Wings Over Scotland

Alert readers will know that one of this site’s key themes for the last several months has been examining the true meaning of Labour’s pledge to “pool and share resources” within the UK if Scotland votes No – pointing out that as Scotland is one of the wealthiest parts of the UK due to its oil resources, “pooling and sharing” means diverting more Scottish money to poor parts of England and Wales.

(Northern Ireland already gets the biggest share of UK spending.)

And those same readers will also have noted our ongoing puzzlement at the continued failure of any Scottish reporters or broadcasters to question Labour on that point. But is it possible to solve this unfathomable mystery?

Read the rest of this entry →

We’ve been taking the mickey out of Labour a lot in the last couple of days, which has been thoroughly merited and done with serious intent, but we thought it’d be nice to finish the week with something a bit more positive. Those of you who follow our Twitter account may have seen it already, but if not it’s well worth taking some time out for.

It’s a speech made at a Yes Scotland meeting in Lockerbie by Mark Frankland, who alert readers will recall from his appearance on this site last year, and it pretty much speaks for itself. Get this man on more stages.

The last 40 years of UK politics accurately summarised in 30 seconds.

(From episode 3 of Stewart Lee’s Comedy Vehicle, still on iPlayer at time of writing.)

Rob Shorthouse is the Head of Communications for “Better Together”. This week he took part in a debate in Dunoon. The paper’s account of the event, published today, is fascinating and unusually candid, but this bit stood out for us in particular.

We think that’s his coded way of saying he’ll be voting Yes. Would explain a lot.

We’ve just endured two soul-withering hours of Labour’s 2014 Scottish conference. We thought you might like to meet someone who enjoyed it almost as much as we did.

Read the rest of this entry →

An extraordinary front-page headline in today’s Herald blares “Miliband pledges positive case for Union as No inject love into debate”. (We apologise to any readers we may have just inadvertently upset with the thought of Ed Miliband “injecting love” into them while they’re still digesting their breakfast.)

The article’s rather shy on details of Ed’s positive case, but luckily the Guardian has it.

Read the rest of this entry →

For those who missed it, Labour’s official explanation of the “40%” figure.

You’re right. She CAN’T have really said that. Watch it again.

The SNP has made hay with the damning appraisal of Scottish Labour’s “Devo Nano” plans which was delivered this week by charity think-tank Reform Scotland, and in particular its rejection of Labour’s claims that the proposals would mean Holyrood raising 40% of its own budget.

(As we’ve noted before, we’re not very sure why anyone’s meant to find that exciting anyway. You don’t make a difference to society by changing the address of the tax office, you make it by changing what you spend your money on.)

Because it looks, not for the first time, as if Labour’s got its sums wildly wrong.

Read the rest of this entry →

Continuing our trawl through the “Devo Nano” report. No squirrels this time.

Labour, of course, immediately trumpets any anti-independence opinion from big business, but suddenly treats anything welcomed by industry with great suspicion if it’s in line with SNP policy, so no shocks on that front. But not for the first time, the party seems to have rather misunderstood the entire concept of devolution.

Read the rest of this entry →

All this week we’ve been mockingly referring to Scottish Labour’s devolution proposals as “Devo Nano”, nano- being a mathematical term meaning “one billionth”. The implication there is that the amount of actual power being devolved would be very very small. We’re not subtle. But as we dig down into the full 298-page report, it’s beginning to look as though our sarcastic description is in fact somewhat over-generous.

Read the rest of this entry →

Labour’s full Devo Nano policy document is now available, at an artery-clogging 298 pages. We’ll be having a good old wade through it today, because despite Johann Lamont’s comprehensive explanation of its contents on telly on Tuesday night, we still have a couple of minor queries over the precise details that we’d like to get definitively cleared up, and this should do it.

Read the rest of this entry →