The audacity of tripe
Your jaw just drops sometimes at the sheer cheek of it.
“I am pleased that this impartial body has […] rejected the nationalist attempts to silence their opponents by setting spending limits that would have given them an unfair advantage.” – No campaign leader Alistair Darling, in a post on the “Better Together” site today.
Remember: the “nationalists” wanted to let the No campaign spend £250,000 more than the Yes campaign – a funny kind of “silencing” and a quite unusual definition of “advantage”, let alone “unfair”. Instead, the Electoral Commission has recommended that the Yes campaign be allowed to spend more than its opponents. We’re trying for all we’re worth to work out why Mr Darling considers that a victory.
(Mind you, in fairness the post is titled “A victory for the campaign for a fair referendum”. It doesn’t actually say which campaign that is.)
I reckon the Catalan reporter in this article has got it right.
link to bbc.scotlandshire.co.uk
“Eduardo Naespagna, Scotland reporter for Catalan newspaper, El Periodico said he was puzzled by the Unionist responses. “Surely it’s obvious that Salmond has played them for suckers? The only reason for putting ‘Do you agree?’ into the question was so that it could be taken out. Since it was also clear that your Electoral Commission would recommend funding on the basis of the 2011 election, the original finance suggestions by the Scottish Government were clearly a ploy. The bonus for the Yes campaign is the recommendation that the UK Government has to engage in talks with Scotland. That’s game and set to the SNP – victory in 2014!”
What do you mean that he isn’t real?
If I recall correctly Alex Salmond said at the SNP conference last Autumn that “the nonsense will end in 2013” and I feel we are now seeing his words coming true as the “NO” campaign leadership detaches themselves more and more from reality.
It is not for nothing that Alistair Darling is more and more attracting the soubriquet Comical Ally. This is a balloon that will go down long before autumn 2014.
Should Darling not be questioning instead why Salmond and the S.G are running rings round him and the No campaign?
What struck me from his interview on the Sunday Politics show was his apparent detachment from the inner sanctum of Millibands Labour. Asked a number of questions on uk labour policy and how those may affect Scots voting he was at a loss. Cleary London Labour considers him to be yesterdays man and suitable fall guy material.
Andrew Tinkell’s take on today’s EC announcement:
link to lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk
Here’s an extract from the latest e-mail briefing for BT supporters:
I am pleased that this impartial body has rejected the fixed referendum question which Alex Salmond demanded.
They have also rejected the nationalist attempts to silence their opponents by setting spending limits that would have given them an unfair advantage.
The commission’s experts have also said that nationalist attempts to gag business, unions and civil society are wrong.
However we think that once the referee has blown the whistle the players should obey the decision. That is why months ago we said we would accept the Commission’s recommendations in their entirety.
Over the past few months, we have called on the nationalists to follow our lead and agree to having the Electoral Commission set the rules. It looks like we have won that argument. Alex Salmond has had to concede that he cannot be both the referee and player in this particular game. Thanks to the thousands of you who joined our campaign for fair referendum rules.
“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” (1984 G Orwell)
Quite an achievement. “Andrew Tinkell” is actually worse than the usual run of Tickle gags. Useful that years of misuse have given me the outward exterior of a pachyderm.
Yours, only modestly irately, etc.
Is that the Alistair Darling that used to be the Chancer of the Exchequer? He obviously still cannae count!
Beware, for hidden in the detail is a further £150,000 limit for every party, think tank, union, dining club or anyone else who can get the funding and join in the fight. Guess where that funding is likely to be sourced.
Also, the Greens are liable to fall short of their limit by at least £63,000, levelling up the parties by default.
I always thought that “Do you agree” seemed like an add-on, a trap to get the main body of the question through exactly as required. If this is the case, then Alex Salmond has indeed “played them for suckers”.
BBC Scotlandshire makes a good point. The Electoral Commissioner for Scotland was, perhaps being economical with the truth in stating to Brian Taylor that the EC had ‘strict criteria’ concerning ‘third parties’. Under PPERA, third parties are defined thus: link to legislation.gov.uk – in other words, anyone on a UK electoral register who chooses to register with the EC. I find no guidance in the EC’s section on the Scottish referendum to suggest any amendment of this definition.
This would seem to mean that anyone on a UK register, even if they have no vote in the referendum can register with the EC as a third party and spend up to £150,000 campaigning. I may be wrong, but if I’m not, this would seem to distort the level playing field somewhat… Maybe cause for seeking clarification from the EC?
not tripe, but doubleshite- newspeak of the BT
Screw the rules, the Unionists of every description are going to try and throw £10s millions at this, then they can ignore any questions (if any) after they win. “Grumpy Nats lost now they’re complaining boohoo!” There is democracy and there’s British democracy. Money is their only real weapon, to make sure the MSM are kept sweet and the consistent bombardment of every home with BritNat propaganda, and the dear old BBC in Scotland preparing residencies at Pathetic Quay for a dozen rent-a-unionists to be permanently camped on TV and Radio.
If they don’t cheat (and they cheated in ’79), then they’re buggered like an Oxbridge freshman!
I had a bizarre encounter at work. A colleague who is also a labour councillor came into to the break room, his face aglow with triumph. I already sort of knew where it was going, and soon it became clear he was rabbiting the same dreary nonsense contained in Mr Darlings letter. I could not let the matter pass without comment and challanged him on it, stating quite clearly what the EC had said, and that Salmond got exactly the question he wanted. A brief silence followed by a slightly puzzled expression and the man walked out muttering something about come november there wouldn’t be a referendum.
I could not follow that one at all. But its clear that labour have lost the art of thinking on their feet. Once something clearly goes off their pre-scripted responses they are quite helpless, flailing about looking for something else to latch onto. In a about two weeks it will slowly become apparent that the EC have indeed given Salmond what he wanted, and I expect the Bloviater in chief Mr Davidson to start railing against EC bias. The EC ruling contains nothing that the No camp wanted. It does contain everything they feared. So I expect to see even more surreal and increasingly deranged posts from Labour.
The tories though….it’s just a thought but its now the 3rd time I have heard tories describe Scotland as an Independent Country. I wonder if their approach is to convince that we’ve been independent all this time and the Union is just a social club we pay into? If it is, I think it possibly one of the worst things they could ever have tried since the now fatal double whammy stealth tax attack on labour in 1997.
Still – today was a good day. And I think the powder that has been kept dry all this time, will be moving to the front soon.
Oops! I see I should have typed Andrew Tickell. In my defence I had one eye on the keyboard and the other on Michael Portillo at the time. Apologies Andrew
“In my defence I had one eye on the keyboard and the other on Michael Portillo at the time.”
I’m not sure you’re doing your defence any good here…
Hope this isn’t considered too far OT. Quite a long article, but I hope it will give EU supporters something to think about. All I can say is thank goodness we will have our vote in 2014. I don’t give journalistic freedom much of a future, if/once this set of regulations is in place.
link to globalresearch.ca
I was struck by Alistair Darling’s turn of phrase in an article in today’s Independent:
“But Alistair Darling, who leads the Better Together campaign, accused the SNP of trying to rig the question.
“Anyone who knows anything about the nationalist will know that they’ll chance their arm, if you like. I’ve always thought that the Electoral Commission, being a neutral body, being a referee in this contest, would look at this closely and I’m quite happy with the judgment they reached.”
‘The nationalist’??? So, as he sees it, supporters of the SNP can be defined as a sort of group chancer.
Imagine that sentence with the word “black” or “Jew” in place of “nationalist”.
“Comical Ally” – yep, that needs to go viral
Tamson says:30 January, 2013 at 10:07 pm
“Comical Ally” – yep, that needs to go viral
All we need now is a pack of playing cards.
Alastair Darling is a nationalist as well, a British one. Of course he will never admit it. The SNP must have received about 1 million votes in 2011. So why the leader of the No campaign thinks that it is a good idea to come out with negative stuff like that about the SNP is a bit odd?
@Rev
Quite. There should be no room for that kind of rhetoric
Do the spending limits cover the free promotion and spin for ‘NO’ from the msm and BBC? Just what is the price of that and would this wolf in sheep’s clothing called the Electoral Commission go for their jugular? Too many unionistas have been beside themselves with anxiety to ensure that the EC is used – I smell a big rat!
What can then be done about sloppy EC stewardship – don’t tell me it’s a hand-wringing operation and woe is me stuff – and what happens? We’ve been truly stuffed – again!
Cameron’s behaviour if he wants to keep the UK intact is bizarre. He is screwing ‘No’ at every opportunity and it can only be to eliminate Scottish Labour from Westminster – but will he want to be known as the PM who lost the UK?
Something’s in the wind and we need to wise up to it.
Elizabeth says:
30 January, 2013 at 10:53 pm
@Rev
Quite. There should be no room for that kind of rhetoric.
There are no rules or restrictions in War and i’m afraid we are one. The next phase will probably be “rebels could destabilise region’
Cameron and co will resort to anything.
Barontorc
Cameron’s behaviour if he wants to keep the UK intact is bizarre. He is screwing ‘No’ at every opportunity and it can only be to eliminate Scottish Labour from Westminster – but will he want to be known as the PM who lost the UK?
Something’s in the wind and we need to wise up to it.
I totally agree. I was discussing yesterday’s events with my colleague on the way home from work, and what you have said is also on the same lines. This is really getting deep …very deep. There are politics within politics now, and games within games going on here, and trying to see through the fog of it all is an absolute mind-twister. The way I see it, it is like this…
The SNP
———
Straightforward – Independence and in the EU. At worst – EFTA.
The Tories
———–
The Black Arts with this lot!! – We want Scotland in the UK, but do we? We want the UK out of the EU, but do we? We fear UKIP, but do we? We know what we are up to …but do you?
Labour
——-
Lost in so many ways – Miliband is no PM and Lamont is a walking joke. They can’t tell us if they are in the EU, or out of the EU. They are terrified of UKIP. They want to wear Tory clothes, only UKIP wear them better, and Scottish Labour is a totally different beast from London Labour. I expect eruptions at some point within the party. Would not be surprised in the future if Labour (3rd in the UK) and Libs (4th in the UK) don’t join and become one party so they can take on the Tories and UKIP.
UKIP
—–
Apart from ‘we want out of Europe’ and ‘get rid of the immigrants’, do we know anything else about this party? …I mean, seriously, do we???
Libs
—-
Who?….what?…Eh?? ….Do we care???….
The EU / Barrosso
——————–
This behemoth is fraying at the edges. Internal strife, and the rise of Nationalism in smaller countries in all of its big nations. What it does to Scotland in the end, will affect the EU one way or the other (great, eh!! – wee Scotland brings down a collossus). If we are ‘in’, then so are Catalonia, Bavaria, Venice, etc. If we are ‘out’, and these other countries get their independence, then they are ‘out’, and then you can kiss goodbye to the EU as it will fragment all over the place, and have holes (Bavaria) within the greater state …all thanks to Scotland!!
Aye ….Politics within politics ….seriously ….who needs to watch ‘A Game of Thrones’….
I think it was someone here who commented that appointing Darling to lead BT was a gift – how right that was. If the guy could walk on his hands and teach his arse to speak we’d have the makings of a great Spot the Difference. Steve Bell would do a good job of it too.
Barontorc
I smell a big rat!
I agree, the Unionists will stop at nothing to hold on to Scotland, they will use every dirty trick in the book – who is going to hold them accountable? The EC, you bet they won’t.
I believe we ‘ain’t seen nothing yet’ and I reckon once the polls start to show a significant rise in the Yes campaign it’s going to get pretty horrid. All aided by the BBC & MSM
Many of my friends still do not use the internet (poor broadband speeds etc) so they are completely reliant on the BBC & the Herald/Scotsman and for the time being are not interested in engaging with me on the subject.
Spending limits can of course be circumvented if you can find a “friendly printer”. Jim Devine might be able to point you in the right direction.
@kininvie
This would seem to mean that anyone on a UK register, even if they have no vote in the referendum can register with the EC as a third party and spend up to £150,000 campaigning. I may be wrong, but if I’m not, this would seem to distort the level playing field somewhat… Maybe cause for seeking clarification from the EC?
That is the case Blair Jenkins spelled it out clearly on Good Morning Scotland this morning …. UK registered voters will be able to spend the up to £150 000
kininvie
“who needs to watch ‘A Game of Thrones’….”
No-one needs to watch A Game of Thrones, they need to READ A Game of Thrones – the books are much better.
We have always been aware that the Electoral Commission can do nothing about the freely owned MSM so we shouldn’t get all worked up about this.
Their ruling means that other organisations can raise money for YES as well which throws down a challenge to us.
The area which interests me most is that of money from outside Scotland. The EC doesn’t appear to have barred money being raised from England.
In this case surely they cannot logically refuse money raised from Canada, USA New Zealand etc.
But in the final analysis we will win by properly deploying the huge advantage we have over the Worse Apart. They have virtually no activists. We probably have 20,000 to 30,000. It’s round the doors and the village halls and the high streets – and online – where we will win.
Darling’s comments are a sign of desperation on the unionists’ part.I hope he makes more of them.