The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland



Down The Pipe 64

Posted on October 16, 2023 by

As alert readers will have noticed, Wings has been perusing the SNP’s Governance And Transparency Review over the last couple of days, a document which tentatively attempts to discern just how big a mess the party’s previous leadership has left it in.

(SPOILER: a really big one.)

The paper has now also reached the mainstream media.

Wings already touched on that particular aspect of the party’s mismanagement back in August, but in the light of the report now formally acknowledging the problem it’s worth taking a moment to establish just how astonishingly bad it is.

Read the rest of this entry →

The phantom menace 215

Posted on May 01, 2013 by

We’ve spent a fair bit of time over the course of this website’s existence documenting the multi-media witch-hunts that invariably arise in the Scottish media whenever some obscure and/or anonymous independence supporter on the internet says something slightly intemperate (or even just expresses an unpopular opinion).

We especially enjoy contrasting it against the way that the elected, taxpayer-funded representatives of major political parties can get away unremarked with comparing the First Minister to dictators and genocidal mass murderers (of the sort “Better Together” donors like to give hundreds of thousands of pounds to).

hatespeech

The vast difference in the amount of media weight given to abusive behaviour from British nationalists and that from the independence side (the infamous “cybernats”) has long been a feature of Scottish political debate, but over the last 12 hours the phenomenon has seen an intriguing new twist.

Read the rest of this entry →

The Scotsman backs Al-Qaeda 5

Posted on February 29, 2012 by

It doesn’t, of course. (We have it on good authority that the old-school-Tory broadsheet considers the Islamic-fundamentalist terrorist organisation to be a bit soft on homosexuality.) But as a headline, our statement is every bit as valid as the ridiculous one the paper has rather embarrassingly chosen to run on its front page today.

“SNP backs ‘devo-plus’ for independence vote”, hollers the once-august organ, possibly causing more naive readers to imagine that the SNP might have backed ‘devo-plus‘ for the independence vote. The marginally more wary would perhaps have been further persuaded by an opening paragraph which reads “The SNP wants the devo-plus option, which would see Holyrood take control of most taxes, included on the referendum ballot as an alternative to full independence.”

But of course, no such thing – or anything remotely close to it – has actually happened. Dig a few lines deeper and what you find is that some unnamed, unquoted “Nationalists” (who may or may not be in the SNP) have allegedly said that if “a strong body of opinion lines up behind devo-plus” (whatever that actually means), the Scottish Government might agree to include it on the referendum ballot.

(Despite the fact that on last night’s Newsnight Scotland, the proponents of devo-plus, including Jeremy Purvis and Tavish Scott, said that they didn’t want the option included in the vote at all. They want it to replace the status quo as the “No” choice.)

So to recap: some people who weren’t prepared to give their names have supposedly made comments which the paper has interpreted to mean that if certain vague conditions are met in the future something else might happen, in theory, despite that thing not being desired or supported even by the people who invented it. Quite the scoop for the Scotsman’s ace reporters – and for the high journalistic standards of the Scottish media as a whole – there, I’m sure we’d all agree.

Unionists ponder suicide pact 0

Posted on November 08, 2011 by

David Maddox in the Scotsman livens up a previously-slow news day with a report that Labour are preparing to team up with the Conservatives in the UK Parliament to force a Westminster-led referendum on Scottish independence. The article is short on solid quotes to contradict David Cameron's repeatedly-stated position that the referendum is a matter for the Scottish Parliament, relying instead on unnamed "sources", but if true it would be an astonishing development. None of the UK parties stood on a platform of holding a referendum – indeed, all three explicitly opposed the idea – so where they'd be conjuring a mandate to do such a thing from would be anyone's guess, whereas the SNP have an extremely clear one from the Scottish people to conduct the vote in the second half of the Holyrood parliamentary term.

Most observers on both sides of the debate agree that a Westminster-imposed referendum would be an enormously risky gamble for the Unionists, as Scottish voters are unlikely to take kindly to such a democratic trampling. But it may be that the three London-based parties sense a growing trend of support for a Yes vote – reflected in recent polls – and consider it less of a risk than waiting for three more years of brutal cuts to take effect and persuade Scots that they're better off away from Tory-led UK governments. Labour especially, though, would be dicing with death were they to collude in such a scheme. We shall see.

  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.

    Stats: 6,785 Posts, 1,221,599 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • Alf Baird on Too Tight To Mention: “Gaun yersel Aidan, tell us aw aboot oor zero-growth unner-developed and plunnerred colonial economy aye rin bi a bunch o…Jul 8, 07:40
    • Aidan on Too Tight To Mention: “Let’s rewind back a bit, go back to any WoS post from May or earlier and the plan was very…Jul 8, 06:18
    • Young Lochinvar on Too Tight To Mention: “Dangerous stuff. The more boxes that are ticked that say “ye just Cannae dae it” and that we are in…Jul 8, 05:07
    • Anthem on Too Tight To Mention: “Brilliant!Jul 8, 01:33
    • Dunx on Too Tight To Mention: “The UK has a veto in the UN Security Council, not the General Assembly . The GA is a talking…Jul 8, 00:41
    • Young Lochinvar on Too Tight To Mention: “I suspect not MB. The problem I have with the Jacobite rebellions is the whole “using” thing the exiled Stuart’s…Jul 8, 00:24
    • Young Lochinvar on Too Tight To Mention: “LOLz 🙂Jul 7, 23:57
    • Stuart on Too Tight To Mention: “Would that be the same UN General Assembly where the UK Government can wield a veto? Why yes it is!…Jul 7, 23:21
    • Xaracen on Too Tight To Mention: “Only one page on JPTI appears relevant, Aidan, and it doesn’t say what you asserted. JPTI states on its site…Jul 7, 22:52
    • sarah on Too Tight To Mention: “Liberation’s case has to be approved by the General Assembly of the UN. That is well known. The route to…Jul 7, 22:28
    • Oneliner on Too Tight To Mention: “Not My KingJul 7, 22:27
    • Confused on Too Tight To Mention: “I like to think of it this way : an analogy Scotland is like Auschwitz (rich industrial area, but not…Jul 7, 22:10
    • Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Too Tight To Mention: ““The foundational function of the State is the monopolistic organization of the power of the sword over a territorial cultural…Jul 7, 22:07
    • James on Too Tight To Mention: “I quite agree, “Chas” is indeed a unionist prick. Well said.Jul 7, 21:56
    • Northcode on Too Tight To Mention: “Leah Gunn Barrett has this to say about the Darien Scheme. The Darien Myth and the Origins of the Union…Jul 7, 21:53
    • Mark Beggan on Too Tight To Mention: “Pity the Jacobites didn’t win. Young English nationalists would be talking of the slaughter of London, the burning of Winchester.…Jul 7, 21:46
    • Aidan on Too Tight To Mention: “@Alf – I constantly praise Scotland and talk up its strengths both here and in person. Can the same be…Jul 7, 21:37
    • Aidan on Too Tight To Mention: “@Xaracen – it’s on the JPTI website. If you want the actual wording you’ll need to email JPTI or persuade…Jul 7, 21:35
    • Alf Baird on Too Tight To Mention: ““they talk about our history and culture as being ancient guff but not one of them has ever presented anything…Jul 7, 21:19
    • Xaracen on Too Tight To Mention: ““The Committee on Decolonisation has said conclusively that the case of Scotland won’t even be considered in any session as…Jul 7, 21:14
    • Young Lochinvar on Too Tight To Mention: “Chas Well first because it’s interesting, second because it’s pertinent to much of the discussion going on here and lastly…Jul 7, 21:12
    • Aidan on Too Tight To Mention: “No it doesn’tJul 7, 20:59
    • Anthem on Too Tight To Mention: “Looking forward to hearing about it Sarah.Jul 7, 20:55
    • Chas on Too Tight To Mention: “Why? The past has passed.Jul 7, 20:55
    • sarah on Too Tight To Mention: “Liberation’s case to the UN continues.Jul 7, 20:43
    • Young Lochinvar on Too Tight To Mention: “I reckon with the current thread toing and froing on the subject of colonies and colonialism and the Act of…Jul 7, 20:42
    • Alf Baird on Too Tight To Mention: “““Resort to violence to keep control.” Can you give me a recent example of when The Uk Gov has done…Jul 7, 19:48
    • sam on Too Tight To Mention: “The riots in George Square 1919. These were protests about working conditions that so alarmed the UK gov that they…Jul 7, 19:46
    • agent x on Too Tight To Mention: “i find it very strange that how things have developed on here. “I am a proud Scot that demands Independence”.…Jul 7, 19:34
    • Dan on Too Tight To Mention: “One ponders how you managed to see and respond to a post within 1 minute, when it takes up to…Jul 7, 18:57
  • A tall tale



↑ Top