This select gathering is all the Scottish Conservative conference delegates who were interested in discussing the party’s approach to devolving more powers to the Scottish Parliament in the event of a No vote in the independence referendum of 2014.
Readers far more cynical than ourselves may find the picture a useful gauge by which to measure the true degree of interest the Tories have in more powers.
It’s taken 306 years for the people of Scotland to be allowed a democratic voice on the constitution of their country. It’s a thing that was never supposed to happen. The Scottish Parliament’s electoral system was constructed deliberately and explicitly to prevent any party achieving a majority – in theory ensuring that the SNP could never pass a referendum bill – even though the two main UK parties still resolutely defend the First Past The Post system that produces them at Westminster.
This morning’s Daily Record carries a story about Ed Balls’ policy speech on welfare yesterday. Commendably, the Labour-supporting paper isn’t shy of pointing out the implications of Balls’ comments:
“Scots could get welfare benefits at lower rates than people in wealthy parts of England under plans being worked on by Labour. Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls yesterday raised the idea of a regional cap on welfare, opening the door to variations in a range of social security benefits.
Balls said the welfare cap of £25,000 a year per household should be higher in London but could be lower in parts of the UK where housing is cheaper.”
We’d have been even more impressed, though, if Wings Over Scotland hadn’t revealed the reality of what Labour’s future plans meant for Scotland almost three weeks ago.
The Scottish media is full today of Gordon Brown’s latest attempted intervention in the independence debate. Scotland on Sunday and the Sunday Herald both report that the former Prime Minister will urge Scots to “ditch the Tories, not the Union” (as the original SoS headline put it before being changed online to the rather more sober “Brown urges Scots not to give up on UK”, presumably out of respect for the gentle sensibilities of the paper’s Conservative-leaning readership).
(We’d like to take a brief moment here to appreciate a couple of beautifully acidic, deadpan lines from the Herald’s piece, written by Paul Hutcheon. Our emphasis.)
“Brown, who led his party to defeat at the last General Election, will be the special guest at an event in Glasgow. Although Labour has a dominant role in the cross-party Better Together campaign, senior party sources last year pushed for a separation to convey Labour’s distinctive message.”
The substance of Brown’s argument, in so far as it can be said to have any, is founded on a lie that was comprehensively disproved on this very website well over a year ago – namely that “if Scottish Labour supporters vote to leave the UK it would mean abandoning colleagues in England to years of Tory rule”.
That proposition is demonstrably untrue (not to mention a remarkably defeatist assertion that Labour can’t now defeat the Tories in England, despite having done so in 1997, 2001 and 2005). But even if it wasn’t, what then?
Extracts from a piece last year on the highly influential Conservative Home:
“Drawn up more than three decades ago by now Lord Barnett the [Barnett] formula distributes taxpayers’ money across the UK. Even Lord Barnett now describes the formula as “unfair”. On both the Left (IPPR) and Right (TaxPayers’ Alliance) there is agreement that the formula is well past its sell-by date. Scotland and Northern Ireland receive a much greater share of UK taxpayers’ money than need in either country would require. The biggest losers are the poorer English regions and Wales.
This seems one of the great no-brainers of British politics. England is losing up to £4.5 billion every year because a Conservative-led government is sending that money to parts of the UK that stubbornly refuse to vote Conservative. So let a [2015] Conservative Prime Minister call for the phased ending of the Barnett formula.”
“Vote No, Get Nothing” is starting to look a little optimistic.
In this site’s view, there are just two things the Yes campaign needs to get across to the Scottish people in order to win the independence referendum. All the quibbling over this detail and that detail, as seen in the No camp’s ridiculous (and so far mythical) “500 questions”, will ultimately come down to two simple facts at the ballot box:
1. There will be NO significant new powers for the Scottish Parliament in the event of a No vote. If anything, the opposite will be true.
2. The Scottish people already want independence. They simply haven’t yet realised that the thing they want is called independence.
Win on those two, and the Yes side will win everything.
We gather a few refreshments are usually taken at party conferences, so given that Eddie Barnes of the Scotsman is in Inverness covering the Scottish Labour gathering, perhaps a hangover explains his rather confused piece for Scotland on Sunday today.
There are three particularly notable passages, which we’ll take you through quickly here so you don’t have to go and read them on the paper’s website.
Scottish Labour’s record time for a policy U-turn was already pretty low. It took less than 24 hours from Johann Lamont’s infamous “something for nothing” speech before her MSPs were hastily popping up in the papers to insist that various universal services were in fact NOT under threat at all. (Despite the fact that the head of the commission investigating them had explicitly said that nothing was off the table.)
But yesterday saw the hapless party set a new personal best.
We hate to harp on. But it may be that there are still some people stuck in a cave somewhere in the Hebrides who think Johann Lamont is the “leader” of a political party called “Scottish Labour” rather than a regional branch manager of one based in London, and who imagine that the findings of her commission on devolution – should there actually be any before the referendum – will become official Labour policy.
The media is in full-on spin mode today, reporting Ruth Davidson’s miraculous Damascene conversion to the principle of “more powers” for the Scottish Parliament, just 18 short months after her Churchill-esque declaration of devolutionary defiance to the effect that the petty tinkering of the Scotland Act was a “line in the sand”.
Most of the papers, of course, feign critical analysis by highlighting Davidson’s U-turn. But what we haven’t seen in a single one is any sort of actual examination of the content of Ms Davidson’s speech to a micro-audience of literally several people in what appeared to be the corridor of an Edinburgh hotel yesterday.
We suspect that’s because anyone who did would be very hard-pressed indeed to credibly describe the measures she proposes as representing “more powers” for anything. In fact, they’re the opposite.
A lot of independence supporters are getting excited today about this clip of Labour shadow-cabinet MP Helen Goodman telling the BBC that Labour would keep the bedroom tax. They’re right to highlight it, but most are doing so for the wrong reasons.
Goodman’s position is that Labour WOULD still implement the hated tax, but would only penalise people for over-occupying their housing if they’d been offered smaller accommodation and refused to move. Opponents of Labour are observing the hypocrisy of the party raging against the tax in public while admitting they’d retain it, which is fair enough, but also misses the real point.
Rob on Rapist’s Rights: “It all seems to boil down to “it wisnae me” and a big boy did all the bad stuff and…” Aug 12, 07:58
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: “@ twathater says: 12 August, 2025 at 3:37 am “greedy bastards who despise paying their taxes” Perhaps you could enlighten…” Aug 12, 07:00
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: “@ Cynicus says: 12 August, 2025 at 1:15 am Sure I know that. And sometimes I do. But mostly I…” Aug 12, 06:51
twathater on Rapist’s Rights: “Wee Chid you have to be aware Captain Shit For Brains is a proud yoonionist and Scotland hater alongside his…” Aug 12, 03:37
Young Lochinvar on Rapist’s Rights: “Not really a surprising considering SHE looks on herself as British as famously stated live on British MSM to SNP…” Aug 12, 02:34
Young Lochinvar on Rapist’s Rights: “C’mon please! Anyone else spare a moments thought for poor auld Lord Provost Swinney tonight? Weeping for his “PRECIOUSSS” on…” Aug 12, 02:14
Young Lochinvar on Rapist’s Rights: “I managed to miss the vast bulk of the bull on ITN this evening by walking the dog then popping…” Aug 12, 02:05
Cynicus on Rapist’s Rights: ““Yet in 2025, CM is not surprised, shocked or astonished that the people he supports in the Middle East will…” Aug 12, 01:15
Mark Beggan on Rapist’s Rights: “Sturgeon’s suffering from post Colonial Stockholm syndrome Isn’t she Professor. Oh dear oh fuckin dear!” Aug 12, 00:02
Young Lochinvar on Rapist’s Rights: “Onlooker Which actually neatly sums up the whole 2 legged walking conundrum that (the currently reinventing herself) SHE is.. London…” Aug 11, 23:46
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Rapist’s Rights: “ASH REGAN interviewed by Mike Graham (7 Aug) on subject of trans women and prison: (Please copy and paste link…” Aug 11, 23:40
Iain More on Rapist’s Rights: “Those Quizzers that voted NO have a lot to answer for. How they and Sturgeon hated Scotland.” Aug 11, 23:19
willie on Rapist’s Rights: “How dare you Hatey call a mobile home a “camper van ” Sturgeon and her husband Peter had a very…” Aug 11, 23:00
Onlooker on Rapist’s Rights: “Exactly right. She finally gets tae hae the teenage lesbian fun she denied hersel oan joining the SNP it 16.…” Aug 11, 22:55
willie on Rapist’s Rights: “Ureka – I have it now. The answer has been with us all along. And when you work it out…” Aug 11, 22:50
Onlooker on Rapist’s Rights: “Talk aboot an admission: “I’ve always loved London.” Aye, nae doot, hen, nae doot. Says it aw, really, eh? Jist…” Aug 11, 22:46
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: ““named after her” Somebody needs to design a new camper van and call it the Sturgeon.” Aug 11, 22:06
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on Rapist’s Rights: ““As First Minister I have many, many, many different responsibilities, but there is no responsibility that I have that is…” Aug 11, 22:05
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: ““an enviable period of settled prosperity and good governance under, I’d suggest, the most able and competent politician of his…” Aug 11, 22:00
robertkknight on Rapist’s Rights: “Frankly, Sturgeon deserves the gaol.” Aug 11, 21:46
George Ferguson on Rapist’s Rights: “Wind back to 15 years ago. Her miscarriage was the most important thing that ever happened to Scotland. Not realising…” Aug 11, 21:32
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: “She’d be Scotland’s Mammie for life, x, and yer mammie is niver wrang. Yoons like you (insert abusive swear terms…” Aug 11, 21:16
Sven on Rapist’s Rights: “agent x @ 20.49. Or, Mr Salmond would not have resigned, Ms Sturgeon would not have inducted as the “Nation’s…” Aug 11, 21:13
TURABDIN on Rapist’s Rights: “Ms STURGEON might so easily have been «the liberator», she held for years strong cards but chose not to play…” Aug 11, 21:02
agent x on Rapist’s Rights: “If the yoons like me (insert abusive swear terms here) had not voted “NO” the Sturgeon creature would be President…” Aug 11, 20:49
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: “@ Alf Baird says: 11 August, 2025 at 8:29 pm If you’re paddling in the murky waters of the “class…” Aug 11, 20:42
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: “@Tartanpigsy says: 11 August, 2025 at 8:10 pm “You are such a pr**k” Aw, diddums. Truly the “courage” of the…” Aug 11, 20:34
Alf Baird on Rapist’s Rights: “We should always consider first our fundamental colonial reality rather than looking at our situation as one of everyday political…” Aug 11, 20:29
Hatey McHateface on Rapist’s Rights: ““working class interest” Ah yes, the soon to disappear, already greatly endangered, working class. Politically, replaced by the benefits class…” Aug 11, 20:19
Tartanpigsy on Rapist’s Rights: “Hatey McNever-set-foot-in-Scotland-other-than-on-fishing-or-hunting-trips…… You are such a pr**k” Aug 11, 20:10