Wings Over Scotland

And you can’t say that every day.

Read the rest of this entry →

It’s curious that as the Scotland Bill negotiations deadlock drags on, well beyond its original deadline of 12 February and now hurtling headlong towards the extended 23 February one with no sign of progress on the horizon, that nobody is remarking on one of the most striking facets of the new devolution proposals.

Remember “pooling and sharing”, readers? Whatever happened to that?

Read the rest of this entry →

Last night, MP Natalie McGarry made another heavily-qualified semi-apology to the popular abusive-tweeter enthusiast JK Rowling, because that’s how bullying works. (As far as we know McGarry has still refused Rowling’s demand that she make a sizeable donation to Rowling’s charity under threat of legal action.)

One of George Orwell’s most-quoted lines is “Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”

We wonder who was trying to silence the torrent of drivel below, then.

Read the rest of this entry →

Without a doubt our new favourite Unionist website is this one:

And it’s not just for the snazzy badges.

Read the rest of this entry →

Since the astonishing election of 56 SNP MPs to the UK Parliament last May, the Unionist media – suddenly deprived of a whole contacts book full of friendly Scottish Labour bench-warmers ready to feed it cosy stories over a boozy expenses lunch in Whitehall – has raked through every bin and gutter in the land looking for anything (however pathetic) that it can try to puff up, distort, and rope into service as “dirt” on each of the Nat members, in an attempt to discredit them and the party.

So let’s just have a little look in here and – YIKES!

This could take some time.

Read the rest of this entry →

We saw a very interesting article on the London School of Economics website today.

It notes that in 2006, the year before the SNP came to power, 65% of Scots identified themselves as “Scottish not British” or “more Scottish than British”, but by 2014 – the year of the independence referendum – that number had fallen to just 49%.

It concludes, correctly, that just as we noted on Sunday, support for independence is fundamentally political in nature, not nationalist. But that only tells half the story.

Read the rest of this entry →

The Herald’s lead politics story this morning:

So Scotland currently has no debt? No responsibility for any share of the enormous £1.5 trillion burden run up by the UK? We’ll take that deal. Where do we sign?

Read the rest of this entry →

Barely a week – indeed, barely a day – has gone by over the last year or so without some angry, confused and hurt-sounding Unionist pundit or politician churning out yet another article on the theme of “WHY AREN’T YOU GRATEFUL THAT WE SAVED YOU FROM INDEPENDENCE, YOU APPALLING PLEBS?”

As far as the No side are concerned, the oil-price slump is a slam-dunk game-ender which finally conclusively proves that Scotland is too wee and too poor to run its own affairs, and their uncomprehending bewilderment as support for a Yes vote not only fails to disintegrate but keeps increasing even as the oil price sinks lower and lower has been quite a phenomenon to behold.

So we were interested to see today’s Sunday Times report a YouGov poll done for the comedy grumpy-old-white-guys support group (and spectacularly unsuccessful tactical voting enthusiasts) Scotland In Union, and somewhat miss the point of the results.

Read the rest of this entry →

Order “Welcome To Cairnstoon”, Chris’ compilation of Wings cartoons and more, here.

There’s nothing unusual about reading something in the Scottish media that makes your eyes widen. But a piece we saw in the Courier earlier today stretched ours out to Clockwork Orange-like proportions.

Now that’s a pretty intriguing opening (as the bishop said to the actress). At first we took it to mean that an independent Scotland could effectively take over Britain’s EU membership in the event of a Leave vote, ending any debate about whether and when it would be admitted on its own.

But then the punchline arrived.

Read the rest of this entry →

The title of this article is a phrase that people use when publishing a transcript of someone’s intended speech, to signify that this is what they INTENDED to say, but that the reader should verify it with the actual speech to check whether they did, because sometimes there are last-minute changes or the person simply forgets bits.

The above is Kezia Dugdale’s scripted speech to the Scottish Labour conference in October 2015, just 94 days before calling for an income tax increase for “hundreds of thousands of working Scots”.

Sometimes leaving stuff out by accident looks like the smart move.