Introducing Devo Nano, Part 2
[NOTE: The content of this article will be added to Part 1 after today for easy future reference. This one will be left here so that comments will be preserved. Comment on either this post or the earlier one as you see fit.]
Let’s proactively synergise some more inter-operational solutions!
17. It could be argued that as the effective “manifesto” of the No campaign, in the context of the Labour voters who ultimately will in whole or large part decide the outcome of the referendum, Labour’s Devolution Commission paper is the most important document in the 307-year history of the Union. So one would assume it would be clear, concise and powerful. If one had never met Scottish Labour.
If you’ve suddenly burst into tears trying to plough through all that pompous management drivel – which goes on for a whole further page in similar vein – let us helpfully summarise it for you, for by now we feel no pain or other human emotions.
It says “We’ll give more power to local people, but we don’t have the faintest idea which powers or how”. Okay, let’s move on.
—————————————————————————————————————
18. This next part is quite telling.
“Full devolution of responsibility for delivery of the Work Programme to local authorities on the basis that they are better placed to meet the requirements of local labour markets and this would enhance democratic accountability.
However, we believe it is essential and right that the Scottish Parliament play a key role in providing strategic oversight of local authority delivery of this service.”
By common consensus the Work Programme has been a complete disaster, spending billions of pounds in order to achieve – literally – worse results that would have come from doing nothing at all. Does Labour propose to give the Scottish Parliament the ability to end it and use the money more wisely? No. It just wants to put poorly-paid councillors in charge rather than ministers. Awesome.
(Also, there, a sneak preview of Labour’s attitude if it wins in 2015.)
—————————————————————————————————————
19. What about Scotland’s abundant renewable resources? Do we get those?
“A Memorandum of Understanding between the Scottish Government should be agreed with the Crown Estate becoming accountable to the Scottish Parliament, with devolution agreed in respect of their common objectives on the development and management of the seabed and foreshore, and those local authorities with an interest in this area should be fully consulted throughout as to its contents.”
Nope. We get to collect the Queen’s money for her.
—————————————————————————————————————
20. Anyone for some more empty gestures?
“We recommend establishing a constitutional guarantee of powers to local government.”
See (6).
—————————————————————————————————————
21. And at that point we’re actually pretty much done. The remainder of the paper is just a recap, listing the recommendations in bullet-point form. But we’ll have a quick scoot through them anyway just to see if we’ve missed anything, and because some of them sound even more ridiculous boiled down to a sentence, eg:
“RECOMMENDATION: Whilst it is inconceivable that the Scottish Parliament would be abolished, we believe the Scottish Parliament should become permanently entrenched in the constitution and indissoluble.”
Translation: the Scottish Parliament will never be abolished, so let’s waste our time legislating (as our first listed priority) to stop it from being abolished, even though that legislation itself could simply be abolished.
NB: The UK does not have, in any tangible form, any such thing as a “constitution”. It has laws and conventions, any and all of which can be repealed and/or ignored as the government of the day sees fit.
—————————————————————————————————————
22. Now for something controversial:
“RECOMMENDATION: Partnership arrangements between Parliaments and Governments whose responsibilities will inevitably overlap should be established, so that they work together for the common good, safeguarding civil and political rights, and promoting social and economic rights such as welfare and full employment. “
Translation: it’s probably best if governments co-operate with each other, as a general rule. We’re not absolutely sure that it needed two years and a dedicated commission to come to that conclusion.
—————————————————————————————————————
23. You’re right, that doesn’t sound enough. Let’s beef it up.
“RECOMMENDATION: There is a strong case for giving partnership arrangements a legal existence, in the form of statutory obligations on both administrations to co-operate in the public interest, or through the creation of a formal Intergovernmental Council or its equivalent with the duty to hold regular meetings. “
Translation: Let’s make sure the simple principle of basic human co-operation is extensively codified, which will encourage people to look for and exploit loopholes in it, because that’s how people think.
—————————————————————————————————————
24. Check priorities are in order.
“RECOMMENDATION: The following matters should remain reserved as they are key to the maintenance of the union: [long list of almost aspects of governance, from defence to regulation of animal medicine]”
Translation: Remember, above all else, that this isn’t about what’s best for the people of Scotland – it’s about whatever will preserve and maintain the Union.
We must ensure, as a matter of deliberate and conscious policy, perhaps even law, that Scotland is never better off than the UK as a whole. If that means taking more money from Scottish taxpayers and giving it to the rest of the UK, thereby helping Labour win votes in English marginals, better still.
—————————————————————————————————————
And that, readers, two years in the making, is Scottish Labour’s vision for a post-No Scotland. We get employment tribunals, a little bit of health and safety, and a cut in Barnett funding in exchange for taxation “powers” which never can and never will be used to do anything other than exactly mirror the UK tax structure, and the chance to take quite a lot of tedious paperwork out of Westminster’s hands.
Even if we were to somehow grow our economy (a difficult task, as the paper expressly and explicitly specifies that “financial and economic matters” must remain reserved to Westminster), we’d hardly be able to do anything with the money, because 99% of welfare will also remain reserved, as will nearly everything else.
And of course, best of all, we get to keep paying for Trident and aircraft carriers and going abroad to shoot thousands and thousands of brown people, as the queues for foodbanks stretch the length of our High Streets.
It’s quite the counter-offer, we’ll give them that.
Or … ‘You’ll have had your Devo’ as they say in Edinburgh.
What a rabble are Labour, too close to Libor and too far from liberty.
Riddoch ripping into this on R4. Massie up next.
Labour want to add to YES.
Labour seem to have taken a leaf out of WC Field’s life manual:
“I always carry a bottle of whisky with me in case I see a snake. Which I also carry.”
A derisory offer not even worthy of serious consideration.
The areas to be retained are the areas that drive my desire for independence.
My back o a fag. packet sums indicate the £2bn additional income is only about 20% of all Scottish taxes (not 40% as claimed), and would result additional spending commitment of £2.3bn.
You would think that with two ex Chancellors they’d be able to balance the books. Oh wait…
What, exactly, is Scottish Labour?
This document ISN’T a promise of jam tomorrow.
It’s a promise of a loan of some over-ripe raspberries at some point in the near future, harvest permitting, assuming Labour can manage to catch the berry bus.
We’ll then be expected to supply our own sugar, boil the jam ourselves and then present the finished goods to London for consumption on their morning crumpets.
Scotland’s breakfast toast will remain jam-free and we’ll be told to be grateful that we have butter…
Just saw the Lamentable one on the telly. I actually hate her more than I ever did Thatcher.
Think of all the screaming, fighting, clenched teeth, blood and backstabbing warfare that went into a process that should have produced at least sextuplets.
What did we get? an ominously quiescent infant barely able to survive in it’s cardboard box pretend incubator.
What are it’s chances of survival?
I just watched brigadoon netflix to get a better idea where labour devolution commission are coming from.
Do I see broadcasting is absent from those things esential to the maintenance of the Union? Shureley shome …
However they have given the game away with “Power and responsibility must march together.”
We’re not in power so you can’t hold us responsible for anything we’ve just said or are about to say, so there.
“Do I see broadcasting is absent from those things esential to the maintenance of the Union?”
No, it’s in there.
Is it just me, or does that stuff about devolving power to groups of councils sound like Labour potentially setting up an alternative Parliament?
Well, at least we can now see the Jam Tomorrow on offer:
pic.twitter.com/3JYYWTUJQX
@Rev Stuart
“The use of the phrase “the power to raise around £2bn more in revenues” is deeply misleading in any event. It suggests the Scottish Government having £2bn more in its coffers, when in fact by default its budget will be exactly the same – the “extra” £2bn is merely a replacement for £2bn in block grant from Westminster which Labour proposes to do away with.”
I just don’t get this, no government no matter how idiotic would raise income tax for people living in Scotland only to see an equivalent amount stripped from the block grant.
Surely any additional revenue raised would only be worthwhile if it could be spent in Scotland? Lunacy of the highest order.
“Where there is no vision the people perish”
” above all else, that this isn’t about what’s best for the people of Scotland – it’s about whatever will preserve and maintain the Union”
Spot on, Stu!
Which is always how Labour saw devolution. To them, it was never more than a tool to maintain London Rule of everything important and to hinder the relentless movement towards full self determination.
Here’s the Labour Propaganda Show to explain it for the numpties (us).
Surely Devo-No-No is the way to go in terms of a chanting song !!
Just heard some 25-30’ish year old ‘nobel laureate of Economics’ in blue overalls on the BBC espousing that Sterling does not belong to folk who are Scottish.
The BBC clearly only broadcast the thickest folk displaying symptoms of BT fear.
There are masses of us educated folk, who would go into explanations about fiscal and monetary policy… assets versus liabilities etc. Fat snowballs chance of anyone like that getting air time, as clearly seen by the dumbing down of the population by a sinister and manipulative BBC, who are actually contracted to ‘Educate’ btw!
Fuck em… and ever paying a penny of Scottish Sterling to them ever again.
Hi Stu. Not in the narrative of the recommendations in the .jpg above.
“Hi Stu. Not in the narrative of the recommendations in the .jpg above.”
In this one, though:
link to wingsoverscotland.com
DOESN’T ANYONE READ THE DAY’S PREVIOUS POSTS?
SLABs stirring title looks like it was made by Dilbert’s random mission statement generator.
At least they’ve confirmed there is no jam tomorrow.
Sorry, Rev, Brian Taylor was gushing in his praise of the proposals.
I am astonished at the BBC’s ability to spin this the way they have.
Absolutely pathetic.
Even the bit about securing the continued existence of the Scottish parliament in a constitution is laughable. The UK is the only country in the western world not to have a constitution and Westminster has no plans to draw one up.
It’s all drivel.
Labour thinks it won’t get voted into the Scottish Parliament anytime soon , so if there,s a no vote , they will take power away from the Scottish Government and devolve power to councils , where there are a few labour held councils.
@Alfresco Dent , you call J Lamont , lamentable . I would call her contemptible ! She is actually conniving to do the dirty on Scotland !
Surely the Labour Party have had over 100 years to write this report.
They could have at least managed to photocopy at least one set of the full report to go with the Executive Summary.
It reads as if David Brent was involved in some of the wording.
Scottish Devolesson
Naw means Naw
bfh–I’m quite shocked how weak these proposals are,considering the pre briefing in the press.just bottled it.
Rev, not only do “we get to keep paying for Trident” but we will still have the obscenities anchored on our coast. Heard Murphy at lunchtime repeating Lamont’s claim that Labour want multilateral disarmament but where’s the evidence that they are actually doing anything about it?
Actually the thought of double devolution of broadcasting quite appeals.
/*irony*/Tonight on Kingdom TV, Gordon Brown claims credit for instigating Kirkcaldy food bank. David Ross takes over as Council chief and promises to uphold the high standards of his predecessor, …/*end irony*/
Thanks Stu for deciphering this heid-fanglin equivalent of bubble-wrap braille, an unenvialbe task indeed.
Available on kindle? Amazon on stand-by for the deluge of orders?
I’ll look forward to finding my copy discreetly slid under the cludgie door next time I run out of sh**e paper.
Phsyco babble!
Phsyco babble!
What do we want?
A new health and safety board!
When do we want it?
Now! Or not.
*Wonders* – perhaps there’s so little substance to this, that they’ve had trouble actually making the full report any longer than the summary, so have had to publish what they’ve got.
“*Wonders* – perhaps there’s so little substance to this, that they’ve had trouble actually making the full report any longer than the summary, so have had to publish what they’ve got.”
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Even the executive summary is padded wildly, with big chunks just repeated word-for-word. I don’t know how much more bullshit they can have.
Maybe they were so busy arguing until last week that they just have to knock the whole thing up on Monday night.
Red Squirrel
I was a great fan of Dilbert’s Mission Statement Generator and I agree it has put to work and some on this. Dear God! It is death by gibberish and double speak.
However, it is very, very good for the Yes campaign because there is nothing to fear in this steaming pile of Labour in-fighting compromise and sleight of hand.
I can’t actually believe Johann is genuinely happy with this. It falls so far short it is not fit for any purpose (or porpoise).
Look into my eyes, into my eyes, into my eyes…
BBC in Scotland teatime tv news was really really really really excited about it all. Shameless UKOK propaganda by fat bloke rapidly turning into a big beach ball with feet, wrapped in a union jack.
How can any body be responsible if it doesn’t have the power to change things? Does number 18 harken a ‘regional’ minimum wage? Does number 19 & 20 mean that the Scottish Parliament is to get(supposedly under Labour) the rights to the crown estates including the foreshores,but is then expected to use it only with the permission of any council in that area? Does this mean a pay rise for councillors as they get more powers?We have recently seen what councillors would do when given extra powers,(trying to keep out nationally elected ministers).
I think councillors may well have to stand for annual election if they have extra powers.
An old Johnny Mercer song as a tribute to Mr Darling
link to youtube.com
Gather ’round me, everybody
Gather ’round me while I’m preachin’
Feel a sermon comin’ on me
The topic will be sin and that’s what I’m ag’in’
If you wanna hear my story
The settle back and just sit tight
While I start reviewin’
The attitude of doin’ right
You’ve got to accentuate the positive
Eliminate the negative
And latch on to the affirmative
Don’t mess with Mister In-Between
You’ve got to spread joy up to the maximum
Bring gloom down to the minimum
Have faith or pandemonium’s
Liable to walk upon the scene
To illustrate my last remark
Jonah in the whale, Noah in the ark
What did they do just when everything looked so dark?
(Man, they said “We’d better accentuate the positive”)
(“Eliminate the negative”)
(“And latch on to the affirmative”)
Don’t mess with Mister In-Between (No!)
Don’t mess with Mister In-Between
(Ya got to spread joy up to the maximum)
(Bring gloom down to the minimum)
(Have faith or pandemonium’s)
(Liable to walk upon the scene)
You got to ac (yes, yes) -cent-tchu-ate the positive
Eliminate (yes, yes) the negative
And latch (yes, yes) on to the affirmative
Don’t mess with Mister In-Between
No, don’t mess with Mister In-Between
Sorry couldn’t help it. Thanks to Moridura for the link
Found the authors.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVszcAgsBxs
@seasick Dave
“Sorry, Rev, Brian Taylor was gushing in his praise of the proposals.
I am astonished at the BBC’s ability to spin this the way they have.”
This sickens me. This guy in particular, knows the effect of his opinion on BBC. Its an abuse of power and position. These commentators deliberately communicate these types of ‘gushing’ sound bites in the full knowledge that he will catch some people out.
They know EXACTLY what they are doing.
And so it continues, we allowed the establishment to run our media and we pay the price, because they will use this power to keep things in their favour.
This reminded me of what the new wife said to her not so well endowed new husband on their honeymoon after a two year engagement,
“Is that it…???
@ericmac
Where’s the wee boy in the crowd when you want him.
“The King is in the altogether, the all together the most remarkable suit of clothes that I have ever seen”
As sung by Danny Kaye.
OT folks
Has anyone seen the petition lodged with Holyrood?
link to scottish.parliament.uk
link to scottish.parliament.uk
Disgraceful i think.The fact that it’s open to anyone on the planet is of concern to me.
i would bet a months earnings that lamont had nothing to do with this report. she will have contributed not a jot. i believe she would not understand anything more complicated than basic, she has been chosen the leader of a corrupt bunch of individuals who like her do not have the intellect to be in the job they are in. this report is direct from london and she has been taught her lines for interviews and will vanish the morra.
This makes me feel physically sick. Why does SLAB want to harm the people who live here ?
Derek
They most likely don’t think any of it will come to pass. It is an attempt at a spoiler to attract the Devo Max preference vote. However, I think the proposals are way too timid to do that and the sight of Brian in a ra ra skirt cheer leading the proposals probably won’t attract many (although it takes all sorts).
@derek cameron
The Queen’s shilling Derek.
Bought and sold for English gold. True three hundred years ago and true now.
M4rkyboy – Don’t worry. The people who matter, the people of Scotland, will see through this despicable little ploy for what it is: treachery.
Defence should remain a reserved matter who’s gonnae defend us?
I remember a night in the early nineties, I was lying in bed and the room started shaking, my first thought was shit must be Faslane, turns out it was a small earth tremor in the Firth off Ailsa Craig, I guess what I’m saying is that we live under the shadow of the imperialists WMD and anything could happen and it’s goodbye West of Scotland.
The one and only chance we have to rid our nation of these immoral weapons is Sept 18th, I don’t care about devo-nano, currency,eu,border controls all I care about is my children and future generations free from the spectre of imperialist weapons of doom.
The Labour Party are now part of the imperialist system and must not be trusted as custodians of our nations future
@ Seasick Dave
Whenever I see Brian Taylor I think he’s about to burst.
Total own goal for Labour, great to see! What a silly bunch they are, hopefully loads more yessers as a result of such a failure of a plan! 🙂
@Derek Cameron: This makes me feel physically sick. Why does SLAB want to harm the people who live here ?
You’re not the only one positively repulsed by this. I cannot understand how Scottish Labour can so boldly state that it’s more important for Westminster to control welfare than for Scotland – and that extends to its destruction. It’s more important for Westminster to have control, even if it means a party is in power dedicated to its ruin.
Think about it. Labour would rather see the welfare system destroyed than in the hands of the Scottish people.
As with Calman, the starting point was to make sure that the Union is preserved. That is the only way that this makes sense so, like you Rev, I believe it has got nothing to do with what is best for Scotland but what is best for (Scottish)Labour. Evidence? The eponymous Arthur Midwinter and Jim Gallacher are on the team.
But my brainstorm idea is that there may be a secret Scottish Labour Machivalian strategy hidden in here to encourage Scotland to vote ‘Yes’by making proposals so stupid and vapid that even apolitical punters will reject them while out of touch Westminster takes them at face value. Johann of course will be out of the loop while behind the scene forces unknown – maybe Broon, maybe Bomber Harris are plotting away for the leadership of Labour in an independent Scotland.
Plausible? The thing that makes sense at any rate is the fact that it is such a damp squib. As someone has said elsewhere, this is ‘punch the air’ time for the ‘Yes’ side.
@Dan
It’s the one subject in the debate that, whenever it’s brought up, raises my blood pressure.
The Govt papers from the 70’s explicitly recommend this exact tactic to undermine the case for Indy.
The absence of any local groups tells you that this is not a campaign for independence by the people but a campaign for annexation by London.
Disgusting in the extreme and one of the main reasons i despise Westminster.
Well said Dan. I have absolute confidence that that will be the case. I heard Jim Murphy spouting a load of gaffe today on BBC Radio during a school debate. Astounding how SLAB are trying to mind bend young folks and saying that the SG/SNP have not got a clue. Results speak for themselves, especially when compared to what the previous efforts have (failed) to achieve.
We need fundamental change, not historical rhetorical political emptiness.
This sums up Labour me me me.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yuj1bKFldlc
@ Flower of Scotland
There’s a better word for her but it’s somehow not encouraged, yet. I’d really like to ask her why she thinks her fellow Scots are somehow uniquely incapable of controlling their own affairs. She should never be allowed near our weans again.
Margie Maxwell, a “lifelong Labour” supporter from Easterhouse is demanding “independence now” –
– see latest “surge in Yes vote” article on Guardian website home page.
Much as I support independence, this is 100% wrong I’m afraid. The fact that the UK constitution is not written in a single document with “The Constitution” at the top of it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have one (99% of US constitutional law is Supreme Court precedent anyway).
See for example:
Loughlin ‘The British Constitution – A Very Short Introduction’ (ISBN 0199697698)
Turpin and Tomkins ‘British Government and the Constitution’ (ISBN 0521185114)
“Much as I support independence, this is 100% wrong I’m afraid.”
It’s not “100% wrong”, because I said “in any tangible form”.
Whatever people say, a constitution that isn’t written down ISN’T a constitution. It’s custom and practice, easily overridden on a whim.
@M4rkyboy
Amusingly, within the petition PDF there is a section for the number of petitioners. I wondered how many people were interested after they stated in the background information section:
“there are many people who have expressed support for local
independence, and there are also people who…would want their island group to leave Scotland and
remain in the UK.”
The Section asks:
How many signatures have you collected so far?
Answer:
0
Thats a close tie with the number of branches in PCS (Public and Commercial Services Union) who wanted to support No.
“Has anyone seen the petition lodged with Holyrood?”
47 signatures?
so that’s Tavish Scotts family signed up then,
I would not dignify that with a comment
disgusting creature has probably never seen the shetlands.
The longest suicide note in history!
kalmar:
To be quite honest I don’t see why they should bother with a full report.
I’ve read all the other proposals, Devo-More, Devo-Plus, Ming ‘s Federalism: the best future for Scotland, and even the Labour interim report.
Work you’re way through all the graphs, figures, verbiage and management speak and you always end up with the Barnett Formula, (or whatever replaces it), and the ability to crank up income tax above the UK rates. That’s it.
This summary is all they really need because it tells us all we need to know.
Points 22 and 23.
Could such an idea be used to hamstring a Scottish Government in areas such as Education and the Scottish NHS by binding up policy with lashings of UKGov red-tape and legal contract?
I smell a rat.
@ Rev Campbell
You’re correct. (And you don’t need me to confirm it.)
The sporadic, jigsaw referencess in every legal nook and cranny character of the British constitution is why our English cousins are forced to employ a bevvy of lawyers, (a scoundrel is a better collective noun) to collate and then interpret what lies on all their statute books.
A constitution conceived and composed for the people – rather than the power elite – is something you can read in uninterrupted linear progression, one clause after another.
The British Constitution
Is an upright institution.
Immune to dissolution
Or venal prostitution…
Dearie me, just when you have lost all hope in Severin Carroll, he produces an article of this calibre:
link to theguardian.com
Severin’s an enigma.
@ Muttley79
Thanks, Muttley. I draw attention to it a few posts above but thought using the http prefix a block to access?
@ Hand & Shrimp: Googled ‘Dilbert’s Mission Statement Generator’, gave me today’s biggest laugh, thank you! 🙂
Sheech, Jaba on the box. There may be a few smashed TVs tonight, kicking the cat instead is not an option. DevoMax quoth she. And there is flabber well and truly gasted the length and breadth of the country.
“Jackie Baillie says what Labour has brought forward is an “ambitious package”.” according to the BBC website. Ambitious?? She must be joking. If that is ambitious then Scottish Labour are indeed brain-dead. Hopefully we can finally pull the plug on 18th September and then work to get a REAL Labour party with REAL ambition for the people of Scotland. What a pillock!
And after her second address to the gathering I’ve come to a decision. I’m away to respond to Yes Blair’s email – donation imminent.
WHY DOESNT THE REV BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE ACTUALLY READ WHAT HE WROTE?
Doesn’t anyone else out there find it curious that broadcasting is in the must haves but not in the resume of must haves, especially when so much of the rest of the “executive summary” is pure padding?
Is it so that they can deny limiting free speech by saying “Look at the summary page N, it isnt there.”, when it is on page N-some?
@ Andy MacNicol
I’ve always thought of Jackie Baillie as an “ambitious package.”
@muttley79
The archive link.
link to archive.is
@muttley79
The archive link.
link to archive.is
I cant be the only person thinking this? can I?
@EphemeralD
we cant even be certain that the signatures are islanders-the petition is open to anyone, any country.
The fact a territorial/constitutional matter like this is open to outside influence is beyond a joke and surely cant be considered binding.
John Swinney being far too reticent and reasonable by not tackling BBC or currency issue head on
Absolutely bizarre document from what I can tell. Well done for wading through it- maybe time for a shower? I was expecting one headline grabbing thing tangible and impressive enough for the electorate to be able to buy into it. The pointless percentage of income tax deducted from Barnett ain’t it.
Could be bloodshed at the SLAB conference. Are they trying to throw this referendum? WHAT ARE THEY THINKING?
It is all good news for Yes of course. And 24 neatly lists some of the things I am voting for Scotland to take full control of. Christ, they couldn’t even give us xenotransplantation. Can you imagine Johann Lamont being asked if that should be on the table?
He, he. I posted this on the “What you can’t have” thread, re-posted it on the previous thread, and now here. Do you think I will set up an infinite fee-back loop of mirrored realities? Do you think Scotland will disappear if the Scot’s public do not recognise the actual reality of Union0ism?
Imperialism, as defined by the Dictionary of Human Geography, as “an unequal human and territorial relationship, usually in the form of an empire, based on ideas of superiority and practices of dominance, and involving the extension of authority and control of one state or people over another.”
link to en.wikipedia.org
Is £2bn not more like 5% of scottish non-oil tax revenue, not 20%?!
“Is £2bn not more like 5% of scottish non-oil tax revenue, not 20%?!”
Labour have applied all sorts of caveats and qualifiers to get their percentages.
I think this crap from Labour might be a couple of things.
1 An opening gambit to see if they can affect the polls in any way useful to No.
2 A tentative attempt at a lowest common denominator devo extension to see if it might be agreed by the other Brit parties and therefore provide a common front against the evil nats.
Why no coverage of the north british branch of Labours proposals for DEVOSMEVIO on BBC News at 10? Coverage of Indyref by Mr Little but not this? Has it been suppressed by Ed Millband as it wouldn’t be a vote winner down south?? Or did I miss it??
Lads n lassies who or what the fuck does the Labour Party think there trying to kid with this pish
Just listening to Johann Lamont blathering. There’s a glazed look in her eyes as she tries remember the script.
Johann Lamont doesn’t accept that her plan is just a bit here and a bit there.
The Guardian headline writer has altered the “Yes Vote in Surge” heading of its earlier topic to the more uncertain, “Is the Yes campaign right to scent an upset in the air?”
More thought control from the neoliberal Unionist press.
She thinks that these are the powers which would really make a difference. She doesn’t who it is that they will make a difference to.
‘Say’.
I know he’s a politician and all but John Swinney just let his country down there on the BBC. Some of us would die for the country but he disnae want tae rock the boat? I voted for you Mr. Swinney and I’m the one not paying this TV license and risking jail. The least you can do is stand up for me!
@ Alfresco Dent
“Let his country down”?
Ah, the fickleness of the electorate.
Grouse Beater
What would have been the problem with a bit of honesty there? He just opened it up for numptie Fifers tae claim all politicians are the same. The question was a gift and an open goal.
Watching Gordon Brewer ripping JoLa a new one on newsnight Scotland…. he doesn’t appear to have read the script. If even someone from the BBC cannot accept her proposals make sense then what hope has she got?
Its a car crash of an interview. Brewer pressed her on why Scotland should be able to put itself at an income tax disadvantage but not at an advantage…. she ain’t got a clue
@Alfresco Dent: I know he’s a politician and all but John Swinney just let his country down there on the BBC. Some of us would die for the country but he disnae want tae rock the boat? I voted for you Mr. Swinney and I’m the one not paying this TV license and risking jail. The least you can do is stand up for me!
I realise your frustration, but I think Mr. Swinney made the right decision here. If he said he didn’t believe the BBC was impartial, that would give the BBC carte blanche to an all-out attack in tomorrow’s headlines – one that the SNP have been keen to avoid, even though they’re in the right. If he said he did believe they were being impartial, then he would’ve been laughed out the room as surely as Baillie was. I do wish, rather, that he just said “I’ve said all I’m willing to say” rather than repeat himself a la Michael Howard, giving the No side ammunition.
You could tell that he really, REALLY wanted to say a Yes or No (I think we all know which), but I think it would’ve been more damaging for him and to the campaign to do that than to decline a straight answer. I certainly don’t think he’s let anyone down, no matter how much I wanted him to chew the BBC out. He has to pick his battles.
It was INCREDIBLY difficult to watch, though, not least because it allowed the No side a fleeting victory in showing Mr. Swinney’s reticence, allowing them to pull the “if he can’t be straight on this, how can he be straight on anything” fallacy – ignoring the fact that this is an elected politician talking about the state broadcaster, which is rather different from evading an actual political subject.
What the Labour document is saying is that they intend to bypass the Scottish Government and exercise power via the Local Authorities, and other power groupings which they will set up, to ensure that the voters have no way of influencing decision-making. For example, after the last round of local elections, many authorities continue to be ruled by Labour, Tory and Liberal coalitions, although the SNP is the largest group. So it is not all gobbledygook but a cunning anti-democratic plan.
I take your point my friend and perhaps, in the cold light of day, I realize he had little option, but to see the moron Baillie score a point last night really hurt. For the life of me I can’t understand who votes for that woman. Who the hell is she actually speaking for?
@ Alfresco Dent
I didn’t see the interview in question, but Taranaich offers wise words.
Accusing your host of bias rarely elicits sympathy.
Viewers interpret an outburst as sour grapes, paranoia, or unwarranted and ungracious, particularly as the accuser is enjoying the broadcaster’s invitation to put forward his opinion and hospitality. There’s also a danger your debating point loses power lost in the distraction.
I suspect John Swinney found himself between a rock and a hard place. On the other hand, Baillie was the blancmange he can throw himself at without fear of injury.
Do you think that the Devo Nano report is a bit of reverse psychology from Labour? They are secretly wanting the country to vote yes. why else would they give up such a miserable about of devo? Or are they that incompetent and stupid that they have forgot 2007 and 2011. That they have had 4 leaders in Scotland since 2007. And wee eck is still there
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
“Hi Stu. Not in the narrative of the recommendations in the .jpg above.”
In this one, though:
link to wingsoverscotland.com
DOESN’T ANYONE READ THE DAY’S PREVIOUS POSTS?
Naw.
P.S.
I also hate windows8