Since 1872, assemblies have been allowed in Hyde Park so that people might demonstrate their support for social and political causes or other rights and freedoms.”

    This was exactly why the original organising committee for the Dundee march chose Magdalene Green for the rally at the end of the march. (Before the organisation was hijacked by AOUB>)
    Historically, it was where Dundonians went to demonstrate. Also, it is ‘common land’, as well as being a park. The council allowed sheep grazing in the park in the 1950s. (And on Caird Park golf course.)

    As far as I can see, if there’s no ‘central’ focus, ie stage, singers, bands and stalls after the march, then individuals are free to walk wherever they want in the park, as ‘normal’ people…

    I remember the saltires flying from Arthur’s Seat at a previous rally but haven’t uploaded the pics anywhere. Maybe I will…

  260. Clootie says:

    Liz G seems determined to define these parks as property managed for “The Royals”.
    The concept of Royals is very political and I for one reject it. No one is born above others so let us not accept that assertion. The people and THEIR rights come first.

  261. Dr Jim says:


    Skripal has nothing to do with Scottish Independence that’s a completely different matter so no comparison there really
    As to the said gentleman ever being a MSP that’s possible of course if enough people vote for him the question might be which party if any wants him or he stands as an Independent

    If you agree with the SNP way of doing things and your behaviour matches then you’re likely to be welcomed

    Craig Murray as far as I’m aware after being interviewed doesn’t and doesn’t and that’s why he’s not in the SNP, perhaps he could form his own party

  262. Macart says:


    Well reasoned post Wull.

  263. Liz g says:

    Thepnr @ 8.25
    Well said Alex,I totally agree with Yesindyref2, too.
    We need to stay the course,we cannot allow ourselves to be goaded into violence.
    The British state know violence they are good at it.
    It’s us peaceable kinds they can’t handle.
    It might have take some time but,its coming!

  264. Ghillie says:

    Ronnie, stewart b, yesindyref2 and thepnr and others =) Well said!

    We’ve come a long long way on this road to Independence, peacefully and respectfully.

    Knee jerk reactions never go well.

    This Indy Movement is so much better than that.

    Agent provocateurs, keekaboo! We see you.

  265. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi peeps.

    I’ve uploaded the pic from October 2016.

  266. Andy-B says:

    Dr Jim 8.56 pm.

    Thank you for your response, just as I suspected, nothing that holds any water.

    Murray might be outspoken from time to time, but he has a wealth of experience, and is knowledgeable in the field of British politics. He also has many international contacts from his years in the FCO.

    A useful man to have around Holyrood.

  267. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    wull @ 18:47,

    Much of what you say makes a lot of sense. The SNP is having to play cards in a game where the rules (and cards, even) keep on changing, so it’s not easy, and they’re having to ca’ it canny.

    Where I disagree is on the necessary hard pre-agreed outcome of an EUR2 if Scotland were again to vote differently from England. Partitioning a continuing Union in the throes of its worst crisis in living memory is like trying to stick a plaster on an unstable crack a mile wide.

    Who wants to continue to be shackled to a politically unstable England and a likely plummeting pound?

    I don’t believe any hopeful incumbent of Downing Street would agree to such a thing anyway, with their universal Anglocentric view that Westminster is paramount. Maybe weasel words beforehand to get the support, followed by reneging afterwards accompanied by lame excuses a la Gove: “no parliament can constrain a successor”.)

    This is just another re-tread of “Devo-Max” by the back door. It leaves us in exactly the same vulnerable position as always. Long past its sell-by date for reasons too well-known to rehearse here.

    Besides, it would kill off any hope of IR2 for the forseeable future. The long game gone even longer. No thanks, not for me, sorry. We have to have more self-confidence than this. Always passively waiting for events to somehow magically come to our assistance instead of making them happen. Well, I’m not waiting for the angels and I have a life to lead, the remnant of which I want to be free of all this BritNat ordure ASAP

    As I’ve said before, I believe the only logical outcome of a repeated result as in 2016 is separation. Complete and final. With everyone knowing that in advance of the vote.

    Whether any prospective partner would agree to that proposition either remains to be seen. The English though might finally be willing to “let” us go so they could be free to pursue their own direction unhindered. They don’t seem to be motivated by any kind of logical thought, economic or otherwise, anyway!

  268. Golfnut says:

    The Arthur Seat and surrounding was as far back as David 1st a Royal Hunting Park. However there is no listing on Wiki of it still being a Royal Park. Where is this Royal Park thing coming from. Genuine Question.

  269. Meg merrilees says:


    re Jeremy Corbyn:

    Like the leader of the Scottish conservative and unionist party, maybe he doesn’t actually want to be PM…

  270. twathater says:

    @ Nana 9.23AM
    Nana as always thank you for your untiring work in producing these fantastic links ( in the words of a wee twat ) ” you are indefatigable ” smiley fing

    I would like to draw everyone’s attention specifically to this one where Martin Keating gives a very detailed explanation of what a SECTION 30 order specifically means and lays out the reasons why ALL true indy supporters should sign the petition to the Scottish Government

    Please get as many people to sign the petition and FORCE treeza to say NOOOOOOOOO

  271. Famous15 says:

    Beware. Having read with interest the tweets on the Police Scotland pay rise I detecteda pattern of misinformation. My algorithm went red hot. The speech patterns and grammar reflects the style of the detected anti Corbyn Tory 1st Battalion. So they have moved on to attack the Scottish Government.

    They are not even subtle or clever but to some they are very effective.

    Take their repeated assertions that because of SG taxation that a sergeant will earn less than a constable as an example. I do not have to explain the absurdity of this on this blog but they keep running it so the tractors believe that spin has traction on those arithmetically challenged.

    Beware of the Tory 1st Battalion.

  272. stewartb says:

    galamcennalath @ 8:41 pm

    You wrote: ‘Channel Four ….. “Jeremy Corbyn makes offer to Prime Minister over Brexit …. come up with the right Brexit deal, and we will support you. His two tests? Preventing a hard border with Ireland and protecting jobs and workers’ rights. And he said if those tests weren’t met, Labour would push for a general election.”

    Your absolutely right: once upon a time – like yesterday – Labour had six tests. And one in particular was quite precise. namely: does the final deal deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

    Now that is a tough one to square with what we heard from Corbyn today! Triangulation in place of statesmanship?.

  273. Liz g says:

    Golfnut @ 9. 29
    The Royal Park stuff is coming mainly from me Golfnut.
    I’m not going in to detail here.. sorry..
    I can only say that I’m a member of HES, I attend a lot of their events and that the status of the Park was explained to me ages ago in a conversation that had nothing to do with Indy or the current row!
    You needn’t believe me… of course you needn’t….one thing that may demonstrate what I’m saying though is that, AUOB had to get HES consent and not Edinburgh Council consent to use the Park.
    That should show at least it’s not public space!!
    I can only post to the best of my knowledge, but I hope that helps!

  274. Colin Alexander says:

    Dave McEwan Hill

    The SNP won the 2016 Scottish Parliament election by winning more seats than any other party and so formed the (minority) Scottish Govt.

    And, with the support of the Scottish Greens in Holyrood, the Scottish Govt has already been given the democratic mandate for another indyref.

    That’s the done deal, as far as I’m concerned. Now the SNP MUST deliver on the manifesto commitment to another indyref.

    (I could also talk about the Triple Lock, but I’m embarrassed for the SNP to even mention that pish).

  275. Dr Jim says:


    I’m glad you agree he talks too much about some things he shouldn’t, again a reason why he’s a risk to a political party, a leaky mouth perhaps?

  276. Robert Peffers says:

    @Stravaiger says: 26 September, 2018 at 12:56 pm:

    ” … Robert the Bruce didn’t call off the Battle of Bannockburn because there were no toilets.”

    Maybe that was because the choice of battleground by Bruce was a, “Big Bog”. It was the major point in making it a Scottish victory.

    Here’s a wee cut & paste:-

    “Bruce had deployed his troops 2 miles to the south of Stirling Castle straddling the main road from Falkirk to Stirling at the point it passed through woodland in the New Park.

    Defensive earthworks were constructed to form a bottleneck along a portion of the road. The English had the choice to launch a frontal attack through this narrow approach or to by-pass the wood and take a boggy route to the east. In either case Bruce hoped the English advantage in heavy cavalry would be neutralised.”

    So there you go the very considerate King Robert provided a great big bog for the English tourists.

    I’ll get my coat!

  277. Macart says:


    Heh! Corbyn’s offer and tests.

    It’s easy to make offers you’ll never have to come good on. Just as it’s easy to set tests with conditions you know have no amicable or ready solution.

    He’s such a card. 🙄

  278. Colin Alexander says:

    Regarding animal welfare under nearly 12 years of the SNP in Govt.

    How many thousands of mountain hares have been slaughtered and how many birds of prey poisoned on the rich men’s playground of Scotland’s mountains and moors?

    Was it the Scot Govt that did it? No.

    But, what have the Scot Govt done about it? Heehaw.

    They don’t want to upset the dukes and Lords and millionaire absentee landowners, so drag their feet on doing something with any real impact to end the needless slaughter.

  279. Robert Peffers says:

    @Clootie says: 26 September, 2018 at 8:55 pm:

    ” … No one is born above others so let us not accept that assertion. The people and THEIR rights come first.”

    Aye! And, as the people of Scotland are legally sovereign, the people and not the monarchy own Scotland. That is why there is no English style Law of Trespass in Scotland. It is why Scots have legal right to roam and are only restricted in access close to private dwellings by laws of personal privacy – a sort of Peeping Tom restriction and it applies even to the Royal’s privately owned, “Balmoral Estate”, bought by Queen Victoria.

    The courts ruled that the public could not be prevented to access to marked paths that are ancient Rights of Way.

    I don’t really know the status of Holyrood Park but I believe it is part of the Crown Estates and they, in Scotland, belong to the sovereign people not the non-sovereign monarchy.

  280. yesindyref2 says:

    It’s an interesting one, and the solution is to put myself in their shoes as though I’m the decision maker. It’s land owned by the “Government Ministers” and presumably on behalf of the People of Scotland. I have a remit to look after that land on behalf of the people, and that includes giving amenity on that land for the people. Which includes not allowing one group to detract from the amenity of others.

    Well, it’s big enough, events do take place, a well-organised event might take up a small area, but plenty left for others. So are they going to leave it filthy, trampled, needing litter collection, sanitisation and grass sowing which costs me money as Alan Sugar would say. Because if so, I absolutely have to deny that use, or seek deposits and cast-iron contracts to get full recompense for the body that I administer for the People under a remit from the SG.

    But I’m easy-going, so I find out what history the organisation have got, contact those with a responsibility for Glasgow Green, Falkirk, Dundee and find out they clear up the litter and generally control the area well.

    OK, fine so far, but these are erections and if anyone deciding under cover of putting up a marque decided to put up a man or indeed woman shed and live in it for a while, it’s actually not easy removing them. So I consider this, decide it’s very low risk and allow the whole shebang to go ahead. But someone more cautious than me, and over-protective might say no. Doesn’t mean they’re wrong and I’m right, it’s a judgement call!

    And then of course there’s my 20 page risk assessment and health and safety report …

    Mmm, that was pretty boring as Hans Solo said …

  281. Robert J. Sutherland says:

    stewartb @ 21:44,

    I thought Labour were against tests? =laugh=

    Maybe they’re simply trying to reduce them?

    I’m no fan of JC, but never gave much credence to the media anti-semitic accusation, since it seemed to me as much intended to damp legitimate criticism of Israel’s policies and actions. (No worries, a topic that properly belongs elsewhere.)

    But it struck me forcibly in listening to Corby a little today how much he and his fellow-travellers seem to be viscerally anti-foreigner in general, in a way that goes beyond merely pandering to the Leaver segment of Labour support.

    Read between the lines, and these hard-left union types really give the impression of belonging to some kind of xenophobic cargo cult as much as the high Tory Empire Loyalists. (If for superficially-different reasons.) Far more concerning IMO than something directed specifically at any one particular sub-group.

    In stark contrast to Corby’s high-minded windbaggery, they clearly want as little to do with their neighbours across La Manche as possible, as if they were contaminated, and the source of all our problems. So much for their take on the Socialist International.

    Their “will of the people” mantra is just as determined and self-serving as that of the Tories. Which is how JC so easily finds common ground with his supposed opponents.

    Ironic, since the middle-class virtue-signalling bien-pensants who gave Keith Starmer the standing ovation yesterday would be horrified if they fully grasped this darkness at the heart of the party. (On second thoughts, maybe some of them actually do, but prefer to look the other way.)

  282. Golfnut says:

    @liz G
    Thanks for that, I’ve been doing a little digging of my own since I posted my comment, my first attempt with Wiki brought up only English Royal Parks, so was a little confused since the area concerned was known to me as a boy as the Queens Park as well as being just referred to as Arthur’s seat.
    I’m wondering at it being attributed to Scottish Government, does that mean the one we elect.
    As if I would dare not to be believe you ?

  283. Golfnut says:

    @liz G
    Thanks for that, I’ve been doing a little digging of my own since I posted my comment, my first attempt with Wiki brought up only English Royal Parks, so was a little confused since the area concerned was known to me as a boy as the Queens Park as well as being just referred to as Arthur’s seat.
    I’m wondering at it being attributed to Scottish Government, does that mean the one we elect.
    As if I would dare not to be believe you ?

  284. Golfnut says:

    Sorry for the double post. The ? Mark was supposed to be a smiley face.

  285. mike cassidy says:

    ‘Enjoy’ this moment from the labour conference.

    I genuinely don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the staggering lack of awareness of the reporter.

  286. yesindyref2 says:

    That long ramble by the way is, being a bit of a blether sometimes and talking to the Forestry Commission people, is something like what they had to go through for the likes of the Park Stages car rally around Newton Stewart I used to go to with my boy, except they charged for the use, provided a rear service area, and I think, improved some of the tracks and had to rework them after the rally. I think public liability insurance may have been involved, one of the reasons – cost – rallying has been on a bit of a sad decline. The MacRae rally and Borders would have been similar.

  287. Robert Louis says:

    I think that those behind this banning of indy march from Holyrood, may have to an extent backfired on those responsible. All this tosh about ‘Royal Parks’, as though this is England, seems to have touched a raw nerve. Perhaps more folks should check on the status, and let’s get it sorted. Whilst people are contented to let lizzie romp about as Queen, she has her palaces etc.. but this nonsense of it being a royal estate is like something from darkest mediaeval England.

    Time the Scottish gov got their folks working on this, and got it changed. This is NOT England, and the Queen does not own our country.

  288. Welsh Sion says:

    O/T with apologies – A dispatch from your Cymru correspondent.

    What with ‘my’ First Minister, Carwyn Jones (Labour), officially starting the race for his successor as Leader of Labour (Western Colonies Branch) and new FM today – result due in December and Plaid Cymru due to announce if Leanne has kept her place as Leader or if either of the other two candidates (all three are espousing the ‘I’ word, by the way) on Friday, then these are certainly ‘interesting times’ for those of us studying politics in the various countries on these islands.

    Rumour has it that Carwyn is going as he was undermined following the Carl Sargeant affair, but something makes me think it has more to do with Brexit and/or that he doesn’t get on with Jezza. The Tories and UKIP also have new Leaders in Cardiff Bay this autumn. The Liberal Democrats have a sole Assembly Member (seconded to the Labour Government Cabinet as Education Secretary) and a new Branch Manager (Western Division) as of last autumn.

    If you do have a few minutes spare on Friday, Scotland, I’d ask you to turn your eyes to my country, and one of your natural friends and staunchest ally (we do, after all, suffer and have suffered in similar ways from ‘the common Westminster/Establishment enemy’) and seewho will be the Leader of the sister Party of your own SNP.

  289. yesindyref2 says:

    @Liz g
    Yes, Holyrood Park owned by the Scottish Ministers as of 1999 under the Scotland Act 1998:

  290. Robert Peffers says:

    @Robert Louis says: 26 September, 2018 at 5:07 pm:

    That was, (almost), a great post Robert Louis. Pity about this bit though:-

    ” … You must remember, Scotland is a country within a bipartitie treaty with England, a treaty which either party can end. Scotland is not a region. That is a critical difference, when compared with say Catalunya (although they have my full support)

    Scotland is both a country and a Kingdom – England is a kingdom composed of three countries.

    However, in the context of, THE UNITED KINGDOM”, both partners in the UNITED KINGDOM are KINGDOMS. In,”The Treaty of Union”, neither England or Scotland are partner countries because it is a union of kingdoms.

    The reason it is called, “The united Kingdom”, is because it is NOT a union of countries but is a union of kingdoms.

    In point of fact it is really illegal that it is being run as if Westminster is the de facto parliament of the country of England and is, “The master race”, with three dominions, (they dominate Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland).

    Westminster is effectively the parliament of the country of England and thus it devolves English powers to Scotland, Wales & N. Ireland but those powers are legally equally those or the two signatory kingdoms. They do not belong to England alone but the both partner kingdoms.

  291. Thepnr says:

    @mike cassidy


  292. Liz g says:

    Golfnut @ 10.48
    Thank You for saying Golfnut…. it’s just that I’m a bit limited as I can’t do links, and wouldn’t even know where or how to look for stuff like Legislation …
    I have to stand on the shoulders of the giants on this site who do..
    Anyhoo…as I indicated earlier ( isn’t that nice and cryptic LOL) I do have regular contact with some HES people.
    And it’s my understanding that this park is a Royal Park and has different rules that by Legislation HES have to comply with.
    Holyrood… yes the bit we elected.. are responsible for the Royal Parks!
    HES are discharging the response abilities of a Holyrood Minister, and nothing political can be authorised in the Royal Parks, there are apparently more than one!
    I think the Botanic Gardens “might” be another, but couldn’t argue it!!

    What I was trying to point out is that we should be accurate in our complaints and our outrage.
    And that this is Public Space is not true.
    AUOB should have put a correct version of events out, as we ( the Yes movement)just looked stupid rushing to accuse HES of something they are not responsible for.
    Ma… peeps … tell me the contac was awful, and very ill informed.
    So I was trying to bring any Wingers who want to complain up to speed.
    With the correct information.
    Hopefully it will all blow over in the next few days ?
    Hope to see you at the march?

  293. Thepnr says:

    Hope nobody minds but I thought a wee tune from 2014 might be in order, just to lighten the mood and maybe bring a smile 🙂

  294. yesindyref2 says:

    HELLO everybody, Holyrood Park is N-O-T *that’s NOT* I repeat NOT owned by the Queen, it is NOT a Royal Park it IS owned by the SCOTTISH MINISTERS and it’s the SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (Land reform review group) THAT SAY SO:

  295. Liz g says:

    Yesindyref2 @ 11.17
    Thank you
    You are a star,for finding and posting that information..
    I hope that now at least on here we have a better understanding of the situation.

    On the positive side though…. An awful lot of people (and sorry for how it sounds,I don’t mean any disrespect,to voters who cared enough to complain)
    But some very clearly illiterate and ill educated people have been posting on social media about this,and,while they were all over the place with the facts or it and their point of views.
    The ONE thing that shone through was that they were claiming their Sovereignty.
    They understood!!!
    It was theirs and they wanted it.
    I’m a Sovereign Scott ,no matter how badly expressed,was clearly being claimed.
    That’s different from 2014,that’s new,and that’s Brilliant!!

  296. Robert Peffers says:

    @Colin Alexander says: 26 September, 2018 at 10:35 pm:

    ” … Regarding animal welfare under nearly 12 years of the SNP in Govt.”

    Oh! Awa an bile yer heid, Colin. We have had, getting on for, 80 years of Labour rule in Scotland – what did they do about Mountain Hares?

    Don’t you ever read the news? The past couple of days there has been news items about an honest error made in a Scottish Maternity Unit that resulted in a unborn baby being decapitated at birth.

    Yes there needs to be work done on curbing the worst excesses of the big sporting estates but for God’s sake Colin think about priorities and your hate for the SNP that have done more for Scotland in every year they have been in power than any of the Scottish branches of the English Parliament have done in my lifetime.

    We have had 311 years of Westminster Unionist rule and what have they done about mountain hares?

    The SNP/SG have not only had to act as if they were a minority government because all three Westminster unionist parties act as one opposition and thus the SNP have difficulty getting even reasonable laws like the Offensive behaviour at Football legislation negated by idiots.

    There is a finite time in the parliament for a very crowded agenda of legislation yet we have numpties like you on about Mountain Hares. What about the many, many improvements needed to help the old, sick, disabled, maternity units, Mesh implants, food banks, costs of school uniforms, regulation of ingredients in foods that kill people with allergic reactions and a thousand or six thousand other much more important things than Mountain Hares.

    Which, BTW, like much else in Scotland’s wildlife, will be best resolved by land reforms to curb the worst excesses of the big sporting estates. Scotland can well do without big sporting estates that are a result of the clearances.

    The killing of birds of prey, seals, the need to cull deer that have completed the job begun by Westminster to clear Scots from Scotland.

    Those barren wasteland landscapes that so many delusional people imagine as Scotland’s natural habitat are all man made.

    Scotland’s natural habitat was the Great Caledonian Forest and it was man that killed that off – followed by the clearances, the import of sheep and therefore the unnatural growth in the numbers of deer that prevent the natural regrowth of forests.

    Fence off an area of the Highlands and keep out the deer. Within a couple of seasons there is a change within the fenced off area and a few years later there is natural mixed forestry naturally returned.

  297. yesindyref2 says:

    There’s this as well:

    and I daresay somewhere a list of those previously transferred to the Secretary of State for Scotland before Devolution, and a full list afterwards – apart from those two noted mistakenly (well, maybe) transferred to the CEC.

    Research first, keyboard anger second.

    We’ve nearly won, don’t throw it away now and snatch defeat out of the open jaws of victory.

  298. yesindyref2 says:

    @Liz g
    Yes, I read your posts. It’s – annoying – to put it politely. I posted this here at 10.59 this morning

    and in The National at about the same time, and nobody bothers reading it.

    And yes, I did make the same mistake as most people 🙁

  299. Capella says:

    We will be at the Edinburgh march, by “we” I mean the Aberdeenshire brigade. Rendevous at Princes Street Gardens and march down the High Street. Then a stroll around Holyrood Park in the company of like minded strollers.

    If anyone is selling nicknacks then I would buy some. If anyone wishes to speak then a p.a. system can be used. I’m looking forward to a happy and memorable celebration of our democratic right to meet and talk.
    See you there.

  300. yesindyref2 says:

    I’ve got a funny feeling by the way, that if Scotland or its representative(s) didn’t own Holyrood Park and presumably Palace, that any coronation of a monarch in Scotland wouldn’t actually be legal, as she/he make their way to the parliament with the Ridings or something like that, to be crowned with the Scottish Regalia, but it’s a bit of a dim memory, I read about it years ago, and quite frankly my dears, I don’t give a damn! Sturgeon is the current Keeper if that’s the word.

  301. Liz g says:

    Yesindyref2 @ 11.47
    Ah… your star shone so brightly there for a minute.. and then …
    Holyrood is a Royal Park.
    It is indeed not owned by the Queen.. as it is not her personal property.
    Neither is it the property of any Scottish Minister.
    The Title is held by a Scottish Minister on behalf of the Scottish Crown.
    Not the Scottish People, the Scottish Crown.
    A Minister of Scotland holding the Title doesn’t make it our ( the public) property or confer any rights on us for its use!

    Just like… Holyrood is in theory owned by us and paid for by us but we cannot just wander in to it, and armed police make sure we don’t.
    To do that takes Legislation.. Aye?
    Also just like a prison…. We own and pay and consent to there existence, but we cannot rock up to them for a picnic…. again there’s Legislation that says we can’t .

    We might not agree with the Legislation but it is there… that park does in no measurable,( so far )way belong to the public….

  302. Robert Peffers says:

    @Liz g says: 26 September, 2018 at 11:48 pm:

    ” … On the positive side though…. An awful lot of people (and sorry for how it sounds,I don’t mean any disrespect,to voters who cared enough to complain)”

    Now I spent much of my early life in the Lothians and from around school age until I married in 1962 in Edinburgh. If memory serves it was in the king’s/Queen’s Park that the Scottish Miners held their Annual Miner’s Gala. It was also the usual venue for the Orange Walks to end.

    However, I suppose things are different now that we actually have a, “Devolved”, Scottish Government.

  303. Thepnr says:


    I’m very pleased to hear that also I’m sure there are many more thousands that will be too as we’ll all be there for the same reason. Every mickle maks a muckle 🙂

  304. Liz g says:

    Yesindyref2 @ 12.03
    Our posts are crossing….Im having much the same problems as Petra!!!
    Anyhoo… I agree that it’s Fiona Hislop who should be contacted… But she is passing it on to the heed bummer at HES!
    She should bite the bullet and explain the status of the park.
    Either way none of the two of them could satisfy the demand to use the park.
    The responsibility is ultimately AUOBs they should know the situation and should tell it like it is.
    They need to at the very least make it clear its not a public park.
    Again they might not like it… But they should not mislead people,or fail to correct their understanding of what is actually going on.
    This is a shit way to get publicity,don’t ye think?

  305. Thepnr says:

    @Liz g

    All that matters is the march in Edinburgh is going ahead, mistakes I’m sure have been made, innocently I’m sure but nobodies perfect.

    Maybe time to put this to bed and instead encourage all that can make it to come along. I’m absolutely certain I’m going o enjoy the day whatever 🙂

    We should all join hands now LOL

    One last point, who really cares about the squabbling that seems to be going on? I don’t as it’s a waste of energy, all our energy needs to be focused on the “goal” as if that needed saying.

    I’ll be looking for you there just so you can give me a hug 🙂

  306. Liz g says:

    Yesindyref2 @ 12.13:
    You might very well have read it..
    But the so called Coronation Traditions are recent inventions.
    We…. Surprise Surprise…are only given the impression that they go way back.
    But like you .. Other than exposing the misdirection.. I struggle tae care,and hope that there’s not another one!!

  307. yesindyref2 says:

    @Liz g at 12.19
    That’s not my reading of the group report, I didn’t look further:

    2 By the 19th century, the government in London was responsible for managing these Castles, Palaces and other iconic national properties held as ancient possessions by the Crown in Scotland. In some instances, the ownership was also conveyed to the government. This was the case with Holyrood Palace and as a result, the ownership of the Palace transferred from the Secretary of State for Scotland to Scottish Ministers at devolution under the Scotland Act 1998.

    3 There was, in addition, a much larger transfer of historic national properties from the Crown to Scottish Ministers at devolution. In 1999, 26 properties held as ancient possessions by the Crown in Scotland were conveyed on behalf of the Crown by the Crown Estate Commissioners (CEC) to the Secretary of State for Scotland. As a result, the ownership of these properties, listed in Fig. 10, transferred to Scottish Ministers under the 1998 Act.

    “ownership” as opposed to “responsible for managing”.

    So unless that group got it wrong, Scotland owns Holyrood Park (and others) whiuch are listed in Fig 10 underneath those paragraphs.

  308. Liz g says:

    Thepnr @ 12.51
    You are of course “” mostly “” correct, I’m wanting this to be done with too!
    I am so looking forward to next week… especially the chance to chat to a fellow canine enthusiast.
    The only mistake you make… and you should know better by now…
    I am the exception That proves the rule
    I do not give hugs ..
    I only receive them…

    See you both soon xx

  309. Thepnr says:

    @Liz g

    A bad mistake to make right enough, see if I can make it up to you as I think you’ll like this tune and all other Wingers too. Hey indulge me it’s dark O’Clock 🙂

  310. HandandShrimp says:

    I see a Yes Picnic has been set up as an event for the Park post march 🙂

  311. Liz g says:

    Thepnr @ 1.44
    Thank you.. one of my most favourite songs, and I’d never heard that version before…
    Handandshrimp @ 1.56
    OMFG ……. I am supposed to be leaving this alone.

    But a picnic… If it’s a Yes picnic is no likely to get permission either.
    Although I don’t suppose anyone is asking for permission!
    I’m so mad at AUOB, there was no need to do this.
    They should have done their homework and not even asked to use the park!
    Let our marches end in success.
    I hope they realise that Nicola & the Scottish Government will have to condemn this, if it becomes a thing!!!
    What are they thinking???

  312. yesindyref2 says:

    Mmm, see how the mind wanders and then comes back to the beginning. Round and round and round it goes, where it’ll end up …

    Onyways, here’s a bit from that report above:

    9 The Review Group considers that iconic national properties such as Edinburgh and Stirling Castles and other historic properties of equivalent national significance to Scotland, should be held inalienably on behalf of the people of Scotland by Scottish Ministers. The Group also considers that there should be greater clarity over the historic properties owned by Scottish Ministers. It might be useful to produce a list of those considered to be held inalienably on behalf of the nation. The list in Fig.10 might be considered to include examples of such properties, while Holyrood Palace is an example not in that list.

    Hear Hear!

    on behalf of the people of Scotland

    Full LRRG report “The Land of Scotland and the Common Good”

  313. Ghillie says:

    The march will be smashing and whatever happens in the park afterwards will be grand too =)

    Hope me and my sons will be able to find you all!

    We’ll be waving a big blue flag 🙂

  314. Petra says:

    @ Liz g at 3:37am …. “I hope they realise that Nicola and the Scottish Government will have to condemn this, if it becomes a thing!!! What are they thinking???”

    Makes you wonder doesn’t it! A bit like the increasing numbers on here who purport to support Independence but run Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP, the National etc down to the ground on a regular basis.

    Why not just get to Edinburgh, march, head to a pub/restaurant or go home? It’s the numbers marching that make the point, imo.


    Visit the site and cheer yourself up.

  315. Capella says:

    A Clan Gathering would be good, after the march. All summer there are Highland Games in theses high pastures where the clan tents attract a lot of visitors. These events are held on village greens or parks. Nothing political about that surely?

    The Anderson clan might well hve a few items on sale too.

    BTW – Has the YES movement civil war now superceded the SNP civil war?

  316. Cactus says:

    With regards to Edinburgh 6/10, here’s a thought… if ‘static stalls’ are apparently denied (it may not be ideal) but you could just drive up there, park up yer vehicles, and have a car boot sale like, ye could drop an awning over for effect, afterall ye’ve paid yer Road Tax and your on the road.

    Check it out… tis now over 793,000+ Winger comments (4,917).

    Seems like it was 700K only yesterday.
    FAO Glasgow commuters, watch out drivers, Freedom Square is temporarily closed due to a scissor lift falling over on the North side, plan yer route.

  317. Collie says:

    Personally, I think posters on here should tone down the Yes on Yes attacks.

    It does no one any good to openly attack fellow Yes Campaigners.

    I am sure the people marching will get by just fine if they find there is no merchandise to buy at the end of the March.

    Personal attacks on here aimed at people like Tommy Sheridan come across as cheap and nasty.

    A lot of readers on here support people like Tommy Sheridan, so as I said, tone down the Yes on Yes attacks.

  318. Cactus says:

    Same goes for a stage for all of the speakers / singers… just roll-in one of dem big open side articulated lorry trailers and park up.

    It’s good to be on the road again.

    Loosey goosey.

  319. Nana says:

    What do we still not know about the Brexit process or the withdrawal agreement with the EU that is currently being negotiated? This paper looks at some of the main unknowns.
    In terms of the devolution settlement, there is still considerable uncertainty as to the impact Brexit will have. We do not yet know how the UK Government will go about temporarily ‘freezing’ devolved powers returning from the EU; nor do we know much, if anything, about the long-term proposals for what should replace EU “common frameworks”. Much of the detail of these new arrangements will only become fully apparent after exit day.
    More here

    No taxpayer funding for Eugenie’s Royal Wedding

  320. Nana says:

    Will not archive

    There’s been a lot of talk in the news about Brexit recently and you’ve probably heard a lot of words like ‘backstop’ and ‘Chequers’ – but what does it all mean? Here’s one of RTÉ’s political experts @RTENewsPaulC to explain

  321. Nana says:

    Will not archive

    FDF response to Government’s latest ‘No-Deal’ Technical Notices

    Compare & contrast the read outs from the Trump/May bilateral meet. Team May effusive about a big US-UK trade deal. White House didn’t even mention. Rather embarrassing

    US offers UK inferior open skies del after Brexit

  322. Petra says:

    ‘Labour accused of pinching policies from Scottish Government.’

    ”Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was accused of peppering his pitch to party conference with policies “pinched” from the SNP.

    In his keynote address, Corbyn said his party was “ready to take charge” and deliver “a real alternative to the people of Britain”.

    He set out plans for a “green jobs revolution” which would create 400,000 skilled jobs in wind farms and home insulation.

    There was also a commitment to extend free childcare in England and Wales.

    In addition, there were promises to give workers seats on company boards, and the creation of employee shareholding funds.

    Corbyn also promised an end to the “racket” of privatisation and outsourcing, and a new tax on second homes to pay for housebuilding.

    The SNP’s leader at Westminster, Ian Blackford, attacked Labour for having “pinched policies wholesale from the SNP Government”…….

  323. Nana says:

    Explaining the depth of UK complicity in war-crimes in #Yemen at the UN

    The ‘Bordering on Brexit: Global Britain and the Embers of Empire‘ Conference was held last weekend at Garrison Library, Gibraltar. Professor Richard Toye, Director of Exeter’s Centre for Imperial and Global History, interviews Fintan O’Toole (Irish Times) about his conference keynote

    Corbyn and crew are off to Brussels to talk Brexit with Barnier. I wouldn’t trust this lot to handle my baggage any more than I trust the clueless Tories.

    Ian Dale doesn’t like getting telt!

  324. Petra says:

    I don’t really agree with much that Kirsty Hughes has had to say lately, however her article includes some statistics which may be interesting (apologies if they’ve been posted before).

    …”In August, a YouGov poll for Scotland suggested Scottish voters now support Remain by 66% to 34%. The same poll found that 83% of SNP voters now back Remain, compared with 74% of Labour voters and just 29% of Conservative voters.

    Sixty-one per cent of Scottish voters back holding another EU referendum (when “don’t knows” are excluded), while 79% of SNP voters would support this…”

  325. Phronesis says:

    Water availability and sanitisation is the 4th industrial revolution;
    ‘We have a unique opportunity to harness this Fourth Industrial Revolution – and the societal shifts it triggers – to help address environmental issues and transform how we manage our shared global environment’

    Responsible businesses co-author the social contract;

    ‘Through the post-war decades, countries that saw the strongest and most widely distributed prosperity had a powerful and positive social contract at their heart. The social contracts that underpinned these successes paired growth with inclusiveness. They implied mutual responsibility for the future, sharing prosperity between shareholders and stakeholders, between capital and labour. Today there is a widespread perception that the distribution is skewed too much towards capital.
    In this environment, the implicit social contract that served many countries well has been damaged and broken. In the view of many it has become an “anti-social contract”, under which business is the winner, who takes it all’

    Scotland is a really cool country with a responsible government- building compassion, humanity, and ethical policies throughout and valuing all its citizens.


  326. Petra says:

    ‘Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh: ‘Labour are a mess – and their failings are all of their own making.’

    …”Are Corbyn and Leonard not aware that we already have a mandate for a second independence referendum? It’s not up to Corbyn to dangle a carrot at the Scottish electorate, and it’s certainly not up to Richard Leonard to deny us our democratic right. Corbyn being coy about his support for Scottish self-determination has been exposed by Leonard’s comments – Labour doesn’t care about the sovereign will of the Scottish people, it only cares about the Union and is ready to sacrifice democracy to preserve it.

    Mind you, Leonard does not have a good track record when it comes to Scottish matters. His continuing lack of understanding devolved issues makes watching his performances in Holyrood an uncomfortable experience. It’s hardly surprising that he doesn’t support a second referendum when he’s not even sure what powers are devolved to Scotland courtesy of our 20-year-old parliament.

    Nor does he have much of a grasp of Scottish political history. Labour’s conversion to a parliament, rather than a mere assembly, was based on the Claim of Right in the 1990s. That is when Donald Dewar and a generation of Scots Labour leaders, who unlike Leonard were household names, backed the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine their future form of government….”

  327. Robert Peffers says:

    I’m going on memory here but Westminster, as Westminster always has, acted illegally in the late 1790s. They arbitrarily took the running of the Scottish Crown estates away from Edinburgh and amalgamated the Scottish Crown Estates with the Crown Estates of the Kingdom of England under the private company, “The Crown Estates Commission”.

    Like all these illegal Westminster take over operations you will have extreme difficulty in finding any information of this on the internet but there were lots of protests at the time. The two kingdoms Crown estates did not legally belong to Westminster – only those of the kingdom of England did.

    Just as the Scottish Crown Jewels belong to Scotland where the people of Scotland, not the monarchy, are legally sovereign so Westminster has no legal claims upon either the Scottish Crown Jewels, Scottish Crown Regalia, (Orb, sceptre, etc.) or the Scottish Crown Estates.

    Until devolution, (and that too is illegal), as Westminster is legally the bipartite United Kingdom parliament not the de facto parliament of the country of England. Yet that is how Westminster works.

    It calls itself the United Kingdom Government but in practice is the Country of England parliament that has assumed it has full sovereignty over the other three countries in the United Kingdom.

    However the real legal position is that the United Kingdom is a two partner kingdom and is not a four country union of countries with England the master country.

    So, if you have the patience and the persistence you will find Westminster just took over the Scottish Crown Estates, (then run from Edinburgh), and established a private company called, “The Crown Estates Commission”.

    This then got further hidden away in the devolution settlement and reverted to Scottish Control but initially, if memory serves, the Secretary of State’s control – not the Scottish Government’s control.

  328. Petra says:

    Thanks for the links Nana X

    Ian Dale doesn’t like getting telt!

    Ha ha ha. Great wee video on there.

  329. Petra says:

    Leonard has put his big foot right in it. Thank you Dickie.

    ‘Wee Ginger Dug: Desperate Unionist political parties are a threat to our democracy.’

    ….”The Claim of Right is the document which doesn’t merely underpin the devolution settlement, it also represents the political foundation of Scotland’s place within the UK. If Labour has unilaterally decided to rip that claim up, then all by itself that counts as a material change of circumstances which justifies a second independence referendum, with or without Brexit….”

  330. Petra says:

    One of my posts (with 2 links) seems to have disappeared. I was basically asking what the setup at Holyrood Park (end point) was like during the Suffragette March earlier this year.


    ‘Letters: Heritage bodies have no right to censor us.’

  331. Hamish100 says:

    Collie if folk wish to disagree wirh Tommy Sheridan. They can. Its called debate and we arent afraid of it. In fact its stimulates ideas should you have some.

  332. Collie says:

    Hamish 100

    I was not talking of Tommy Sheridan alone. I was talking about the Yes on Yes attacks.

    That does no one any good.

    Try reading my post again and then come back and apologize to me.


  333. sassenach says:

    Whilst agreeing with you (but only to some extent!), a movement such as ours will always have different ‘factions’ that will want different things – after Indy is achieved – and we can accommodate these things.

    Some of us may have ideas that don’t suit everybody, but I hardly think Yes voters will change their minds and vote No simply because they disagree about the views of Tommy Sheridan!

    We need to have broad brush outlooks for after Indy to setup a new country!!

  334. Petra says:

    ‘Michael Fry: The UK’s approach to migration is Unionism in action.’

    …”This vicious, vindictive woman (May) made a name as Home Secretary by her efforts to crack down on immigration. She showed no mercy for hard-working families who wanted merely to do the best by this country and themselves, nor for students who promised to go home once they had finished their studies, as nearly all those who got in have indeed done. Still she failed every single year to meet her targets, and by a mile.

    Her anti-immigrant obsession has continued from the Home Office into No 10 Downing Street, souring everything else she has put her hand to there. Just as free movement for workers is built into the structure of the EU, as one of the “four freedoms” that define the single market, so her institutional xenophobia, the “hostile environment”, has been embedded into the machinery of the UK Government. Never shall the twain meet, not in Salzburg and nowhere else either.

    One expression of the hostile atmosphere is the little-known Migration Advisory Committee (MAC). It is “a non-departmental public body associated with the British Home Office”, whatever that may mean – a typical piece of obfuscating official gobbledegook. In translation, what it actually signifies is a catspaw of the Home Office, which can all the same disavow any sensitive findings by the tame professors it appoints to serve.

    The present members of the MAC are typical: six academics headed by Professor Alan Manning of the London School of Economics (plus a civil servant as the Government’s enforcer). Not a single one of these eggheads lives further away from Whitehall than York. They all have cushy billets at English universities, so that voices from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are not even going to be heard in their powwows. The Home Office as a rule has no Scottish functions, because our own government carries out what it does for England. An exception is made in the case of immigration, this being reckoned a matter for the whole UK.

    All the same the committee does identify differences in Scotland’s migrant experience, and the effect they have had on our attitudes and objectives – though only in order to deny that these would ever justify any deviations from the harsh central policy. It’s a fine piece of Unionism in action.”…


    National Website Comments – Alf Baird:

    ”If the census data is carefully analysed we can see that a very large proportion of immigrants coming to Scotland are the over-50’s from rUK who are here to either retire or is often the case to take their last public-sector managerial level job here in Scotland before retirement.

    In other words Scotland is importing an ageing population, as well as its professional class, as has aye been the case. This is also preventing younger Scots from climbing up the jobs ladder in Scotland, which often leads to them leaving to seek opportunity elsewhere and hence taking their young families with them.

    Other countries manage their populations whereas Scotland for centuries under Westminster has had no control over what happens. So what we have here in Scotland is mainly older ”Brit” folks in and younger folks out and that is what leads to the ongoing unsustainable position, which is quite different from that in England.”

  335. Ottomanboi says:

    Some on here seem exercised by the need for Nationalists to stay ‘legal’.
    There is plenty of online stuff indicating that without Westminster say so, May is no Cameron on this issue, any 2nd indyref might well be illegal.
    A Catalan style situation would then arise.
    What then?
    Sturgeon’s position seems to be that of wait and see what the UK gov. concedes. As a British Unionist hard line can be expected from May & co and the DUP backup crew on constitutional matters, which are reserved to London anyway, she may wait a good long time.
    Indyref2 without Westminster legal consent? Inconceivable? really?
    Some wit says i ought to wear a badge…so i can be pointed out to the authorities as a trouble maker? Nice one!

  336. yesindyref2 says:

    “Until devolution, (and that too is illegal)”

    LOL. Yes, well, probably, and probably the Union itself is illegal, as the Scottish Parliament was dissolved by Proclamation by the Queen’s Commissioner a couple of days before said Commissioner would have had the authority to dissolve the Scottish Parliament, so therefore he couldn’t have had and it didn’t happen.

    But apart from that small detail, which means that Westminster truly is illegitimate as people would say using another word, Westminster is Glorious, long to rule over us. Or US, and looked what happened there over tea bags being thrown into a harbour!

  337. stu mac says:

    @Thepnr says:
    26 September, 2018 at 8:25 pm
    @yesindyref2 @ 7:26 pm

    Totally agree, there is nothing, I’ll say it again NOTHING more likely to stop the progress of support for Independence growing than for it to descend into a rabble holding rammy’s on street corners.

    I agree and one has to wonder about the true motivations of at least some of the folk who try to promote this.

  338. yesindyref2 says:

    It’s been pointed out to Alf Baird God knows how many times, that he only adds up those who come IN to Scotland from the rUK, and doesn’t bother with those who LEAVE Scotland who originate in the rUK according to the census data. He’s out by a country mile, a factor of 10 or more!

    It’s nett migration thst counts, and that’s quite low.

  339. frogesque says:

    @Collie: 7.20 & 8.49

    Sentiments and frustrations are high just now. I feel The National did itself and the Indy movement a bad turn going off half cocked without fact checking.

    We are where we are though and friendly fire is counter productive. We should all put our egos to one side. So we can’t have stalls, so what? We can match and have a picnic.

    Myself I intend to raise my flag high at the Haymarket end of Princes Street, walk to the Gardens to meet up with like minded folk then make our way up to the Castle/Johnson Street to join the rally.

    I have a right to peaceful protest which is exactly what I intend to do. I do not need anyone, especially Yessers, telling me otherwise or potentially stirring trouble that could lead to injury or worse.

    If Edinburgh City centre cannot cope with the influx of folk then those in City Chambers should think long and hard at sporting venues like Murryfield

    We will march, we will be peaceful, we will be seen. A stall or tent won’t make any difference.

  340. yesindyref2 says:

    @stu mac
    It’s not the first time for that one.

  341. Fred says:

    @ Colin Alexander & his “Triple Lock!” Is this you rabbiting on aboot the “Largs Lavvy Doors” again? Check the Holyrood toileting arrangements before U set oot!

  342. Petra says:

    @ yesindyref2 says at 9:24 am … ”Petra – It’s been pointed out to Alf Baird God knows how many times, that he only adds up those who come IN to Scotland from the rUK, and doesn’t bother with those who LEAVE Scotland who originate in the rUK according to the census data. He’s out by a country mile, a factor of 10 or more! It’s net migration that counts, and that’s quite low.”

    Well I don’t know Alf Baird, yesindyref2, but what I do know, by using my eyes and ears, is that more and more people seem to be moving to Scotland from rUK, many are elderly, many are buying up properties leading to local youngsters being frozen out of the housing market, many Scots are moving elsewhere including down south and many more people from rUK are now holding key positions in Scotland. One just has to watch STV news every night to verify the latter.

    I’d also like to see the statistics broken down in relation the the massive rise in usage of our NHS, Homecare services, paedophile numbers, homelessness etc, etc.

  343. Collie says:

    Frogesque 9.30am

    Excellent post and you put my point across far better than I could ever have done.

    Stop the personal attacks on individual Yes Campaigners, it does us no favours and the Daily Record would just love the Yes Movement to be at each others throats.

  344. Dorothy Devine says:

    Nana , thanks for the links as always.

    The Ian Dale one was a revelation, apart from the insult to those who posted in response to his request for questions , I had never seen the video of his attack on the anti nuclear protester of a certain age.

    How absolutely appalling was that! I’m surprised he wasn’t jailed for assault .

    After reading his idiotic disparaging of ‘cybernats’and watching that video I have surmised the creature is a coward and a bully and worthy of nothing.

  345. gus1940 says:

    Re HES ban on politics in Holyrood Park – my recollection of my sole attendance at the Miners Gala in the park in 1959 was that there was a bloody great marquee complete with Dance Floor, Band and extremely busy bar – bigger than about 50 stalls.

    Let us also remember what the Licensing Laws were in 1959 and this was the middle of the afternoon.

    I think that at that time the leader of the Scottish Miners was Communist Abe Moffat and I don’t suppose that his speech to the crowd was in the slightest way political.

  346. CameronB Brodie says:

    Re. immigration. It would appear that Whitehall’s “hostile environment”, which is amplified through the media, is possibly having an effect on Scotland’s attitude towards Others. We appear to be lagging in the racism stakes though, which might be due to differences in national cultural identities? Only a guess. 🙂

    Scottish Public Opinion

    Executive summary

    Generating a clearer understanding of Scotland’s attitudes to immigration is important to the independence debate.

    At a UK level, immigration has for some time been one of the most salient issues in policy debates. The issue looms large over all political parties, often dominating media debates and stimulating impassioned exchanges in venues ranging from local pubs to Westminster. And numerous polls and surveys have documented Britain’s views of immigration as well….

    ….But the basic facts about immigration are quite different in Scotland, and it is important to see what people think about immigration in that context. Scotland saw, proportionally, a greater increase in its migrant population than any of the other nations of the UK between 2001 and 2011, but its migrant population remains relatively small and its population density low in comparison with many other parts of the UK (Migration Observatory 2013).

    This report is the first major systematic analysis focusing specifically on Scottish public opinion about immigration to Scotland. It is the result of a survey of a representative sample of more than 2000 people in Scotland and a further 2000 people in England and Wales, who provided comparative data. The survey was undertaken online by the respected polling company YouGov in October 2013.

    The report has three primary sets of findings. First, overall attitudes to immigration in Scotland are less negative than in the rest of Britain, although falling short of majority support for increasing or even keeping the the same level of immigration. Second, in Scotland as in the rest of Britain, public opinion differentiates between types of immigrants, with markedly different attitudes toward various sub-groups and categories. Third, there is a complex if not quite contradictory relationship between immigration attitudes and constitutional issues. Each of these sets of results is outlined further below.

    Key data points are as follows:
    Overall attitudes to immigration

    A majority in Scotland (58%) support reduced immigration to Scotland, but more people in Scotland think immigration is good for Scotland (41%) than say it is bad for Scotland (31%).

    Compared with the rest of Britain, there is less opposition to immigration (in England and Wales 75% support reduced immigration) and it ranks lower on the public’s list of priorities (fourth in Scotland, compared to second in England and Wales).

    Public Attitudes towards Migration in Scotland: Exceptionality and Possible Policy Implications


    Scotland is often perceived as having a relatively welcoming view towards migrants and is presented as such by its politicians and policymakers. This positioning sits within a broader political context in which the Scottish Government favours immigration but has limited policy levers with which to directly influence it. This paper seeks to scrutinise the supposition that Scotland can be seen as ‘different’ to the rest of the UK in terms of how immigration is perceived in the public realm. This is pursued through the analysis of attitudinal data to explore public views on migration, the potential drivers of these perceptions and their implications for future immigration policy in the context of the 2014 referendum on the constitutional future of Scotland. The research finds that the public in Scotland does hold relatively positive views towards migration and that this could be related to Scotland’s particular experience of population in and out movements. However there is evidence of some (growing) hostility towards migration on the part of the general public in Scotland and a possible link between nationalist leanings and opposition to ‘Others’. These findings have significant implications for debates regarding possible future immigration policies in Scotland.

    Keywords: constitutional change, immigration, public attitudes, referendum, Scotland, UK

    Net migration and Scotland’s population in the run-up to the EU referendum


    1. It is sometimes suggested that the rate of overseas migration to Scotland should be increased in order to grow and rejuvenate its population. In fact, Scotland’s population has remained above five million for fifty years, and it is projected by National Records of Scotland (NRS) to grow by 7%, or 340,000, by 2039.

    2. All serious studies have found that immigration is no answer to ageing populations as is the case in most Western societies as medical facilities improve. Raising the retirement age as health improves is a much better way forward.

    3. About half the international migration to Scotland is from the EU. A proposal to impose work permits would cut out EU migration into lower-skilled work and reduce net international migration by about 4,000 a year. This would leave overall migration at just under 16,000 year, in line with the assumption in the NRS projection mentioned above. Such a reduction would be in line with Scottish public opinion which strongly favours a lower rate of immigration.

    Scotland’s Population

    4. It is often claimed that Scotland has a declining population. It did indeed decline from 1975-2002 but has fluctuated above the level of five million for the past 50 years. From 2004 onwards the Scottish population has increased by at least 0.3% a year.[1] In the space of ten years it rose by 263,000 reaching 5,350,000 in mid-2014.[2]

  347. haudonthenoo says:

    I was not aware of Ian Dale, jeez what an ignorant bully++.

  348. Fred says:

    @ Nana, Ian Dale’s Diary superb!

    Collie has the right of it, U know what family arguments are like. “Ma Maw never liked you!” ad nauseum.

    Nae Splitters!

  349. auld highlander says:

    Petra @9.15
    A couple of weeks ago I was talking to a sassenach who owns a couple of properties in our beloved land and he rents them out for the summer, he also has a couple of sassenach friends who live in the south who also bought a property here to rent. There is also a sir somebody or other from london who has a few flats overlooking the river in Inverness, again rented out to muppets who are willing to pay the sky high prices.

  350. Dr Jim says:

    Ian Dale’s a lovely man … the rest of his people
    it’s just us inferior people he has a problem with, but I’m sure Jacob Rees Mogg has a plan to thin us out

    Jacob’s lovely too

  351. Daisy Walker says:

    Reading up more on Brexit.

    Nothing good about it at all. The jobs are starting to leave.

    At least the penny is beginning to drop with the Farmers… finally!

    Brexshit and Bad.

    Thanks for all the links Nana.

  352. heraldnomore says:

    Woe, woe and thrice woe – another 30m barrels of that damned black stuff coming our way…

    Cursed we are, cursed.

    Never mind Norway’s Oil Fund, even Alaska pay out a dividend every year to every citizen from the income produced by the capital invested when the oil price was high.

    And we’re up to our proverbials in debt. Make you greet.

  353. Glamaig says:

    auld highlander says:
    27 September, 2018 at 10:35 am

    I’m not so bothered by who owns stuff as long as its transparent, they pay tax to the Scottish Government, and their use of it is determined by our laws.

    Ownership boils down to rights, and what those rights are is up to us.

  354. Chick McGregor says:

    “Never mind Norway’s Oil Fund, even Alaska pay out a dividend every year to every citizen from the income produced by the capital invested when the oil price was high.”

    Yes, worth highlighting yet again that even in an avaricious right-wing America, individual oil bearing states are allowed to keep that revenue.

  355. galamcennalath says:

    Daisy Walker says:

    Brexit. Nothing good about it at all.

    The sad thing is there are some astonishly misled gullible people who still believe it will make things better for ordinary folks. I can’t get my head round that level of stupidity.

    Perhaps even sadder, there are individuals who stand to gain from Brexit and so are driven by personal greed. All this off shore tax evasion stuff. Also, an ideology which wants all tax burdens removed from companies and accumulated wealth, and shifted on to the ordinary person via income tax, not insurance, and various ‘spending’ taxes. And having a bonfire of people’s rights, and safety regulations. Very nasty dark evil ideas.

  356. Graf Midgehunter says:

    For those of us who are totally frustrated by the lack of SNP decision making for INDYREF2, it’s hard to be cool and calm in the face of Brit.Nat. onslaughts everyday.

    I’m no exception.. 🙁

    There’s a reason for it and Gordon Ross explains it very well with his video:

    Patience is in this case our strength.

    In the meantime get out campaigning/canvassing/educating, preparing the ground for the day when the word GO comes from Nicola. 🙂

  357. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Oh dear! Oh dear! Oh dear! – Disaster for Scotland.

    Brent Crude’s price is rising again, up to 81.91 dollars per barrell this morning.

    No, no, Scotland cannot have all this largesse. No, no, all that money would only harm us – better by far that we allow Westminster to adminster and spend it for us. After all, they will look after such a key part of the UK and do their best for us.

    Aye Right!!!!!

  358. stewartb says:

    heraldnomore @ 11:17 am

    You wrote: “.. even Alaska pay out a dividend every year to every citizen from the income produced by the capital invested when the oil price was high.”

    Thanks for this: I had no idea – what a great place this is to learn about all sorts of new things! Your post prompted me to delve a little. Others may be interested in this summary.

    Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) – aka “the Alaska Dividend” – has been paying annual dividends to Alaskans since 1982 with no conditions except citizenship, residency, and the willingness to fill out a form. It comes out of the returns of the Alaska Permanent Fund (APF) investments, a portfolio of diversified assets into which the government has invested a small part of the state’s oil revenue each year “as a way to turn the temporary stream of oil money into permanent wealth”.

    The dividend fluctuates with the markets. In 2008, the dividend (plus a onetime supplement of $1,200) reached a high of $3,269 per person, or $16,345 for a family of five. After the financial crash of 2008, the dividend declined, reaching $878 per year in 2012, still $4,390 for a family of five. With world markets recovering, the article (dated 2013) notes that the total value of the APF recently reach a new high of $46 billion.


    Two other things stand out for me from this article: (i) the creation of the APF seems to have been a democratic decision within the power of the citizens of Alaska; and (ii) more broadly, the author of the article compares the benefits of the ‘Alaska Dividend’ to a form of citizens’ basic income.

    The 2018 dividend is $1,600. For more details see .

  359. CameronB Brodie says:

    Correct link for Scottish Public Opinion, above.

  360. CameronB Brodie says:

    Scratch that, I’ve gotten myself in a right twist today. This is the correct heading and link to the first paper. The link I’d provided incorrectly was of intrest though.

    I hope folk noticed a difference in tone of analysis, across the different sources. Knowledge production has to jump through hoops in order to avoid incorporating lazy assumptions which lead to bias. 😉

    Public Attitudes towards Migration in Scotland: Exceptionality and Possible Policy Implications

  361. Meg merrilees says:

    Heard an interview with a senior Irish politician on the tail end of the Today prog this morning. Don’t know his name.

    They were discussing the border scenario and the backstop. My jaw dropped!!! as the interviewer asked our respectable Southern Irish politician why his Government was creating such a problem over the border issue, after all, it’s worked for ages, two countries one in, one out of the EU, land border, different laws, different currency, why is your Government being so awkward about it…..

    Long Pause …

    ..then in a cool, calm and collected, polite but brief reply, the Southern Irish politician quietly pointed out that the problem was actually in Northern Ireland and had been created by the British Government and the situation in N. Ireland ( code I think for unreasonable DUP influence) and if that got sorted then he was sure that the border issue would be resolved as everyone wants to see a deal.

    I think it was a light bulb moment for the interviewer!!!

  362. HandandShrimp says:

    I see that SNP have spoken to the People’s Vote and are laudably still trying to retain Scotland’s place in the EU. Complete clowns like Rennie are demanding that the SNP buy a pig in poke over a second referendum regardless of what that might offer but remain implacably opposed to a second indyref if we are dragged out the EU. Wille says…

    “To be brutal, what he wants is he wants me to back independence if he backs a people’s vote on Brexit. That’s what he’s trying to get to and that is not going to happen.”

    I know we all think Willie is not desperately bright but I think this is actually blatantly dishonest. No one is expecting a dyed in the wool union flag waving nationalist like Willie to back Scottish self determination. All that is being asked that he is intellectually honest and see that a second independence referendum is a fair question in light of the radically altered circumstances. I have every expectation that he would man the Better Together Brexit barricades in the event of such a vote. When Cameron agreed to the first vote I didn’t expect him to campaign for Yes.

  363. Jack Murphy says:

    Scottish Parliament TV.

    TODAY 27/09/2018

    Now Archived:

  364. orri says:

    Thing that Forward as One article is written on the same mistaken premise as Westminster would have us believe.

    The problem is that Holyrood has the power to hold consultative referendum.

    It does not normally hold the power to change the constitution of the UK as a whole unilaterally.

    If an independence referendum was a victory for the Pro-Independence side then without a S30 order there’d be no “legal” way to implement that result.

    It would then be up to Westminster to remove their claim to jurisdiction over Scotland.

    An S30 might be desirable but that might also result in Westminster chancing their arm in laying down conditions like minimum turnout or even islands or part of the mainland remaining protectorates. Or even allowing the UK to retain Faslane for the immediate future until it can build a new base.

    If Holyrood hold a consultative referendum as it’s current devolved powers allow under international observers and with a fair franchise that passes then Scotland would be well on it’s way to independence. Certainly Westminster might need all the friends it can get post Brexit.

  365. gus1940 says:

    Compared with Eckgate which was shrieked at us for about 3 weeks isn’t it amazing how our wonderful media seem to have lost interest in Briggsgate after only a couple of days?

  366. jfngw says:

    Jeeso, Theresa May giving Nicola Sturgeon advice on how to govern better. A bit like getting elderly care advice from Harold Shipman.

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.

↑ Top