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.
Young Lochinvar on The quality of mercy: ““Tartan Tories” Wasn’t that the invention created by “Scotch” Labour to hide the fact it was THE Labour Party that…” Apr 6, 00:35
Young Lochinvar on The quality of mercy: “Beggars Calm down “old boy”!! No need to rant 🙂 You appear to be dragging a disproportionate amount of Oswald…” Apr 6, 00:08
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “1981. The Tartan Tories was what they were called then.” Apr 6, 00:04
Young Lochinvar on The quality of mercy: “Jay Good luck getting a coherent non-nazi reply..” Apr 5, 23:38
George Ferguson on The quality of mercy: “I was trying to remember when I last walked up Carlton Hill in support of Scottish Independence. I have landed…” Apr 5, 23:37
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “That’s very interesting Jay you lunatic.” Apr 5, 21:28
Jay on The quality of mercy: “Evening Mr.Beggan. For decades there has been a ridiculous useage of the terms ‘Left’, ‘Right’ and ‘Centre’ which are rarely…” Apr 5, 20:49
Alf Baird on The quality of mercy: ““The residue of colonialism has deep roots” Yes, so long as the colonized native elite crave the colonizers culture and…” Apr 5, 20:03
Dan on The quality of mercy: “Such is the fragile vanity of the US Administration, one could easily envisage them kicking off a war with Denmark…” Apr 5, 18:47
TURABDIN on The quality of mercy: “AMERICA & allies have a rather big problem….and it’s not located in west Asia. What a collection toadies those allies…” Apr 5, 18:29
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “I was playing the Smiths debut album the other night. Classic. Then today one of my neighbours said he heard…” Apr 5, 16:54
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “And what are you going to do about it? Let me tell you. Nothing.” Apr 5, 16:45
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “You can’t even stand a candidate for the Scottish elections. You are in no position to demand anything. Repeating this…” Apr 5, 16:42
Mark Beggan on The quality of mercy: “You are going to have problems getting all that on just on banner.” Apr 5, 15:54
Aidan on The quality of mercy: “Things have got so bad that we’ve had to deploy our secret weapon “James Cheyne” to bore and distract everyone…” Apr 5, 14:46
TURABDIN on The quality of mercy: “INDIA still wrestles as to the appropriateness of English dress and language in law courts. The Chief Justice of Kolkata…” Apr 5, 14:20
Dan on The quality of mercy: “How “GERS” worked in India. https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/08/18/how-gers-worked-in-india/” Apr 5, 13:59
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on The quality of mercy: “Dr Shashi Tharoor – Looking Back at the British Raj in India (Edinburgh University 2017) www.youtube.com/watch?v=OB5ykS-_-CI” Apr 5, 13:22
Northcode on The quality of mercy: ““…The resolution concerned the slave trade, in which Scots were complicit…”| In which SOME Scots were complicit as opposed to…” Apr 5, 13:19
Fearghas MacFhionnlaigh on The quality of mercy: “HAIL THE CONQUERING HERO G.F. Handel arr. J. Caponegro: Hail The Conquering Hero, from Judas Maccabaeus, HWV 63 First performance…” Apr 5, 13:14
TURABDIN on The quality of mercy: “Cooperation with British Colonialism in India, an Overview During the British colonial period in India, many Indians, especially from the…” Apr 5, 12:26
James on The quality of mercy: “Northy; didn’t you know; according to Yoon Trolls like “factchecker” -who have never “checked” a “fact” in their entire existence-…” Apr 5, 12:25
Northcode on The quality of mercy: ““Jesus of Nazareth” or “Jesus, son of Joseph” or “Christ Jesus” or “Jesus The Christ” or just that familiar plain…” Apr 5, 12:25
Northcode on The quality of mercy: ““As of March 2026, the UN General Assembly has not formally declared colonialism IN TOTO a crime against humanity,…” I…” Apr 5, 11:55
factchecker on The quality of mercy: “A simple internet search shows that “As of March 2026, the UN General Assembly has not formally declared colonialism in…” Apr 5, 11:13
TURABDIN on The quality of mercy: “When talk & reason fail. Frantz FANON’s Perspective on Violence The Role of Violence in Decolonization Frantz Fanon, a prominent…” Apr 5, 10:53
Alf Baird on The quality of mercy: ““Colonisation of Scotland since 1707” According to the UN colonialism is a scourge and a crime against humanity, which must…” Apr 5, 10:27
James Che on The quality of mercy: “There are corners and legal jams one can bring upon ones self through greed and Colonialism. Westminster parliament of the…” Apr 5, 09:00
James Che on The quality of mercy: “Rev Stu, Thanks for inserting two of my old comments in your new post first of all, It can be…” Apr 5, 08:49