The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Opposition For Cowards

Posted on November 01, 2016 by

Just over three and a half years ago, we ran an article about how being an opposition MP or MSP is the cushiest gig in politics. You get all the pay, benefits, holidays and status, but you don’t have to actually do very much except whinge about how rubbish the government is, which most people are happy to do for free as a hobby.

Most of the time you don’t even need to turn up at your workplace.


(Sure, there are all your constituents to deal with, but if you’re not in power all that really amounts to is forwarding their letters to the government and demanding action.)

Tomorrow, the Holyrood opposition will give us a virtuoso demonstration.

Readers should be familiar by now with this site’s position on the Offensive Behaviour (Football) Act, so we’re not going to go over it again here. But what’s going to happen in the Scottish Parliament this Wednesday is that the opposition are going to debate a Tory motion on repealing the Act.

It’s widely expected that – as long as Kezia Dugdale gets back from helping Donald Trump become President and manages to press the right button – they’ll win, with the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems and Greens all teaming up to defeat the government.

(This is despite a number of anti-bigotry organisations like Stonewall Scotland and Equality Network, who could usually count on the Greens to represent their views in Parliament, both wanting the Act to remain in place.)

The vote, however, will be a purely symbolic one. Oppositions can’t get existing acts abolished by simply voting against them. The object of the exercise is simply to score a point against the SNP, and try to bully them into repealing an Act with massive public support by saying that the Parliament is against it.

The only politically credible way (not the only technical way, but we’ll come to that shortly) to get rid of a law is to bring forward and pass a new one which supersedes the provisions of the old one. Any opposition party can do such a thing, and with the SNP’s minority status at Holyrood the votes exist to get a new Act passed.

There’s only one problem with the idea – it’s hard work.

Firstly, to propose a new law you have to know what would be in it, and none of the opposition parties have a clue what they’d actually do about sectarianism and bigotry at football (or elsewhere) rather than the OBFA. James Kelly’s dodgy “consultation” made no recommendations beyond OBFA AND SNP BAD.

(A position that’ll be familiar to anyone who’s been watching Scottish Labour on pretty much any subject over the last decade.)

Then you have to pilot the bill through its various readings and committees, keeping all the other opposition parties happy, which is no small feat. You also have to listen to public opinion, which is a problem when you want to get rid of an Act as popular as the OBFA is. You have to provide costings and get backing from the organisations who’ll be implementing your new law.

It really is rather a lot of admin and effort when you could just be gallivanting around the USA or appearing on panel shows and celebrity dance contests.

But what if – just for example – you didn’t care about political credibility, knowing that none of your parties had any plausible chance of forming a government for the next decade and would never have to be responsible for anything?

Because while you can’t just abolish an Act of Parliament by simply voting against it in a motion, what you CAN do is propose and vote into law a new bill that doesn’t do anything constructive about the problem, but which consists solely of the line “The Offensive Behaviour (Football) Act shall be repealed”.

Alert readers, then, might wonder why the opposition isn’t doing that tomorrow, and is instead wasting everyone’s time with empty showboating.

Only the most cynical, we’re sure, would suggest that all they’re actually interested in is bashing the Nats and getting in the papers. Any suggestion that they’re far too lazy to put the work in for a better law, but also too afraid to face the fury of the public for killing the OBFA with a cheap piece of political trickery, would – we’re certain – be a dreadful and unfair slight on their integrity.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 01 11 16 13:56

    Opposition For Cowards | speymouth

  2. 25 01 18 10:42

    Calm down, repealing OBFA is consensus politics in action - Autonomy Scotland

  3. 19 02 19 06:57

    The Less Than Magnificent Seven. | Newsfeed Cymru

198 to “Opposition For Cowards”

  1. schrodingers cat says:

    spot on stu

    great article

  2. FatCandy says:

    Stu, you’re being extremely unfair. The title “The Offensive Behaviour (Football) Act shall be repealed” had Kelly’s two brain cells in overdrive.

  3. Robert Graham says:

    Aye not sure what odds the bookies would give you, it probably will go exactly as you predict.
    What else can we expect from MSPs who mostly crept in the back door

  4. Grouse Beater says:

    Betting Open Now

    Kezia Dizzie will open her statement with … “Does the senator from Glass-Go Go-Van agree with me that …”

  5. Richardinho says:

    The fact that Ruth Davidson seems more concerned with getting on Strictly Come Dancing pretty much shows how seriously she takes her role in the Parliament.

  6. Mahoney says:

    Wondrous amounts of showboating. The electorate must bewondering what the opposition parties have in store to replace said law with something better? Naw, to sodding lazy to actually do any real work.

  7. Desimond says:

    If poor James ( and i used to work with the guy and he really is a nice fella) believes throwing out outdated titbits will appeal to the so called ‘working class fitba element’ and win Labour “oh they represent us” votes again then the delusion is even worse than i first thought.

    For what its worth, Im a Celtic fan, an SNP member for many years, and I’ve chaired debates this law on Etims with Fans for and fans against this law. The common census is that it in fact it is the Police have grossly overstepped the mark and taken liberty whenever possible. The SNP promised a review after a suitable period of implementation, did it ever arise?

    The law as it stands, while honourable in intention is absurdly vague and allows rampant interpretation – when it comes down to “If anyone finds anything offensive then its a crime” then its a piss poor effort and not one of the SNPs better actions over the years. The public, who like the Bill, do not see the Police “enforcing” this in whatever fashion they decide. I suspect the same actions from them at an Independence rally would be given short thrift indeed.

    But back to wee James…We all know we have bigger fish to fry and if wee James and Kez think this will help them long term, then good for them, deluded fools. No-one will care less as we are all looking at the bigger picture and actual important issues needing addressed.

    Of course it might just help all those Labour MPs, MSPS and Glasgow Councillors get free tickets to Celtic Park, but heaven forbid that would happen!

  8. Thepnr says:

    The Greens to be seen supporting a Tory motion against the Scottish Government will harm them much more than an opposition victory will harm the SNP.

    Extremely foolish IMV and I’m not certain that the Greens will side with the Tories. Will watch with interest.

  9. Big Jock says:

    Opposition for oppositions sake. Slabour’s favourite pastime. Now the Tories and the Greens are joining in. Patrick Harvie if you are reading this hang your head in shame. You have been sold the biggest con since the Vow.

    Or be a man Patrick and urge your party to defeat the Tories and Labour. Or is it a jolly wheeze to abolish a law and replace it with a vacuum.

  10. Coinneach says:

    Not to mention the fact that if it is repealed, they can then blame the SNP for anything that happens as a result.

  11. Another Union Dividend says:

    As a regular attender at football matches, I never take my kids to Old Firm games as the bile that is generated, including from some of my own team’s supporters, should not be inflicted on anyone.

    By supporting this Tory motion, Labour and others are sending the wrong message out that sectarian behaviour is acceptable.

    Its time for strict liability for clubs and deduction of points as that is the only way the Neanderthals will get the message.

    And I see Ian Union Jacket Murray is raising the FIFA poppy ban at Parliament.

    FIFA are correct in this as it creates a dangerous precedent for others to display quasi political symbols.

  12. Blackhack says:

    FatCandy @1:49 pm

    Are you trying to tell me the Kelly has two brain cells ???

  13. heedtracker says:

    spot on stu

    great article

    And not a hope in UKOK hell of ever seeing anything like this, in the grand old tory BBC led press freak show, ever.

  14. Macart says:

    Bang on the nail.

    As I posted last thread, there is only one reason for this grandstanding display tomorrow and it has bugger all to do with moral standpoint or providing an alternative.

  15. Les Wilson says:


  16. Steve B says:

    Great article. I would presumbe though that piloting a one line bill through Parliament is almost as much effort as guiding a larger bill through as it still has to go out to consultation and go through all Parliamentary procedures, committees, etc. – which is probably the main reason why Kelly at least is not trying that.

  17. Brian Powell says:

    I e-mailed Mr Harvey this morning and he did say that no changes had come along to change his mind and he would be voting to repeal the Act.

    I did then put the point that I hoped that, as all opposition parties had been against it for many months, they would have an alternative plan available tomorrow for debate and vote.

    I haven’t checked my emails but I’m guessing Mr Harvey won’t reply twice.

  18. heedtracker says:

    It really is rather a lot of admin and effort when you could just be gallivanting around the USA or appearing on panel shows and doing more photo-ops on tanks.”

    Ruthie Babes also wants on Strictly Come dancing and says she’s now a Ed Balls fan. It does work. Start typing Ed Balls for a google search and first up is, “Ed Balls Strictly…” not Ed Balls, ex Labour MP and shadow chancellor.

    Fledgling Scottish democracy, launch pad for assorted tory stuffed shirts and sock puppets, red and blue.

  19. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    “their integrity”??

    Must have missed that Stu,

    When did BLiS, The Ruth Davidson ‘No Surrender’ to Referendums Party or the Fib Dems last have any integrity??

    The Greens are now looking at losing any integrity they had in backing this motion rather than proposing an amendment.

    The voting public who as you state are in the majority in favour of the OBFA regardless of its flaws will not forget this.

    These ‘Politicians’ are not interested in making Scotland the progressive forward looking country most of its citizens aspire for it.

    These ‘Politicians’ only want to create division, drag Scotland’s people down to their level and extinguish hope of a better society for our children and grand children.

    These ‘Politicians’ do this all for a wee pat on the head from Head Office ‘down South’ and the hope of ermine or other baubles in return for their ‘service’.

    The Greens especially will suffer at the Local Elections in 2017 as this is the direct result of those who ‘lent them their vote’ or ‘gave them their second preference’ at the Scottish Elections in May preventing an SNP majority Govt.

    A reminder if any was needed that all elections going forward are a straight fight between those who want the best for Scotland and the ‘supporters of the Union at any cost’.

  20. bjsalba says:


    When you come up with a better solution/legislation I’ll be interested.

    If you do not/cannot not be bothered, I am not interested.

  21. msean says:

    Think it would save everybody time if they could all agree to reform the law instead.

  22. Ken500 says:

    The ‘opposition’ will lose even more.

    The 3rd rate rejects have too much say in Holyrood.

    Vote SNP/SNP May 2017. Vote for Independence.

    Imagine hanging effigies at a football match. It is just disgraceful.

  23. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Think it would save everybody time if they could all agree to reform the law instead.”

    That would require there to be some proposed reforms on the table.

  24. FatCandy says:

    Blackhack @ 1.58PM – I was giving him the benefit of the doubt!

  25. Habib Steele says:

    I think a question we need to ask is, “How will Tory MSPs and their wealthy friends benefit financially from the abolition of the Act?” Tories are all about enriching themselves and their friends, and depriving the poorest people of what meagre benefits they may have, if they haven’t been totally deprived by sanctions. So how will the abolition of the Act contribute to the enrichment of Tory MSPs and their already rich friends?

    More booze will be sold, pushing up the share values of breweries? More medical emergencies, pushing the cost of the SNHS, leading to the privatisation of health-care thus pushing up the share values of health-care companies (based in the USA?), in which the Tory MSPs and their friends have invested?

    I’m sure there’s more than mentioned above, but will the above provoke some questioning of RD & her Tories?

    And, as the article points out, the Bashing of the Scottish National Party government.

  26. Tony Little says:


    “Ruthie Babes” or Babe Ruth?

    It seems that she regards Holyrood just as a step to something “better”? For me, I can think of nothing better than representing your own people and forging ahead with a newer, brighter, fairer Scotland. I guess I’ll never be a 21st century politician!

  27. Endless Psycb says:

    Just to make the point that most constituency case work involves a lot more work than just “writing a letter to the government”.

  28. Iain Lawson says:

    So the opposition plan to defeat the Government. They look for an issue and the only one they can come up with this? What a compliment they are giving to the Scottish Government!

    SNP strategists must be delighted. Let’s dish the SNP by voting against legislation that has overwhelming public support. Anyone spot the absolute folly of such a move?

    At this rate how many of the opposition will still be around in a few years time.

    Well done James Kelly.

  29. chris kilby says:

    What on earth are the Greens playing at?

  30. Ken MacColl says:

    Is this James -“A’hm no sittin doon” – Kelly?

    There is no way that you can argue against such an intellect

    Ochone, ochone!

  31. liz says:

    Thanks for that Rev.

    I genuinely didn’t know that it wont be repealed, so that is good news.

    So it definitely is showboating and that’s the second time the Greens have done that.
    I see Whitman is on again about getting rid of CT.

  32. Luigi says:

    Since May, the Tories have been desperate to score one against the Scottish government, but have failed miserably thus far. Now, thanks to help from their yoon pals and the Greens (?), they just might be able to demonstrate some opposition. The big question is just exactly what BLiS, the LibDems and the Greens think they will achieve by helping the Tories. Electoral recovery?

  33. Fred says:

    Support for minimum-pricing will be interesting if matters ever get that far!

  34. Brian Powell says:

    When M Kelly was being interviewed did any of the interviewers asked if he had a plan ready to go?

  35. K1 says:

    Yes agreed, they don’t want to ‘reform’ the law. They merely want to undermine SNP. It doesn’t matter what the issue is; obfa, police scotland, health service, named person act et al.

    They’re really no ‘getting it’ ur they?

    It’s over, your party of brown envelopes and yer second name will take ye far, little jolly jaunts at the tax payers expense, dodgy coke fuelled party hard wi yer breeks at yer ankles caught but never exposed, yer da etc etc. It’s over. We’re no living in that shite any mair…sooner Labour are consigned tae the bin next May at the council level the better. As for the Tories…well their rising star is another phoney making a name for herself, it’s always been career moves wi her, shallow as out.

    Now I reserve my special contempt for Harvie in this whole tawdry manoeuvre, an huge ego in direct compensation to his wee physical stature…the wee man complex is at play here. There’s someone fooling some of the people some of the time revealing his allegiance and with nothing to replace the act with he too is at it with this.

    Preference votes have changed for me in light of this, the Greens will not have my preference on the ballot at all. He has sorely underestimated the strength of feeling in a ward that he feels comfortable in…and I will be talking to all my ‘Green’ pals on the lead up. Scunnered.

  36. Illy says:

    You know, the Greens could take a page out of Labour’s “Opposition for Dummies” manual and just abstain.

  37. Macart says:

    Is it confirmed that the Greens would back this Tory dog and pony show without a viable alternative to hand to actually vote in favour of?

  38. Robert Graham says:

    If the SNP are defeated on this legislation, how will the BBC spin it ? , and is there any truth in the rumour the BBC has just received delivery of Champagne & Party hats , an insider reports . Or a source close to the management. Just asking.

  39. Almannysbunnet says:

    I’ll be watching the Greens like a hawk on this one. Harvie needs to decide whether he wants to join the Unionist parties in playing political games or help try and improve this country in ways other than just green issues. Bashing the SNP for the hell of it is self harming for the Greens. The majority of the general public are repulsed by mindless violence around football. Apart from Kelly’s joke of a survey I see no support for just dumping this legislation.

  40. Bill Hume says:

    I rather hope the SNP are defeated on this one. Not because I give a toss about this act or indeed, about football.
    I hope the Green party DO vote against the SNP.

    It may concentrate a few minds to vote SNP and only SNP in May.

    If that sounds a wee bit anti Greens let me say, I do have a lot of time for their green agenda, but I do not trust them to support independence for Scotland.

  41. winifred mccartney says:

    If those opposing this legislation have no amendments or new legislation for offensive behaviour then they really are just playing a game in government and I hope all of their supporters remember this when it comes to elections – it is too late for labour they only know how to ‘play the game’ and are not interested in the best for their country but you would think the greens could come up with amendments to make the bill better rather than just vote it down – this will leave a very bad taste in everyones mouth if the govt is defeated.

    People need to remember this is a govt trying to do something about the worst offences and we should be trying to make the bill better not wipe it out.

    It should cover offensive/threatening behaviour by all crowds of supporters, in streets, on trains etc regardless of wether football, rugby or any other sport.I know I myself and many others avoid towns, cities and public transport when big sporting events are on – surely this cannot be right.

  42. orri says:

    I suppose a grown up debate in Holyrood will allow sensible discussion as to whether there are improvements to be made. Assuming the SNP, or any other party, can put forward amendments they can always propose a change to the motion. If the complaint is genuinely based on the haste of the introduction then surely the opposition parties will have proposals ready.

    Basically the Greens will propose something about freedom of speech and the OBFA as it stands being to specific. The SNP might offer to reconsider it’s scope and the motion changes to amend or incorporate into BoP. The unionists mump their gums. The SNP take the hit on the regretful haste of it’s introduction so it’d be ready for a new season. They also remind the house that repeal is not the only option.

    The way it might go if the Greens get their heads sorted is that the motion is modified to one of a proper consultation and review with repeal only being the nuclear option. The SNP and Greens vote to pass that.

  43. orri says:

    Remember that the 2017 elections will be STV so voting for a Green candidate after you’ve exhausted all SNP ones will not harm the SNP’s chances. As has been mentioned elsewhere, treat with caution independents unless you actually know they aren’t party affiliated.

    If I remember, the SNP are also looking to change the voting for Holyrood to STV.

  44. Peter says:

    I think the legislation needs repealed because it is unworkable.

    How can the police arrest 20,000 people singing The Famine Song or the Ibrox Disaster Song?

    The legislation actually encourages yobs to sing banned songs because they resent being told what they can or cannot sing. I don’t condone that but it is a fact.

    Like the Named Person proposals, the idea is laudable, but the implementation is very poor.

  45. Desimond says:


    I think you may have missed my question asking if there had been the promised review on the honourable but flawed law which would have been ideal time to identify and iron out any current errors or room for interpretation.

    Moving on..

    If the Scottish Government get defeated, can a vote of confidence be called? Lets see how Patrick and the Greens ( never has a Party been lauded so much yet actually did so little) like that. They would be like hippies going over hot coals jumping from one side to another.

  46. Marie Clark says:

    Going by the greens track record in this Parliament, I won’t be voting for them anytime soon.

    Totally disgraceful showboating. Awa and chase yersels ya useless chancers.

  47. schrodingers cat says:

    thing is orri

    scratching each others back requires a modicum of good will, which the smaller indy parties seem hell bent on destroying for no gain (see this article, what good will it do harvey to vote with the unionists?)

    It is akin to self harm.

  48. yesindyref2 says:

    Yeah, that makes sense, same principle as the Grand Repeal Act. Thanks for the clarification (sooking up because of contradicting Rev on the last thread).

  49. One_Scot says:

    ‘How can the police arrest 20,000 people singing’

    By that logic, you might as well repeal speeding legislation.

  50. Desimond says:

    This isnt just Political point scoring, this is Medja Horedom.

    You’re in Labour are now reduced to the 3rd Party in Scotland…you dont even get to appear on newsnight Scotland or Scotland 2016 every night anymore…how the heck are you gonna get some publicity?

    Everyone shrugs as they try and think of something topical and headline catching without needing any actual work, costing or cast iron promises.

    Next week “Bring back the Belt” says Jackie Baillie

  51. The SNP will be the laughing stock of `One Party State`s`

    only a Scottish One Party State could lose a vote,

    Communist Party of China,Workers’ Party of Korea,Communist Party of Vietnam,will have us barred from the club.

  52. schrodingers cat says:

    Peter says

    I think the legislation needs repealed because it is unworkable.

    Like the Named Person proposals, the idea is laudable, but the implementation is very poor.

    didnt you read the article? it cant be repealed, only replaced or amended. this motion tomorrow suggests neither, it is another lame attempt at stirring up sectarianism to boost the unionists snpbad agenda.

  53. Desimond says:

    Im not one for praying but would be funny if Ken in the Chair had to make a casting vote and side with the Govt tomorrow.

    The ultimate face palm ( after the last one and shortly before the next one no doubt) for Labour in The Upper Northern Quarter

  54. K1 says:

    That’s two Peters that cannae unerstaun whit we’re oan aboot on two threads…maybe their interest will just peter out…

  55. K1 says:

    Ah know Scot, they’ll be like *Pyure state o’ that*

    (am just (not even close) missing being ‘on fire’ aren’t I… 😉 )

  56. bjsalba says:

    Flawed the law may be, but so what. Having a review is of no value if the result is that the law is flawed but we can’t come up with anything better.

    Let me repeat.
    When you come up with a better solution/legislation I’ll be interested.
    If you do not/cannot not be bothered, I am not interested.

  57. Joannie says:

    I’ve just looked up the Ibrox Disaster Song and it seems to be a tribute to the victims of said disaster, so not sure why its been put in the same camp as The Famine Song which is pure racist filth.

  58. liz says:

    @Desimond – HaHa, was having a thought like that myself, what if Kez gets held up in the US, partying or something.

  59. Desimond says:

    You appear to have mistaken me for some guy with a pitchfork.

    So what if a law is flawed?
    My last comment to you is this – If the Party in Government that introduced a flawed law undertakes a review ( that they said would happen) and comes up with recommendations to update it accordingly, they then go back to Parliament and say “Vote for this wise old update!”.

    Everyones a winner.

  60. Juteman says:

    If I was Nicola Sturgeon, I would simply sit down tomorrow and allow Mr Kelly to give his ideas on how to proceed.
    I’m sure he could show how clever he is in a 10 minute solo spot?

  61. Orri says:

    Who’s that lying on the stairwell,
    Who’s that lying on the floor,
    66 Huns in scarves and flares,
    Lookin ****ed up oan the stairs,
    and they’ll no be goan tae Ibrox anymore

    Think you used the wrong search engine.

  62. Free Scotland says:

    I reckon Kez will come back from the US of A with jet lag, sleep in and miss the vote.

  63. Joannie says:

    I used google, and this came up…

    If there’s some other sick chant out there, (which wouldn’t surprise me), I still think it should be clarified that whatever sick versions exist aren’t the actual Ibrox Disaster Song.

  64. K1 says:

    But your ‘argument’ rests on the premise Desimond that the Party in Government introducing a review of said ‘flawed law’ and then presenting the parliament with ‘Vote for this wise old update’ that those parties in the parliament are actually interested in such a ‘review’ in the first instance?

    Given that they all seem to be screaming ‘repeal repeal repeal’ and it’s blasted across the DR’s front page and CS have made an arse of it by promoting the nonsense that they say ‘supports this repeal position. It’s kinda difficult to go along with your assumption that we are dealing with sane and rational people in opposition?

    Because if we were, surely this would have been raised in said parliament as a consensual issue that effectively produces a win for everyone before it got to this ‘sensationalised’ level of public interest. Even though the public have no interest in repealing this ‘flawed law’ in the first instance?

    They are ‘at it’ Desimond. It’s quite blatantly an ‘SNP bash tag’, what’s a bit scunnering is the fact that the Greens seem somewhat oblivious as they too have presented no alternative or amendments which would serve the purpose that you say would result in ‘everyones a winner’ either, making it clear that it isn’t about consensual updating of that law?

  65. Artyhetty says:


    Nah, a ‘grown up debate’ is not on the table, it is absolutely not what the tories, slab, or even the greens want. They want to steer things in such as way as to damage the SNP government. It may not be perfect, but this bill is also symbolic. It sends out a message saying we will NOT tolerate violent bahaviour in our society, as well as making it illegal.

    Regards not being able to arrest 20,000 poeople at once, of course that is not the point, like any law, it to deter violent behaviour and make it unacceptable in a civilised country such as ours.

    The unionists, and sadly the greens, clearly wish to turn back the clock and stoke up hatred where it has no place. No thanks to that! Take your backward attitude somewhere else. Wasting time, wasting money and being paid a handsome sum in the process. Sickening.

  66. Vestas says:

    Hopefully those who advocated giving their second vote to the Greens in May have learned their lesson.

  67. Peter says:

    schrodingers cat says:

    didnt you read the article? it cant be repealed, only replaced or amended.


    Mike Russell says Scotland will veto Theresa May’s repeal bill, but they can’t repeal this sectarianism law?

    surely shome mishtake

  68. Peter says:


    It is a disgusting song. I think you have found a different version.

  69. Thepnr says:

    Looking ahead to the concil elections next year, I like many others was willing to support the Green Party after choosing SNP first and foremost for as many candidates they had on the ballot.

    My reasoning was simple, I’d rather have a Green Indepndence supporting Councillor than a Unionist supporting one, that may have made all the difference to how many councils the SNP gained overall control in if they had the support of the Green Party.

    Patrick Harvie if he backs the Tories will have made a massive mistake if he believes that it will all be forgotten come next May. Seems weird to appear to be so self destructive, why would I support the election of a Green Councillor if there was a chance that they would side with Unionists?

    I wouldn’t, simple as that. He better make his mind up and quick. He has until tomorrow to convince me that his party is worthy of my support.

    OBFA means nothing to me when compared to Independence for Scotland.

  70. Joannie says:

    @Peter, I didn’t find “a different version”, I found the real song. Whatever sick twist some fans have put on the lyrics is on their heads, not the person who wrote the original lyrics which are a dignified tribute to the victims.

  71. Macart says:


    ‘Nah, a ‘grown up debate’ is not on the table, it is absolutely not what the tories, slab, or even the greens want.’

    No, a debate is the furthest thing from their minds. Debate implies weighing pros and cons, persuasion and consensus. None of that will be on display.

    With no viable alternative, they’re simply looking at gaining a public government defeat and with any luck a slanging match thrown in t’boot. All to gain/buy the vote of a particular demographic for their own ends. Does anyone seriously think for an instant that those parties give a shit about football, or that they’d hesitate for an instant to consider wider societal fallout?

    The repeal motion is worthless without that viable alternative to hand and no lever to actually enforce the result of the vote. A politically motivated waste of everyone’s time. Except, of course, for those looking for specific political gain.

    Almost a dead certainty Friday’s headlines and editorial is already written by this point.

  72. Proud Cybernat says:

    Hilary: “We have to win to keep that foul-mouthed moron out of the White House. You leaving, Kez?”

    Kez: “Aye, Hils. Have tae get maself back to Scotland for tomorrow. Have to vote to give morons the right to be foul-mouthed.”

  73. Nation Libre says:

    Off topic but relevant none the less. I know it’s nothing to do with the Scottish legal system but how can UEFA fine Rangers (first example I found) and ban their supporters from the next away game because they hear sectarian singing but the SFA can’t?

    Start shutting a section of a stand at a time, this would stop it in about half a season. Has no one got the balls?

  74. geeo says:

    Peter said…

    ‘How can the police arrest 20,000 people singing’

    They cannot, but they can keep them in the stadium for hours afterwards on the pretext of taking names as they leave, to issue future ‘conduct warnings’. (Ask anyone ‘kettled’ in london for 10 hours how much fun the experience was).

    Anyone with an outstanding warrant would be caught, which in itself would be hilarious due to your fellow fans getting you caught.

    The whole process would, if repeated on a regular basis would not be long encouraging self policing.
    While the above idea has difficulties, Peter and others who believe in ‘safety in bigoted numbers’ had better believe that there IS a way to deal with 20,000 bigots which will encourage them to change their behaviour, especially if the police are able to Invoice the clubs involved.

  75. Bob Mack says:

    Every law is flawed. That is how lawyers make a living by unpicking them and finding the flaws. The principle remains however that society has put down a legal marker to say this action or behaviour is unacceptable.

  76. Dougie Raine says:

    Ah, it almost brings back happy fundilymundily memories of Murphy handing out wee leaflets at football games. Halcyon days when Murphy was the new messiah and Labour were about to trounce the SNP at the elections.

  77. Robert Louis says:

    Thepnr at 153pm,

    I agree, I think this could seriously harm the greens. I’d love them to propose amendments or bring forward new ideas – indeed I kind of thought that WAS what the greens wanted to do in Parliament – be an alternative viewpoint.

    Although not a green voter, I had a high-ish opinion of Patrick Harvie, and did think he would look especially at comments made by Stonewall Scotland and the Equality network, since the act also covers homophobic abuse etc..

    I’ll see what happens, but I think the green party might lose a lot of support on this. Let’s put it this way, if it was April 1st and you told me for the first time, that the Scottish greens wanted to remove the OBFA, i’d think you were joking, I really would. It just doesn’t fit with their values one bit, to remove an act like this.

  78. Grant says:


    “what’s a bit scunnering is the fact that the Greens seem somewhat oblivious as they too have presented no alternative or amendments which would serve the purpose that you say would result in ‘everyones a winner’ either, making it clear that it isn’t about consensual updating of that law?”

    Aye, Patrick Harvie knows exactly what he’s doing, or at least he ‘thinks’ he does. He thinks he needs to show how different the Greens are from the SNP which to him means disagreeing with the SNP on most issues other than Independence.

    I do however think that Mr Harvie is seriously underestimating the amount of ill will he’s going to generate and the number of votes he’s probably going to lose with this particular stunt. Truth be told you can already sort of see the effects of it, I haven’t personally witnessed this many people, nor this many people who have been otherwise supportive of the Green party openly criticising them like this before and I’m not just talking about on WoS.

  79. Robert Louis says:

    Nation Libre at 431pm,

    I think you answer the point yourself. The only reason the SFA does not follow UEFA, is indeed because they do not have the balls. I guess it’s just too much hassle for them.

  80. John Walsh says:

    it would save time if HR could all agree to reform the law instead. After consultation with all stakeholders and interested parties, then vote amendment by amendment until there is a workable law to stop bigotry and sectarian singing .
    In the meantime maybe SFA could fine the “clubs” and set up a anti bigotry educational unit with the fines collected.

  81. Greannach says:

    Kezia dear, if you’re back from saving the United States, will you remember to press the button to show the world what a progressive party leader you are? Thanks.

  82. Orri says:

    The thing is that without a warrant the police may not have any automatic right to enter private property such as a football stadium. Hence the clubs could decide to dispense with the police and employ their own security. It might be a foolhardy choice though.

  83. Meindevon says:

    I’m not really all that knowledgable about this stuff. I attend the odd home St Mirren match (all sympathy greatly appreciated, thanks). I have never thought about this Act whilst at the footie or heard anyone talk about, however as I said I have limited experience and knowledge.

    It does strike me, though, that the SFA could sort this if they really wanted to and as RL says maybe they are not up for it. Surely docking points for abusive singing which is easily verified these days, is now the only way forward. Going rapidly down the table would focus the minds of club, players and fans.

    Maybe the SFA need a kick up the backside to do something about it…maybe an email bombardment from some who feel strongly?

  84. callmedave says:

    Catching up at work and see that the Common Space folk are having a hard time from their support. 🙂

    Heard the Famous James say to shortbread radio “that when repealed the existing laws will still be there” an awe that!

    He has no idea, or intention, about constructing a new bill or how to foster support in the various parties to reach a consensus.

    Grab a headline Kelly. It will backfire on him and his pals.

    The Hootsman.
    Is there demand for a second independence referendum?

  85. Grouse Beater says:

    Peter: “How can the police arrest 20,000 people singing The Famine Song or the Ibrox Disaster Song?”

    Have you seen what a water cannon can do for authoritarian regimes? Packs a punch. Then there’s the punch in the back of the head from the guy singing the opposing song. That packs a punch too. Then there’s CCTV, fines, banned from attending matches, and falling attendances and ticket sales.

  86. Al Dossary says:

    @Orri, 5.01pm

    The final say on whether the match goes ahead rests with Police Scotland – nothing to do with the clubs. If police Scotland say it is not safe for the match to go ahead, it does not go ahead.

    Ergo the police would not need a warrant to enter the stadium as the match would not go ahead without them.

    Even the clubs such as Motherwell who largely manage most games with no police inside the ground still have a police presence outside the ground, and certainly a Match Commander keeping watch inside the stadium at the least.

    Plain and simple, the SFA/SPL could put a stop to the sectarian chants any time they wanted simply by enforcing the next game behind closed doors or by deducting points. The second the supporters realise that they have a choice between spewing their bile and their team losing the league, you can be guaranteed it would stop.

  87. The Dog Philosopher says:

    And up and down the country Old Firm Ultras are filing into draughty halls with their trusty old songbooks ready for a bit of proper choir practice at last … ‘once more from the top lads, and this time, just before the 8th bar, can we inject the words ‘die ya basturds’ with a little more oomph?’

  88. Ruby says:

    ‘Only the most cynical, we’re sure, would suggest that all they’re actually interested in is bashing the Nats and getting in the papers.’

    I’m guilty of being most cynical!
    Or perhaps I’m just not a very good liar!

  89. Ruby says:

    I’m sure it must be pretty obvious to most people what these opposition parties are up to.

    I like articles like this which inform how the political system works.

  90. I tried to comment on this item but was blocked by the Gremlins at GCHQ, or wherever.
    Perhaps the SNP Administration should resign en masse tomorrow and precipitate a GE?
    Kelly is a shallow smirking wee man, who is getting money under false pretences.
    I will never vote Green even as a second choice again.
    I abhor the Jimmy Cagney syndrome adopted by Harvie.
    What is he thinking?
    300,000 children will be plunged into poverty next week because of the Tories latest cap on benefits and Tax Credits. Families are having their income cut by £50 to £100 at a stroke, and Labour and the Greens are arguing about this piece of legislation. Beats working for a living, I suppose.
    Yet the Greens will stand shoulder to shoulder with the Tories, and the Abstainers Labour, and the pointless Lib Dems in what is a futile gesture.
    God help them all next year.

  91. HandandShrimp says:

    Having seen the latest opinion polls from the US we should all hope that Kezia gets her butt back over here to waste everyone’s time with this nonsense. At least it isn’t going to do any harm here because no one will pay attention to it past this weekend.

  92. Ruby says:

    Tony Little says:
    1 November, 2016 at 2:28 pm


    “Ruthie Babes” or Babe Ruth?

    Ruby replies

    Neither. She’s definitely not a babe nor is she a great athlete.

    Tory Ruth is what she should be called.

    She in the Herald saying:

    ‘We want to make Scotland the skills capital of Europe’

    Why would she want to make Scotland the skill capital of Europe when she doesn’t want Scotland to be in Europe?

  93. Chess man. says:

    Dear Patrick Harvie et al. One day in 1995, while coaching in my local football club, one of my Under15’s told me about the shocking death of schoolboy Mark Scott – murdered, at random, by a sectarian fanatic called Campbell. As at least 70% of the Scottish electorate are in fact IN FAVOUR of the OBF Act, can I ask you Mr.Harvie to think for a moment about young Mark before you speak to repeal this Act. Thx.

  94. scottieDog says:

    And the bbc will be having an orgasm.

  95. Ruby says:

    Peter says:
    1 November, 2016 at 3:20 pm

    I think the legislation needs repealed because it is unworkable.

    How can the police arrest 20,000 people singing The Famine Song or the Ibrox Disaster Song?

    Ruby replies

    What would you suggest be done about these 20,000 people singing songs which I presume are offensive to others?

    Why are they singing these songs?

    Sorry I have to ask a lot of question because I usually just switch off if there is any discussion about fitba!

  96. Hamish100 says:

    O/T bbc scotchshire has a wee story on the the miners request for a public inquiry.Lisa Summers bent on the story and the main interviewee Alex Bennett (former miner)states he can understand the tories not having an inquiry but why not the scottish parliament (knowing wee smile as they are like the tories). Did a quick google for person named

    He appears to be a Labour Councillor or has a cousin with the same name and looks!.
    Its imperative an inquiry takes place!!. Why not when Donald Dewer was around or McLeish or Lord ….
    SNP’s fault.

  97. Joannie says:

    That’s a good question Ruby, why is anybody singing racist filth like the Famine Song, or sick chants about dead Rangers fans? Why is that anybody’s idea of a good day out?

  98. galamcennalath says:

    callmedave says:

    The Hootsman.
    Is there demand for a second independence referendum?

    A perfect example of a trip they often play with polling. They ask the question in a way to split the vote.

    “Polling shows 46 per cent against another referendum, while 33 per cent believe one should be held in the next two-to-three years, while the UK is negotiating to leave the EU ….
    A further 21 per cent believe a second vote should happen – but only when Brexit has been concluded.”

    So, especially is you don’t read it all, or if you skip read, you might see the 46 against, 33 for.

    WRONG! The reality is 54% for IndyRef2, 46% against. They split the FOR vote between before or after Brexit.

    If the underlying implication is Yes:No 54:46 for the actual IndyRef2, that would do just nicely! More would be better, but that would be conclusive.

    I remember some other load of shysters doing the same with Nukes/WMDs. It allowed them to say the largest group was for Trident renewal because they split the against vote.

  99. Clydebuilt says:

    The Greens are stupidly being sucked into James Kelly’s politicking.

    This will damage them. Scots are sick of Old Firm Sectarian bigotry.

  100. ScottieDog says:

    This article is spot on and when you look to Westminster you can see the outrage at those opposition lifers who have had Jeremy Corbyn and the SNP upset the apple cart.

    For all these years, we had two cheeks of the same arse jeering at each other then having a pint afterwords in the country’s cheapest bar.

  101. Stu Mac says:

    @Orri says:
    1 November, 2016 at 3:59 pm

    There’s an old song by Matt McGinn which is a genuine tribute. Unfortunately recently some Celtic morons (wouldn’t call them fans as that would taint the decent fans) came up with another, same title, that you quoted.

  102. Iain More says:

    It is patently obvious that the SNP SG isn’t dealing with sane or rational people in opposition or even with anybody constructive in opposition and thanks to the Rev we have all now realised that the opposition is also bone effin idle. Well why work when you have the Brit Natzi Press and Media doing all the thinking etc for you.

    It is a wonder the Daily Heil hasn’t drawn up an amendment that the Brit Nat lickspittles that are the opposition at Holyrood could force through with or without Trumps secret weapon in the Dippity Dug being there. They could call it the Oldfirm Banter Fitba Act where for the sane footie fans it would be compulsory to join in with the hate filled drunken bigotry, racism, vandalism and violence of the zombie Brit Nats on both sides of the Old Firm divide even those Fitba fans that don’t support either Celtic or Rangers or face being arrested for not actually being part of a mindless Brit Nat mob. Well it does seem to be the rabid Brit Nats that want it repealed totally, well they do seem to be the main megaphones wanting rid of the OBFA.

  103. yesindyref2 says:

    @call me dave from the Scotsman:

    “Polling shows 46 per cent against another referendum, while 33 per cent believe one should be held in the next two-to-three years, while the UK is negotiating to leave the EU, according to a poll tracker by What Scotland Thinks.
    A further 21 per cent believe a second vote should happen – but only when Brexit has been concluded.”

    So in other words, 46% against Indy Ref 2, 54% for, a clear majority FOR Indy Ref 2.

    Now, why didn’t the Scotsman just say that?

  104. silver19 says:


    It’s a disgrace the BBC news from Distoring Scotland. I watched the headlines and I sat there counted before I seen the full story and knew many of these stories would be SNP Bad.

    There was one after another, Brexit item single market access not going to happen in Scotland on yer bike SNP. Tenant farmers off to court to blame big bad Scottish Government when they are the ones that signed leases. Miners Strike and Police and the Labour Councillor complaining about no enquiry in Scotland he should be asking his pals at the Blue Tories and the Tory controlled Scottish Police at the time on that one.

    And then I had really laugh that item about Automation may threaten 88,000 Scottish public sector jobs, I fully see that some jobs in future a automation and robots could take them over but 88,000 jobs just rubbish and then they had temerity and a dig at the SNP to say that look what happened to the computer systems at the NHS and the single Scottish Police force. What the f**k has automation and robots got to do with computer system at the Scottish NHS and Police Scotland??!?.

    There are really throwing every stick at the SNP, pathetic.

  105. Stoker says:

    Proud Cybernat wrote on 1 November, 2016 at 4:29 pm:

    “Hilary: “We have to win to keep that foul-mouthed moron out of the White House. You leaving, Kez?””
    “Kez: “Aye, Hils. Have tae get maself back to Scotland for tomorrow. Have to vote to give morons the right to be foul-mouthed.””

    Aye, PC, you’ve hit on something factual there. Four days and four articles ago the Rev showed a tweet from Dippy Dug which said:
    “Just arrived in New York to campaign for Hillary and against Trump’s poison for the next 3 days”
    (bold emphasis mine)

    So, let me get this straight, Dugdale was shooting off to help fight the Trumpets poison only to scurry back hame 3 days later to help promote JK’ poison.

    Aye, that’ll be tackling inequality Slabber style, eh!

  106. Ruby says:

    yesindyref2 says:
    1 November, 2016 at 7:48 pm

    Now, why didn’t the Scotsman just say that?

    Ruby replies

    I think you know and I know why they didn’t just say that.
    Is this a new poll? Wasn’t there another one a few weeks ago with a similar result?

  107. Orri says:

    Fairly sure any law can be repealed. However wouldn’t be too relieved at the fact that this is a motion to have the OBFA repealed by the SNP. One supposes that if the motion were to pass then it’ll be used as a constant niggle until the SNP bring forth a bill to do so.

    The reason the opposition parties aren’t going ahead though might have a bit to do with Holyrood procedure.

    Pre-legislative Consultation
    In order to share the power to influence policy, arrangements have been made to allow Parliament and interested individuals and groups to be consulted about proposed legislation before it becomes a bill. This pre-legislative consultation is designed to be open and participatory, allowing access to the decision-making process. This system prevents the government from being selective about which pressure groups have an opportunity to be consulted before policy is devised.
    The outcome of the consultation process must be attached to draft bills (as a memorandum) and so the views of pressure groups and any opposition to the proposals are open and public at an early stage

    The results of said properly conducted consultation will either be some useful amendments or such an overwhelming support for the continuation of the Act that it’d be an act of folly to repeal it.

  108. mike cassidy says:

    Anybody know how you start one of those campaigns where you try and get a track into the charts via download.

    Cos it looks like this might be an appropriate number 1 next week.

  109. yesindyref2 says:

    from the BBC “Brexit item single market access not going to happen in Scotland on yer bike SNP” The BBC are so institutionally thick and desperate to get at the SNP they don’t even realise that’s exactly what the SNP want them to say. Moving on

    Yes, I think they’re just using Curtice’s poll of polls to rehash an old result. But of course it’s hardened against a Ref since June by 6 points, even though they don’t specify if it’s a similar set of results.

  110. robertknight says:

    Betty’s loyal brain-dead opposition have one policy at Holyrood…

    SNP BAD!!!


  111. Capella says:

    The one thing that interests me about football is the politics. So I will watch this debate with interest.

    The opposition parties, including the Greens, better hope that not one hair of anyone’s head is harmed during, or after, the Old Firm game on Hogmonay. Because any trouble, however trivial, will be laid at their door.

  112. uno mas says:

    @Mike Cassiday 8.09

    Good call!

    P.S. Memo to Patrick Harvie, by your friends be ye known.

  113. Famous15 says:

    RE the tenant farmers.

    Who was in government in 2006 when the “bad” law was passed and they signed their leases?

  114. To Tony Little @ 2.28pm Fat Boab, the Dug and Fluffy all know they are on MSM life support; which will not last forever.
    All three know that their job is to bash and bash again at Scotland; anything will do and the MSM will pick it up.
    As loyal members of the UK the HoL will be an open door.
    At the same time they are looking at alternatives; Fat Boab might try TV. the Dug might emigrate with her girl friend to the US.
    Not sure about Fluffy…he might seek a new partner in the HoL.

  115. call me dave says:

    @yesindyref2 etal:

    I was too busy to add to my link earlier re: Hootsman poll

    But I did a quick calculation at the time and was quite pleased the numbers added up to a majority for Indy2. 🙂

    Taking night class tonight so just in… wabbit!

    Day off tomorrow! 🙂

    Catching up now.

  116. Robert Peffers says:

    @Blackhack says: 1 November, 2016 at 1:58 pm:

    “Are you trying to tell me the Kelly has two brain cells ???”

    Yes, Blackhack, that is the case – BUT – (and that is a big but), Blackhack didn’t say those two brain cells were working brain cells – or if they were that they were on speaking terms with each other.

  117. Walter Scott says:

    James Kelly for labour leader. I’d become a £3 entryist to vote for him

  118. call me dave says:

    Fifa ‘rejects England & Scotland request to wear poppies on armbands’

  119. Smallaxe says:

    call me dave:

    Pesky Wabbits! 🙂

    Peace Always

  120. Legerwood says:

    I noticed on Reporting Scotland tonight that this issue of repealing the Act has been elevated to one of freedom of speech. The phrase was mentioned several times in the report.

    Clearly they are trying to ‘but up’ the issue in an attempt to disguise what it really is – a squalid piece of political posturing by those who have nothing to offer on any issue of substance.

  121. Cadogan Enright says:

    Of all parties, u would think the Greens as a multinational party would understand the need to say goodbye to sectarianism

    Manipulators of power in a colonial context NEED racial, skin colour, sexuality or religious differences in subject people to maintain power though division.

    This is politics 101 for Greens

    Come on Patrick – do the right thing!

  122. AuldGranny says:

    The Scottish Government conducted an evaluation of the Act in 2015.

    Scottish Government Report on the operation of the
    Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening
    Communications (Scotland) Act 2012

  123. Dr Jim says:

    Even if the vote goes against the SNP that wont mean the act is repealed
    Patrick Harvie &co will do the wrong thing because he keeps trying to prove the Greens are an actual political party instead of a protest group

    But just like the act wont be repealed the Greens still wont be a political party

  124. Liz g says:

    Cadogen Enright @ 9.31
    Totally agree.
    Surely it’s not in dispute the powers that be have always used our differences against us.
    What are the Greens Thinking.
    Come on the Greens
    Do the right thing.
    Adjust that law , improve that law or strengthen that law.
    But whatever you do don’t stand against it.
    Don’t send the message that it’s ok to behave that way.
    Is it no obvious that the last gasp of the Union is to create the Ulsterisation of Scottish politics.
    Can ye no learn from what was done to Ireland?

  125. Morgatron says:

    What a waste of space these shits are. They should all be paintballed with their own shite .
    Still , their obviously still bitter together!

  126. Capella says:

    O/T just watched an excellent film featuring Leonardo DiCaprio, UN Peace Ambassador for Climate Change. “Before the Flood” by National Geographic, 1 hr 35 mins. One of the perks of not paying the TV tax.

    Bookmark it. Watch it. Stunning photography and convincing arguments, it speaks volumes about the need to develop renewables and support any politician in Scotland who promotes that. If only we were free to make our own decisions!

    Labour and the Tories and their petty squabbles about sectarianism are pathetic in comparison to the real issues which require real decisions.

    Greens, beware of being sucked into the Unionists traps. Keep the eyes on the prize.

  127. Orri says:

    Nice of James Kelly to team up with the Conservatives in this way.

    The proper way to proceed would be for a bill to be proposed which might result in an official consultation. By doing it himself he’s enabled a parody of that. Holyrood might not have a second chamber but one way it makes up for that is by assessment of public mood. The eagerness of some to portray Kelly’s effort as a genuine representation of that will no doubt be used to portray any subsequent consultation as a time wasting exercise rather than the correct way to do things.

  128. heedtracker says:

    Greens, beware of being sucked into the Unionists traps. Keep the eyes on the prize.”

    Are they Green though?! Or just local greens for local tories? They have an opportunity in Scotland to do at least something like what the German Greens did for Germany.

    Maybe its all about voter base. How Green are Scottish Green voters. In Aberdeen they’re rich nimby types, blocking development and expansion, costing hundreds of millions in delays, because that’s Green apparently.

    Germany’s one of the most advanced developed nations in the world, like Japan. But German Greens have changed Germany into one of the greenest countries in the world and no more nukes.

    UKOK right hates Greens the further right you go. Its not on the same fear and loathing scale SNP wise, for UKOK planet toryboy but has Harvie got the green stones to really make a difference, or is he just another small town tub thumper?

  129. Hamish100 says:


    Hope folk are ok but couldnt they try and bomb the big building on the Thames as a reminder of Novemebr the 5th.

    Proves we are expendable.

  130. Clootie says:

    Your last line…they have integrity?
    Labour,LibDems and Tories no surprise. However the Greens supporting the vote is a surprise and unfortunately proves the point that they are not to be trusted to represent us.

  131. Lochside says:

    Hamish 100…I saw MisReporting Scotland and that set up with the ex-miner who I guessed right away was a Labour straw man who’d conflate ‘snpbad’ with the Miners’ Strike and the tenant farmers complaining about the ‘Scottish Gov.’ not helping them, although the leases under threat were signed in 2003.

    But the biggest load of shite was the britpoppyfest at the beginning of the programme.Apparently ‘everyone’ in fitba wants poppy armbands for the England v Scotland game. Aye right! someone should tell that carpet bagger Regan to deal with the shocking pink strip first that they’ve allowed fifa to force oor team to wear. Scotland the brave?…like ballerinas rather than bravehearts. I can see it now a royal doing from Engerland, humiliating anti-Scottish braying from the Wembley mob and a bunch of tartan army overweight panto dames singing ‘.doh a deer’….christ it almost make you wish it was 1977 all over again…where did I put that goalpost?

  132. Ian Brotherhood says:

    @Lochside –

    re: the ‘pink’ Scotland strip.

    Heard about that t’other day and honestly thought it was a joke.

    No way should the Scotland players wear that. Absolutely no need for it.

  133. Tam Jardine says:

    Great piece Stu- lets see what alternatives they come up with.

    OT Another cracker from Siobhan in the Express- of course it is another hammer blow for Sturgeon because the Scottish Resistance guys have been unable to make anything from a crowd fund. Quite how this is a hammer blow it is unclear but it clearly is…

    “Sturgeon’s affronted referendum supporters snubbed in ‘international rescue’ fundraiser” Lots of pics of Nicola Sturgeon and Alex Salmond- even Big Tam gets a mention.

    Strange wee dig about SNP Friends of Palestine- that must be a wee bone thrown down to the BTL zoomers to chew on.

    There is is just nothing- there is nothing there at all. Then Siobhan gets to the end and like a child racing to complete their homework she crams 4 quick random SNP bad lines in with no detail or substance.

    Best of all- Nicola Sturgeon would be embarrassed if the Scottish Resistance had raised huge amounts of money so as it stands if you absolutely had to write an article on this non-subject you would be more accurate to say “SNP relief at failed fringe project”.

    McFadyen quotes James Scott seemingly verbatim in the piece and it is pretty standard fare – one minor error but on the whole it is fine, rabble rousing anti-imperial stuff. Hope Mr Scott is going over it all to check she’s got her facts right.

  134. heedtracker says:

    Scottish sports related. I am sooooooo not British.

    “If Murray wins the Paris Masters final and Djokovic does not get out of the semi-finals, the prize will swing from Belgrade to Dunblane, an achievement before the ATP World Tour Finals in London this month that should all but ensure the Scot a knighthood in the New Year honours list.”

    That’s it!? The greatest Scottish/UK athlete ever and for toryboy teamGBists o the Graun, the highest accolade is getting knighted by Brenda.

  135. Dr Jim says:

    A special announcement will be made tomorrow on the new funding arrangements for Team GB…wait for it…and regions
    Now I don’t know what that’s supposed to mean but it sounds like England think they’re GB again…conveniently

  136. Ian Sanderson says:

    Off topic I know but I can’t seem to find a link to send this to Stu directly….

    Posted this earlier tonight on Yes Alliance (

    SKY Channel 504 (Parliament).
    Currently showing a live debate on “Children in crisis: unaccompanied migrant children in the EU” (Migrant children in the EU)
    This is a debate on a report by a HoL committee, produced in June, published in July, and only commented on by the Govt. (Home Office) today at 5pm
    Despite my feelings about this institution I feel that for once it has fulfilled a basic requirement of society… It has stood up for humanity..!
    Jack McConnell was speaking when I commenced viewing and it was a fine speech. He has been followed by other ‘Lords’, mainly Labour so far…
    I look forward to the govt. spokesman’s ” summing-up ”
    Incidentally Scotland has been mentioned by, at least, three of the contributors so far. Reference has been in glowing terms concerning the ‘guardian’ legislation recently introduced in Scotland.
    I would urge those of you who have access to the SKY channel to watch this. It is the normal procedure for this channel to repeat their broadcasts over the next couple of days.
    Also available here…/4e0c28dc-8412-4261-a061-d327a6bf… (Thank you Ewan Scotty Cramb)
    We’ve had a ‘Crossbencher’ and now have a LibDem. ALL the speakers so far have been critical of the current Govt.

  137. Thepnr says:

    @Tam Jardine

    The fact that Scottish Resistance raised exactly £0 speaks volumes.

    The fact so called journalists don’t know this tells you all you need to know about their level of knowledge of Scottish politics and in particular the Yes movement.

    @Ian Sanderson

    For future reference, there is a Contact button at the top of the page, third column along.

  138. Iain More says:

    So what are the odds on the BBC and STV both leading with and screaming “THE SNPs CONTROVERSIAL OBFA” tomorrow or will it be the “DUG FLIES HOME TO VOTE DOWN SNPs CONTROVERSIAL OBFA”.

  139. Rock says:

    I hope the Greens vote with the unionists.

    Because gullible independence supporters will, hopefully, finally get it into their head that only voting SNP will ever lead Scotland to independence.

    Only vote SNP at all levels until after independence.

  140. mr thms says:


    The BBC 3 website has an item about how the “UK” university system is more expensive than America..

    Their short video clip claims that in the past four years tuition fees in the “UK” have tripled and look to increase further..

    Also, that “UK” students are now on average in greater student debt than US students..

    It ends by asking you to share this information if you think we pay too much for higher education..

    [I]”Are Brits really leaving uni with more debt than US students?”[/I]

    Should we give Reporting Scotland and Good Morning Scotland the scoop?

  141. karmanaut says:

    Wow. I just found out that, amazingly, that paper are STILL letting that woman write for them. This reminds me so much of when I heard that note only had Murphy been out in charge of SLAB, but that McTernan was going to be masterminding things.

  142. Cactus says:

    I love ma country.


  143. call me dave says:

    Another jolly jape!

    Greens in plan to embarrass SNP over ‘timid’ council tax plans

  144. Cactus says:

    Rock it on, last line at twelve thirty-two am.

  145. Dr Jim says:

    Whenever the BBC start a report with “The controversial” you know that means nobody ever mentioned it or it’s something completely unimportant to anybody like when Nicola Sturgeons shoes were “Controversial” because they were tartan and as we all know that was showing outright defiance to our masters and overlords who banned Scots from wearing tartan some hundreds of years ago in case we got a sense of identity by using it as clothing and they might do it again so don’t upset them

    Somebody correct me if I’m wrong but is not every SNP piece of legislation contoversial or is it only when it’s “Slammed”
    or if there’s a “Blow” to it or even if it’s in “Tatters”

    Never mind football’s coming so we’ll “Crash” out against England and there’ll be “Calls” for the managers head even though nobody will have actually called anybody
    but I’m sure Sturgeons “Dreams” of a victory against the “Auld enemy” on whoevers “Soil” will see Independence support “Nosedive” or “Tumble” or “Turn to ashes” on our “Bitter defeat”

    All of which means we defo don’t want Independence “Fact”

    They pay people a lot of money to write the same shit I just did and they wonder why we don’t like the Bastirts

  146. Capella says:

    Laura Keunssberg reports on the Leave campaign’s super duper info gathering software, which is downloadable. Used to profile voters so successfully that they could target ads down to street level.
    I thought it was the dastardly Russkis who were the cyber threats we should be worried about.

  147. Malky says:

    As I’ve already said on the Scottish Greens Twitter feed, this would amount to a travesty of common sense.

  148. Peter says:

    @ One_Scot

    “By that logic, you might as well repeal speeding legislation.”

    It’s very different because there is technology available to catch speeding motorists,

  149. Smallaxe says:


    Thank you Nana,my day is now complete.Kettle on. 🙂

    Peace Always

  150. frogesque says:


    That French/German train is a doozy! Why are we so far behind?

    Imagine Waverley and Haymarket without the stink of diesel or ugly overhead wires and their costly maintenance.

  151. Macart says:

    Interesting piece on Odey Nana, but I noticed a link to this piece at the bottom of the page.

    The last para is a beaut.

  152. Sinky says:

    Coming soon the great FIFA poppy debate on Radio Shortbread

    Being discussed on BBC Radio Scotland Morning Call at 9 a.m.
    Call 0500 92 95 00. Text 80295.

  153. Valerie says:

    I did see the pink strip thing on Twitter. It was from one of the bigger papers, saying they have to wear the pink strip because there is too much of a clash.

  154. Nana says:


    Good to see you commenting, yesterday went well I hope.


    I just thought Wow when I read that piece. Britain produces aircraft carriers unable to carry aircraft and tanks to beat ‘incompetent enemies’

    But hey there’s a roaring trade in a/holes

    Sorry above article will not archive

  155. caledonia says:

    Our family always gives Greens our second vote
    Will aee what happens today but going by greens twitter feed not anymore

    How could the Green Party support vile football disorder and secterinism

  156. Luigi says:

    Lochside says:

    1 November, 2016 at 11:19 pm

    Scotland the brave?…like ballerinas rather than bravehearts.

    Ach, you have to hand it to them yoons, Lochside.
    What better way to humiliate Scotland and put us back in or box than force our national team to wear pink.

    Keep em down. Keep em cringing!

  157. louis.b.argyll says:

    Good article again Rev C.

    But, the thought of LPIS ‘piloting’ anything makes me shudder..

    ..’left a bit, no..right a bit.. a bit more..Oops, too far right..Oh well.. Let’s blame the SNP..’

  158. Nana says:


    Get your Alert reader badge on! I did not see that one. There are so many articles right now, many stating the same thing, basically Brexit for nutters

  159. Luigi says:

    It speaks volumes that Scottish players are willing to be humiliated and wear pink as ordered.

    Can you imagine the French team or the English players agreeing to be humiliated like that. They would walk out pronto.

    What kind of national psyche do we have, when we are prepared top put up with such crap and abuse?

  160. Smallaxe says:


    Yesterday went well for me,but Oncol.baffled!:-)

    Peace Always

  161. Brian Powell says:

    Call Me Dave

    If the Greens really are playing such a game then they are screwed, but it is an article in the Herald.

  162. Capella says:

    @ Nana – Annabel Ewing’s amendment to the football discussion is excellent. Who wouldn’t support that!

    Motion S5M-02231.1: Annabelle Ewing, Cowdenbeath, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 01/11/2016
    As an amendment to motion S5M-02231 in the name of Douglas Ross (Justice), leave out from “there are laws” to end and insert “the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 sends a clear message that abusive behaviour has no place in Scottish football and gives additional tools to police and prosecutors to deal with acts of hatred; further notes that an independent poll carried out by YouGov showed overwhelming public support for the Act, including support from a majority of the football supporters surveyed; recognises the support from equality organisations in assisting to tackle unacceptable behaviour at football matches; notes the importance of Section 6 in tackling issues of threatening communications and stirring up religious hatred, which have been criminalised in the rest of the UK since 2006; further notes the Scottish Government’s record level of investment of £12.5 million in tackling sectarianism through education and grassroots community work, and urges the Scottish Government to continue with this work through the delivery of the recommendations of the independent Advisory Group on Tackling Sectarianism in Scotland, as well as tackling all other forms of prejudice and hate crime and implementing the recommendations of the Independent Advisory Group on Hate Crime, Prejudice and Community Cohesion.”
    Supported by: Michael Matheson

    Current Status: Taken in the Chamber on 02/11/2016

  163. Macart says:


    Ayup! Oh, and the three links at the bottom of that LCH piece ALL in the same vein.

    If you want to know the truth behind a politicians soundbite, simply follow the money. What the money is telling us is that we should brace ourselves for impact.

  164. Tinto Chiel says:

    The pink strip (‘cos dark blue suddenly clashes with lily-white after about 140 years) sums up the disastrous management of football in this country. I’m sure just about everyone at the top level of SFA will be a Yoon. There were certainly plenty of former internationals telling us how pwoud they were, vewwy pwoud. Michael Stewart was about the only one I remember who came out as a vile sep/ trainee pustule.

    As was mentioned before, they could solve abusive songs or violent behaviour by immediate docking of points.

    We all know that will never happen, and why.

    Meanwhile the sad decline of our football continues apace. Doncaster and Regan have a lot to answer for.

  165. Smallaxe says:


    Batten hatches and Stand By to Ram!

    Peace Always

  166. Muscleguy says:

    In terms of opposition to another indyref hardening, a lot of that increase could simply be referendum fatigue. We chapped a door recently and the woman looking distressed simply said ‘not now, it’s too soon, too soon’.

    Unlike us politics wonks some people find such things as referendums psychologically stressful, all the negativity hits them personally and they feel distress.

    As for those wanting an indyref but only after the Brexit are probably former Yessers who also voted Leave. They will I think by and large still troop out and vote to make Scotland an Independent nation when it comes down to it.

    At the moment Indy is an abstract, nebulous thing to most folk who are not political wonks like us on here. The tabling of the referendum bill is small beer with Brexit revelations all over the media, how will it compete with Nissan and Theresa and is Harry going out with a black woman?

    But once the campaign is joined again in earnest minds will get concentrated as last time and thought processes will begin instead of falling back on old tropes as we do most of the time.

  167. Brian Powell says:


    Slab and the Tories won’t support it, as their motion has a different purpose that has nothing to do with reducing offensive behaviour or sectarianism. Like to be wrong but we’ll see.

  168. gus1940 says:

    As far as I can see looking at the on-line versions of the dead tree press and TV news monday’s exclusive in The Edinburgh Evening News revealing Kez’s jaunt across the pond remains an exclusive. There was a brief mention in The National.

    Strange reticence in reporting news by our wonderful media.

  169. Glamaig says:

    Macart says:
    2 November, 2016 at 9:43 am

    ‘What the money is telling us is that we should brace ourselves for impact.’

    Yes. Just back from a visit to S. England. Its interesting reading their papers. The Telegraph is full of Brexit good news and optimism yet the Business section of the same paper is not.

  170. Robert Louis says:

    So, SFA allowing the Scotland team to be humiliated in pink. That must really motivate players. Cringe, cringe, cringety cringe. Who chose pink in the first place as an away strip??

    Got to keep Scotland down. No self worth. That’s how it works.

  171. Capella says:

    @ Brian Powell – I agree – but how unreasonable and manipulative they will look. Worse still, the Greens and Liberals will have to vote it down in order to support the main motion. Not a good look for them.

  172. Andrew McLean says:

    Desmond Says
    “The law as it stands, while honourable in intention is absurdly vague and allows rampant interpretation – when it comes down to “If anyone finds anything offensive then its a crime”.

    Actually it doesn’t, it is a reference to a reasonable man, in this case and in many others that can be a police officer who can be “officially” offended, this has its origins in Roman Law, as the apparition of the reasonable person can be the difference between liability or a criminal conviction as in a void, the judge can do justice by calling upon this creature and judge conduct against what the reasonable person would have done in similar circumstances.

    Most Law’s concerning Tort have the term “reasonable” and “Reasonably Practicable”.

    In 1837 Vaughan v Menlove is sometimes ascribed as the first recorded instance of an apparition of the term reasonable man in common law jurisprudence.

    However this bedrock of Law is unknown to the secret Lawyer of yesterdays call Kaye UKOK Style. If he were and I doubt it, smashing the foundations of Law just to proclaim SNP bad, must constituent the ultimate misuse of “Fiat justitia ruat caelum” imaginable by the human mind.

  173. Fred says:

    Anent the pink strips, they could at least claim it’s for cancer research!

  174. Capella says:

    Who made the decision about the pink strip? – not that I’ve anything against pink (for girls) they could wear ballet tutus and still score goals IMO – but last year it was “The Battenburg Army” with pink and l
    lemon strip.

    What was wrong with wearing saltire blue? I thought that was the traditional Scottish colour?

  175. Grouse Beater says:

    Which way, USA?:

  176. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    Have to agree with @ gus1940 says at 10:12 am

    RE: “Kez’s jaunt across the pond”

    BLiS Propaganda machine lies to/misleads the Scottish electorate by omission yet again.

    Compare this to Dead Tree MSM articles and comments regarding the FMs trips to mainland Europe following the Brexit vote.

    Lots of “why is she”, “how dare she”, “not her remit”, “get back to the day job”, “unacceptable cost to/waste of Scots taxpayers cash”.

    Yet still some doth protest loudly about Billboards attempting to point this hypocrisy out to the less politically aware.

  177. Andrew McLean says:

    the members of the Commission for parlamentirey reform have beeen anounced:
    Katie Burke MSYP, member of the Scottish Youth Parliament For North East Fife, and former Chair of the Scottish Youth Parliament
    Pam Duncan–Glancy, Disability Equality and Human Rights Activist
    The Very Rev Dr Lorna Hood, Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland (2013-14), former Church of Scotland Minister
    Geoff Mawdsley, Director of Reform Scotland
    Professor Boyd Robertson, Principal of Sabhal Mòr Ostaig, UHI, the National Centre for Gaelic Language and Culture.

  178. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    Note from your link @ Andrew McLean says at 11:04 am

    That the following members of the Commission for parliamentary reform were nominated by their political party:

    Scottish National Party: Fiona McLeod former MSP for Strathkelvin and Bearsden (2011-2016)

    Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party: JACKSON CARLAW MSP for Eastwood

    Scottish Labour: JOHANN LAMONT MSP for Glasgow

    Scottish Green Party: John Finnie MSP for Highlands and Islands

    Scottish Liberal Democrats: Jeremy Purvis, former MSP for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (2003-2011).


  179. Phydaux says:

    An insightful and informative article which highlights important stuff about how our elected representatives are failing to carry out their duties in their day job.They will achieve nothing, nada, zilch and how will they then portray their pointlessness?

    An independent Scotland would have a large pool of talent to create a collaborative government of coalition political parties, committed to work in Scotland’s best interests.A well deserved sense of pride in Scotland’s achievements ought to be the basis for better relations within and between peoples.

    As distinct from the English blood and soil nationalist sentiment or jingoism motivated by the need to bolster one’s own side by putting another side down.If the Greens vote with the Tories, they are no different to the cowardly opposition MSPs who have nothing constructive to offer as public servants of the people of Scotland.Their loss of credibility and trustworthiness will not be forgotten at next year’s council elections.

  180. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    Didn’t know anything about Scottish Liberal Democrats: Jeremy Purvis, former MSP for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (2003-2011). tells me he is:

    Baron Purvis of Tweed and the leader of the Devo Plus cross-party group with MSPs from Labour, the Scottish Liberal Democrats and Scottish Conservatives to progress reforms to strengthen the Scottish Parliament within the UK. Most of his proposals have now been enacted in the Scotland Act 2016.”

    He formally served on the advisory board of the independent think tank Reform Scotland.

  181. The Rough Bounds. says:

    How about just expanding the law to ban football altogether?

    That way we would all get peace. Reporting Scotland and Good Morning Scotland would be left with nothing to talk about except murder trials and seagulls stealing packets of crisps.

    They wouldn’t last 5 minutes.

  182. Brian McKay says:

    My biggest disappointment in all of this is that the Greens are supporting this motion. I can’t see why they would nor what they think they will get out of it. It may be that they are looking for some way of showing that they are not completely in thrall to the SNP, but if so, it’s a strange topic to pick given that public opinion is hugely in favour of the OBFA.

  183. desimond says:

    @Andrew McLean

    I appreciate your response there but sadly this only highlights the inadequacy. There have already been cases thrown out where a judge has asked a Police officer to confirm what was being sung. The officer misheard and when asked to explain said “I wasn’t sure what I was hearing but I found it offensive!”

    To be honest I’m more gobsmacked at all the people angry at Scotland having a Pink away strip…what’s the matter with Pink? Its a fine enough colour and didn’t do Buffon any harm in terrifying the worlds greatest strikers for years..I think he’s been wearing Pink since 2008!

    Dare I ask, is it Scottish Salmon Pink?

  184. Macart says:

    @Rough Bounds

    Gets my vote. 🙂

    Reducing North British News to simply murdurr n’ kittens. Probably wouldn’t even make a five minute slot.

  185. orri says:

    No, it’s Salmond pink.

    I’ve heard that there’s research that shows teams in red have an advantage due to its distinctiveness in peripheral vision meaning players are more aware of where their team mates are and hence can pass sooner. The same logic holds for other strips so with any luck neon pink will give Scotland and advantage. The drawback is that it depends on training otherwise you get blunders where someone in a national team passes the ball to an opponent in the colour he usually plays in.

  186. orri says:

    The Scottish Green’s manifesto unfortunately contains a commitment to repealing the OBDA. However it’s tied to some hippy bullshit about local communities taking ownership of clubs. None of which is practical when you have more than one in a given town/city and add on to that some with widespread support. In the case of the Old Firm it’s sometimes not even local support causing the trouble but rather some choosing Scotland’s football grounds as their battlefield.

  187. sil says:

    OT: Germany is determined to deny Britain the Brexit it wants:-

    I really hope Germany follow through with this and deny the UK to single market access, As they EU have said the UK cannot cherry picks what they want, it’s all or nothing. Then indyref2 will be on cards for sure.

  188. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    If you take two pics, one of Scotland’s home and away strips and one of England’s home and away strips, then desaturate the colour on both pics, the Scottish away strip is just slightly darker than England’s home strip.

    Scotland’s home strip provides a greater contrast with England’s home strip with the colour removed.

    Just sayin’ like…

  189. Andrew McLean says:

    “judge has asked a Police officer to confirm what was being sung. The officer misheard and when asked to explain said “I wasn’t sure what I was hearing but I found it offensive!”

    Yes I heard that but haven’t found the source.

    Sorry I don’t get your point, is it one case so the heavens should fall, just because I don’t fully understand will mean my offence is any less.

    For instance, I may mishear the opposition spokesmen, but i am absolutely offended by how low in the gutter so called intelligent politicians will debase themselves and the decent people of Scotland to support sectarianism and bigotry.

    And make no mistake, this politicking on sectarian behaviour, without cumming up with an alternative is politicking of the lowest order, and will be returned on them.

    By the way the song referred to in Donnely and Walsh V PF was The Roll of Honour, a song whose lyrics proclaimed support for members of the Irish Republican Army and the Irish National Liberation Army who died during the hunger strike at the Maze Prison near Belfast in 1981.

    and the arsehole who raised it in parliament was wearing a poppy, so ok uk style.

  190. Stu Mac says:

    @Luigi (and others)

    There seems to be some rather strange attitudes to wearing pink here. The idea that pink is somehow effeminate (which is the vibe I’m getting from you) is quite recent. In the past it was seen as just a shade of red and quite suitable for boys to wear. Recent prejudices may be due to the Nazis forcing gays to wear a pink triangle and this becoming associated with gays. I’m afraid to say the prejudice is not anti-Nazi but anti-gay – which is what seems to being displayed by some posters here.

    My only objection is that there is no real clash of colour. Re the pink strip, it is crap but that is nothing to do with its colour just its general design. One could easily design a good strip which had some pink in it. Don’t forget one of the earliest Scotland strips was based on the Earl of Roseberry’s racing colours – rose pink and primrose. A fine strip!

  191. Thepnr says:

    O/T Marie Rimmer accused of assaulting a Yes supporter has been found Not Proven.

  192. Foonurt says:

    Heard yoan erse James Kelly, gibbering oan thoan wireless, Fuckin awfae.

    Alexander Burnett – Tory Energy Spokesman, oan Radio Scotlinn this moarnin, wisnae onnae betturr. Hung, drawn in quarturrt, whin asked aboot nuclear subsidies, whin eh didnae want thum onnae mair, fur wind-turbines.

  193. Phronesis says:

    An unfolding tragedy for American politics. Hobsons choice for voters to decide who is better for president between this individual who appeals to this organisation ;

    ‘…the Crusader — and it is one of the most prominent newspapers of the Ku Klux Klan.
    Under the banner “Make America Great Again,” the entire front page of the paper’s current issue is devoted to a lengthy defense of Trump’s message — an embrace some have labeled a de facto endorsement.
    “‘Make America Great Again!’ It is a slogan that has been repeatedly used by Donald Trump in his campaign for the presidency,” Pastor Thomas Robb wrote in the Crusader. “You can see it on the shirts, buttons, posters and ball caps such as the one being worn here by Trump speaking at a recent rally. … But can it happen? Can America really be great again? This is what we will soon find out!’

    and this presidential candidate who elicits strong views from an individual who has worked at the heart of the American government;

    ‘Extreme and hostile words stream from the mouth of the Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, who has called the president of Russia “the new Hitler” and threatened Russia with military force. Insouciant Americans are capable of electing this warmonger who would bring Armageddon upon the earth’

    ‘The Clinton crime syndicate in the closing years of the 20th century allowed a small handful of mega-corporations to consolidate the US media in a few hands. This vast increase in the power of the Oligarchy was accomplished despite US anti-trust law. The media mergers destroyed the American tradition of a dispersed and independent media’

    How counter productive for the stance by the Greens et al today about the OBFA. Legitimate laws have an in-built orientation to the common good and elected MSPs have a duty to strike the correct balance between the input from civil society and the output of formal decision-making bodies.

    Conclusions drawn from a poorly constructed and skewed poll do not represent the views of the majority of the electorate who have no wish to revisit sectarianism at a football match or any other venue.

    As these Scotland fans will concur;

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