Wings Over Scotland

In a blur of media excitement this week about such stellar household names as Haydn Gwynne, Maggi Hambling, John Illsley, William Dalrymple, James Timpson, Amanda Foreman, Andy Puddicombe, David Rowntree, Bill Morris, David Goodhart, William Boyd, Tracy Brabin, Paul Cartledge, Glen Baxter and Andy Barrow* all telling Scots to vote No because they love us, an even more thrilling endorsement for the Union was largely overlooked – that of Dana Rohrabacher.

What do you mean, who?

Read the rest of this entry →

Remember the happy days of 2012 when Unionists complained endlessly that the independence debate was in danger of becoming bogged down by arguments about process rather than politics, readers?

We’re now in the third straight day of the No campaign and the media obsessing about a process (an independent Scotland’s currency arrangements) rather than the principle of whether Scotland should choose its own governments.

Above is a double-page spread from today’s Scottish Sun, which has extremely unusually gone with a front-page splash on politics (rather than its usual diet of celebrity freakshows) for the last three days, and which continues to hammer away – as all three opposition leaders did at FMQs yesterday – on the boneheaded demand for a “Plan B” if the rUK rejects a currency union.

The Sun does so despite devoting most of one of those pages to Alex Salmond telling them EXACTLY what Plan B would be, but evidently they’re a bit slow on the uptake, so let’s see if we can spell it out in words simple enough for Johann Lamont, Ruth Davidson, Willie Rennie and Andrew Nicoll to understand.

Read the rest of this entry →

Because you know he’s coming. Do you feel lucky, Labour voters?

We can’t really avoid mentioning the big list of “celebrities” for No assembled today by the cuddly, fluffy, funded-by-Tory-donor-oil-tycoon-linked-to-genocidal-murderers “Let’s Stay Together” campaign to lovebomb Scottish voters, summed up perfectly by an alert reader on Twitter as “a veritable Who’s That? of the British establishment”.

One of the people we HAD heard of on the list was the, er, noted historian Dr David Starkey. Dr Starkey was keen to lend his name to the letter telling Scots that “we want to let you know how very much we value our bonds of citizenship with you”.

He didn’t always feel quite so warmly towards Scotland, though.

Read the rest of this entry →

Private Eye editor Ian Hislop hasn’t made much of a secret of his opposition to Scottish independence. The satirical and investigative magazine, which is normally so razor-sharp on all the failings and hypocrisies of politicians and the media, has been remarkably silent on the subject of the referendum for the past few years, which one might have thought would have given it enough material to go weekly.

So in that context of that self-imposed censorship, the BBC’s coverage of last month’s Commonwealth Games in Glasgow must have been really quite something.

Read the rest of this entry →

It turns out that Jackie Baillie heard this and thought it was a referendum broadcast.

Silly old Jackie, eh readers?

Read the rest of this entry →

Alert readers will be aware that even in a campaign characterised by dishonesty, the ever-smirking Labour MSP Jackie Baillie has carved a reputation for especially notable creativity with the truth. With our hands on our hearts, we don’t think we’ve ever heard her say anything that wasn’t a lie. However, on last night’s The World Tonight on BBC Radio 4, we believe she reached a spectacular personal best. Have a listen.

If you can’t quite believe your ears, we’ll transcribe that for you.

Read the rest of this entry →

We’re sure, right?

And it’ll be accompanied, we haven’t even the slightest shred of doubt, by a veritable procession of outraged columnists demanding that Alistair Darling must take personal responsibility for the actions of these people.

Read the rest of this entry →

Phoebe Arnold on BuzzFeed Politics, 6 August 2014:

“If you minus Scotland’s total tax receipts generated per person since 1980 from the average for the UK, they’ve contributed a surplus of £222 billion in today’s prices (again, counting Scotland’s geographical share of North Sea oil and gas).”

(Source fullfact.org. Our emphasis.)

£222bn divided by 33 years is £6.73bn a year. No biggie. Don’t mention it.

As so insightfully predicted by Lallands Peat Worrier yesterday, the media has raced to proclaim victory for Alistair Darling in tonight’s STV debate. For our money, the only winners were the people who watched something else.

The debate was a mess – not quite as shambolic as Nicola Sturgeon and Johann Lamont’s effort on the same channel a few months back, but none of the lessons from that trainwreck were learned. Darling was angry and personal from the start, while Salmond was off-form and the strategy he adopted for dealing with the only subject Darling wanted to talk about – currency – was absolutely dreadful.

We warned back in February that Yes couldn’t just keep flatly saying “There will be a currency union” for seven months, even if it’s true, and the studio audience was deeply and audibly unimpressed with Salmond’s evasion of Darling’s repeated question, even if the tactic got old and tired when the No man was still using it an hour later.

But we’re not going to get into too much spin, because our view is partisan. The main evidence used for the hasty declarations of a “triumph” for Darling was a snap poll conducted immediately afterwards by ICM for the Guardian. But on even a cursory examination, the poll actually found the opposite of what the media said it did.

Read the rest of this entry →

We encourage readers to keep an eye out for the soon-to-be-released work of the Scottish Research Society. You won’t have heard of them before – they’re only three months old, with just 48 “likes” on Facebook – but they’ve already amassed some serious funds and have registered as campaigners for No in the referendum debate.

The society’s website notes that it “was formed on May 6th, under the Act of 1854, permitting Scientific and Literary Societies to be set up to inform and educate the public on social, economic and scientific matters.”

It goes on to add that “the material contained in the Society’s works, is used to provide accurate and informed commentary on aspects of the issues relevant to the question of Scottish independence. The Society is not a campaign group, but an organisation seeking to inform and provide balance.”

So that’s an interesting start.

Read the rest of this entry →