The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The English SNP

Posted on July 26, 2015 by

Alert readers may recall a few weeks ago, when this was a thing:


The SNP standing for seats in England, of course, is an idea that’s been put forward before by some of the nation’s sharper and more insightful political commentators, but the party has for obvious and understandable reasons shown no inclination thus far to undertake the experiment.

But as we realised after chatting to a left-wing English chum this week (a successful creative and businessman), such a party actually already exists, and has dozens of MPs. It’s just that it’s currently trapped inside a corpse.

The apocalyptic turmoil currently engulfing the Labour Party in jaw-dropping madness seems unlikely to be settled by the outcome of the leadership election in September, whichever way it goes. The candidacy of Jeremy Corbyn has torn the lid off the seething historical divisions between the left and right wings of the party, and it’s a lid that doesn’t look like being put back on any time soon.

If Corbyn wins, right-wingers (or “centrists”, as they rather disingenuously prefer to be called) have already threatened a coup within months, regardless of the obvious stark staring insanity of such a plan. If he loses, Labour face the bittersweet prospect of a Pyrrhic victory in England akin to the one they reaped in Scotland recently, when they won the independence referendum with such grotesque scorched-earth tactics that a disgusted electorate abandoned them en masse just months later.

The raw, jagged schism the contest has rent is probably an irreparable one. The two halves of Labour simply aren’t compatible any more. It seems inevitable that at some point in the near future it faces a split like the one that brought the SDP into existence in 1981, with either a left or right faction breaking away from the main body.

The thing is, there couldn’t be a better time for that to happen than now.

English politics needs a third party. For a generation that role was filled by the Liberal Democrats, but they’re now a shattered, broken mess reduced to an MP cohort you could cram into a London taxi.

The third-largest party at Westminster is of course now the SNP itself, but with 56 of 59 Scottish seats they’re already at 95% of their maximum possible strength – like Alexander The Great (of Macedonia, that is, not Strichen), they have almost no lands left to conquer and can grow no stronger.

So there’s a situation vacant, and enough of a critical mass to make it happen. A breakaway “Real Labour” comprising the 48 MPs who rebelled against the abstention on welfare reform would almost match the SNP for size right away, and would appeal to a disillusioned grassroots that’s currently turning out in large numbers not just to Corbyn rallies but also to protests organised by groups like The People’s Assembly.




A left breakaway group that would be aligned with the SNP (as well as Plaid Cymru and the Greens and probably the SDLP) on most issues would provide a powerful block of MPs more than 100 strong, while also freeing the remnant Blairite “centrist” Labour – let’s call them Middle Labour – to chase Tory votes.

(The effect would be largely the same if, as with the SDP, the right-wing elements of Labour were the ones that broke away. They could still compete for Tory votes, but work with “Real Labour” in coalition.)

Overnight, the task facing the centre/left would shrink dramatically. As things stand, Labour needs to capture 106 seats from the Tories to have a chance of forming a majority government in 2020, which is effectively impossible.

But by splitting into Real Labour and Middle Labour, it would be able to both capture English marginals from the Conservatives AND tap into the missing millions of natural left-wing voters who gave up on politics after 1992. Even assuming that there was no significant recovery in Scotland, the “Labour Alliance” would need just a tiny handful of gains to deny the Tories a majority.

There would of course be considerable tensions between the two parties, and more still if a three-way coalition with the SNP was needed to secure a stable government. There’d be an obvious danger in the two Labours competing for the same seats, although the recent case of Douglas Carswell moving from the Tories to UKIP and keeping his seat suggests that the two factions could hold onto their incumbents.

There’d be other problems too. The Tories and the right-wing media would try the same “a vote for Middle Labour is a vote for the mad Trotskyists of Real Labour/the SNP!” tactics they used in this year’s election.

But those tactics, which were deployed in a relentless blanket bombardment for weeks on end, still only helped the Tories to the thinnest and most fragile of victories in May. The gains which could be unlocked by enabling Real Labour to go after millions of dormant left-wing votes while Middle Labour fought the Conservatives over the “centre” ground would easily overwhelm that slim advantage.

(The position of the “centre” would itself unavoidably be shifted leftwards by the very existence of the new left party, with the Tories pushed out to the right in an effort to put clear blue water between themselves and Middle Labour.)

The potential downside from an independence perspective, of course, is that the UK having a viable left-wing party/alliance of government again would make independence as an anti-Tory safeguard less appealing. But it would remain the case – the Tories COULD still win in the UK, and probably would do on a regular basis as part of the natural ebb and flow of politics.

And in any case there’d be no practical reason for “Real Labour” to be as hostile to independence as the current Labour is. With no Scottish MPs left to lose anyway, it could afford to see an independent Scotland far more rationally – as a perpetual ally, a next-door-neighbour social-democratic bulwark pulling back against the 30-year shift of the Overton Window (driven by New Labour’s total ideological capitulation to the right) that’s made left-wing policies taboo even when they’re supported by large majorities of the population.

With very nearly half of Scots already convinced, even an indy-neutral position being adopted by the Labour left (perhaps as a condition of SNP support in forming a government) could be enough to boost support for independence over the finishing line that it fell just 5% short of last year. An SNP government could simply wait for the polls to look consistently good then call a second referendum whenever it liked,

(And if it also held influence at Westminster the UK government’s ability to pull dirty tricks would be greatly diminished.)

One way or another, Labour is certainly going to be ripped in two – indeed, it already has been – by the current leadership contest. It can either allow that to be a purely destructive event, or one of the party’s rival factions can grasp the thorny rose and do what clearly needs to be done for the survival of the wider Labour movement.

If an “English SNP” Labour can break free of the dead hand of Blairism that’s currently anchoring the party to the seabed, the rUK and Scotland could both be winners. If it doesn’t, Tory rule will last for a generation and both will be in an awful lot of trouble.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 26 07 15 12:18

    The English SNP | Speymouth

  2. 26 07 15 13:22

    The English SNP | Politics Scotland |

  3. 29 07 15 23:09

    Will The Last Labour MP Out Turn Off The Lights? | A Wilderness of Peace

314 to “The English SNP”

  1. Shy unionist says:

    Did the result of the 1983 GE pass you by?

  2. Boab says:

    By splitting into two, they would split their own vote, making it harder to defeat the Tories in our FPTP system.

  3. Clootie says:

    I hope for their sake they do find a soul. However I would prefer an Independent Scotland rather than an alliance to an unstable “Labour” faction.

  4. arthurfaeleith says:

    Why would Middle Labour ally themselves with Real Labour? Wouldn’t Middle Labour just be Tories?

  5. IvMoz says:

    But what would happen to Labour in Scotland, would they become independent or align themselves with “real labour”?

    I could see a labour party in Scotland aligning themselves with “real labour” nicking votes off the SNP.

    Personally, I would see a Corbyn victory as bad for the SNP. We can no longer claim to be the sole anti-austerity party.

    Burnham/Cooper/Kendall would be more beneficial for us.

  6. Julian says:

    Brilliant analysis

  7. Tartan Tory says:

    We can have the Scottish Labour Party, Scottish Conservative & Unionist Party, Scottish Liberal-Democrfats, so why not start the English SNP?

    Never mind being ESNPLAB – that’s pointless. Labour is dead in Scotland and it is currently exhaling its last breath in England/Wales. Just give our southern neighbours a ‘nationalist’, EVIL, anti-Tory party and they will win votes from Labour, Lib-Dem and UKIP.

    Imagine the posibilities of an SNP/ESNP victory in Westminster!!! 🙂

  8. Stevew says:

    This would certainly make UK politics interesting for a change. But I think that the labour “leadership” are looking for the easy life. IE, staying as Tory team B and just wait for the country to get tired of team A (eg, Bliar in 97).

  9. Giesabrek says:

    Interesting analysis Stu. While I agree that it seems obvious that Labour should split, I have to disagree about “Real Labour” capturing so many disenfranchised votes.

    Any coalition is a compromise (although maybe the Tory/Libdem was an exception). How will the policies of a Real Labour government differ if it has to form a coalition government with New Labour? The presence Of New Labour in government will pull Real Labour to the right, thus disenfranchising again those voters who are currently disenfranchised. Perhaps there will be enough to stay to make it worthwhile.

    Also, I can’t see how a Labour government, dependent on SNP MPs would be for independence. At a stroke it loses 56 SNP MPs which presumably it would be dependent on to form the government. Of course, if it is openly hostile to independence in such an arrangement then you have to wonder how long the arrangement would continue.

    Personally, I think a clean split would be good. I think there are potentially enough votes for Real Labour to win, including the disenfranchised voters, outright. It would free them to form policies attractive to the left.

    Meanwhile, New Labour can continue their downward spiral as Real Labour nibbles away at their left-wing flank and the Tories nibble away at their right-wing flank, thus reducing New Labour to an exhausted small third party willing to enter a coalition with either side for a whiff of power I.e. becoming like and replacing the LibDems.

    And regarding the Labour leadership race, I suspect Corbyn’s nomination may have been a ruse by New Labour to tease the “Trotskys” out of hiding in the party for one final purge, never thinking that Corbyn would be so popular and could actually win.

    That New Labour are planning a coup if Jeremy wins would certainly back this up. My predictions? Jeremy wins, New Labour stage a coup and kick out the remaining left-wing of the party. Hopefully this will be the catalyst that creates the Real Labour party again.

  10. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Why would Middle Labour ally themselves with Real Labour?”

    Because they insist that they ARE Labour. If they formed a coalition with the Tories their whole pretence would be shattered.

  11. One_Scot says:

    If Labour want to remain one party they have to choose, do they want power at Holyrood, or do they want power at Westminster.

    I know where my money is and I suspect Labour knows where their money is too.

  12. Kenny says:

    So why hasn’t the Labour Party reformed the House of Lords, an election manifesto promise since 1910?

    As long as there is the promise of ermine, there will never be this “Labour” Party you dream of.

    Just look at Syriza passing privatisation programmes now in Greece. That is why I always say, looking ahead, the future in Scotland is not the SNP. It is the RIC we should be supporting.

    Our future is Cat Boyd, not Nicola Surgeon. Do not follow just who the corporate and state media show you every night on TV — and then come on here and moan about them all!

    There is establishment party politics and there is fighting for independence. They are not the same things at all.

    I’m sorry, but this site seems obsessed with the “Labour” Party!

  13. Jules says:

    I agree that the Labour party in England is torn apart. But the problem is that splitting into two parties would just split the non-Tory vote. A la 1983 as shy unionist says.

    Only hope for Labour is a form of PR, which would allow Labour to split yet still win representation and occasionally cobble together a government.

  14. Bill Bedford says:

    1983? wasn’t that the election that Thatcher was due to lose, but was saved by a short imperialist war in the Malvinas?

  15. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Also, I can’t see how a Labour government, dependent on SNP MPs would be for independence.”

    It wouldn’t. But it could be neutral. It’s a tricky situation, absolutely. It’s not necessarily easy to reconcile the interests of r/UK Labour and independence. But it’s certainly clear that being poisonously hostile to the SNP and independence has damaged Labour severely, so on balance neutrality might well be their best option.

  16. Juan P says:

    @Shy unionist

    Did the results of the 2015 election pass you by?

    Being a crap version of the Tories is not an election winning strategy.

  17. Morag says:

    How does this work under FPTP though?

  18. Swami Backverandah. says:

    I’m inclined to agree.

    It has seemed for a while that the main divisions among the English appear to be between Tory sentiments and Green policies, Corbyn et al of course now representing those “green” credentials – anti-Trident replacement etc.

    So why don’t the missing millions of Labour voters vote Green?

    Greens have image problems, the least of which is brainfade, they’re not seen as a large enough body to effect opposition. Also those missing are Labour voters. They’d rather not vote at all. Real Labour could be Real green Labour and scoop them up – especially the young ones.

    Re the last election, many of the English voted Tory to get the EU referendum, and they want out.
    A case has been made for Scotland to have another Indyref if its citizens vote to stay in EU. Indy supporters will take this route, but after the Greek emasculation, it may be harder to convince the general Scottish electorate of it. Scotland may well vote to leave.

    Now there’s a battle for hearts and minds in the making.

  19. Giesabrek says:

    Shy unionist, do you want to elaborate your argument about an election that happened over 30 years ago, in a completely different economic and social climate, with mostly different party members?

    I’m in my 40’s and I couldn’t even vote in 1983. How many people are there now in the same position? How many 1983 voters have passed away now? Those still alive who voted in 1983 are the minority.

  20. I couldn’t care less who wins the Labour leadership elections both in Scotland and England.

    As far as I am concerned, they, the candidates, are unelectable as leaders of either country.

    None of them, including Corbyn, want Scotland to be an independent country, so sod them, and their lying, corrupt, remnants of a party.

    Personally, I don’t think there will be a split, at least not in the terms of another political party being formed. No, whoever wins, they will become something akin to the tories after their 1997 defeat, and remain in the political wilderness for many years to come. I hope.

  21. HandandShrimp says:

    Did the result of the 1983 GE pass you by?

    There were many things going on in 1983 and yes the division of the Labour party into the SDP did split the anti-Tory vote but Thatcher was far stronger than Cameron, who is only there because Labour cannot turn their vote out. Cameron is more like Major than Thatcher.

    That said, if Corbyn wins, the decision to split the party will come from the right not the left.

  22. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “How does this work under FPTP though?”

    In the way it says. Real Labour win seats in the north, Middle Labour in the south, basically.

    It won’t be easy. None of this is easy for anyone. But it’s made less difficult by the fact that both factions already have sitting MPs.

    In the way that Douglas Carswell was able to leave the Tories then win the same seat for UKIP, whichever Labour faction breaks away could hold its own seats, but be free to fight more successfully for others in their own sphere of influence.

  23. Geoff Huijer says:

    Well thought out, interesting article which
    could well be the answer to ‘Labour’s’ woes.

    Of course, it may be just a little too
    ‘well thought out’ to have any resonance
    for a Party that believes it is born to power
    and believes appeasement of the Right-Wing
    media is the be all and end all.

    Labour should be setting the news agenda not following it.

  24. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    We’re not running a poetry site here, Geoff.

  25. HandandShrimp says:


    I agree to an extant although seeing Corbyn reclaim the soul of Labour would be interesting. The Scottish leadership election is irrelevant. None of the candidates are interesting or particularly capable. Scottish Labour will decline further regardless of winner in the UK.

  26. Macart says:

    The party formerly known as Labour, now symbol, isn’t really Labour and hasn’t been for quite some time. Its a cuckoo with a deep rooted identity crisis. What we’ve had since the sainted Tone took over was in fact a Thatcher construct more readily aligned with the left of true blue conservatism. A movement within a movement which came to prominence within the larger entity, rewriting its entire leadership and operational structure. It simply used the history and the name of an existing movement to achieve its aims, but it sure as hell wasn’t and never will be Labour in any way shape or form.

    They simply didn’t have the courage to call themselves what they really are and stand as a party in their own right. But where did this leave the original party’s rank and file membership and its voters? To this day, deeply confused, hurt, abandoned, angered, shambed by appalling actions taken in their name.

    Now is the time, if it is to happen at all, that they need to break from the abomination Labour has become and be the party and representation they were always meant to be. They have an electorate in England and Wales who need them and need them to be that party again. Call themselves whatever they feel like calling themselves, but act like a representation for those who need a voice.

    They’ll have a job of work to do and it won’t be easy, same as it was for the SNP here in Scotland. It’ll take time and effort to grow and regain an awful lot of lost trust. S’up to them though. Its their country and their electorate. If they have the courage, I’d wish them well.

  27. r esquierdo says:

    I really do not care what the Labour party do. I want to concentrate on independence. The talk of Devo Max or federalism being included in the 2016 manifesto makes me squirm. DevoMax in my opinion would not be a stepping stone to independence. It would kill independence dead in its track

  28. Al-Stuart says:


    Another informative, entertaining and incisive article.

    Thank you.

    PLEASE promise you will keep WoS going for many a year yet? It far outstrips almost every other source of information I know of.


    P.S. Loved your reference to the Alexander of Strichen…

    “Like Alexander The Great (of Macedonia, that is, not Strichen), they have almost no lands left to conquer and can grow no stronger.

  29. Capella says:

    My thoughts too. A progressive Labour in England with the SNP in Scotland would be a good outcome. Those of us who switched to SNP are not likely to revert to Labour as Independence is now the goal.

  30. Sandy says:

    Nothing to stop people in England standing for election as independents with a pledge to follow the SNP manifesto.

  31. Socrates MacSporran says:

    Good analysis Rev, but, I think you are a bit quick to write-off the LibDems.

    Time and Tory stupidity will soon show what a significant hand they played in reining-in Tory excesses during their five years in government. Yes, they can take all their MPs to the Commons in a big taxi, but, they have been there before and come back.

    Under the right leader, and that is not Tim Farron, the LibDems could recover.

    Labour, whether in government or opposition, seems to be in a permanent internal war. Aye, a left-right split might happen, but, ah hae ma doots.

  32. Dave sharp says:

    I’ve been saying exactly this for about two years now.

    There is a vacuum on the left in English politics, now with a united enemy, the Tories.

    A coalition of the left from all corners of the UK need agreed principles to rally behind and I believe much of that work has already been undertaken by Common Weal.

    By using this work I believe would provide a strong platform of shared, attainable beliefs that we can show the electorate work and are not just utopian socialist pipe dreams.

  33. DerekM says:

    Spot on Rev,some of us old labour have been screaming this at the party since we saw thatchers children hijack it and the unions.

    If they were to split it would only take this term of parliament until the next GE before the left wiped the floor with the blairites in England.

    I have already been telling all who will listen that if Jeremy does become leader the most important thing he can do is cut loose the Scottish branch or he will feel our wrath in 2016 even if he is the leader,which would give the blairites the opportunity to remove him.

    They are finally starting to wake up down south,know any good English journalists Rev that you could teach how to become Wings over England ?

  34. Escarii says:

    Called it! Though it would be a shame for the real labour to lose the name – and I can’t imagine they’d keep it; the Blairy lot seem petty that way – when the history of left wing labour is thier deserved inherritance.

    But after all, what’s in a name?

  35. Davie Park says:

    “Those still alive who voted in 1983 are the minority.”

    THAT HURTS, ya bastard. I’m 50 – not 150.

  36. msean says:

    Don’t think they will split if Mr Corbyn wins,the losing candidates will go on to vote whichever way their new leader tells them to vote. All these right wing Labour candidates will vote on demand and tell the world that they were convinced and really,really always vote this way.

    Middle Labour 🙂

  37. Capella says:

    Chuka Ummuna in speech in Washington calls for federal UK

  38. Jamie says:

    I’d love to see the Labour party take a big swing left. However, I’d still worry about an undermining contingent that would want to break away but refuse to leave the Labour brand and go into obscurity. That’s why Blair did so well. He hijacked a brand with loyal voters with the sole goal of attracting swing voters leaning to the right.

  39. Giving Goose says:

    To see the hysteria being whipped up about a possible Corbyn victory is to witness the real fear at the heart of the British Establishment. Being a party of government at Westminster is only allowed (by the media/vested interests) if you are a party of the Right.

    You have to be a fully signed up member to the big global NeoLiberal project and Corbyn is not that person.

    For goodness sake, Corbyn is talking about Renationalisation of certain industries and *Horrors* increasing manufacturing.

    But that might weaken the part that the Financial Services Industry currently hold (the country to ransom) within the Brit economy, with the leverage that this brings.

    The Right of the Labour Party are actually natural Tories and they are akin to a 5th column; essentially they are infiltrators working to keep the NeoLib hold on the population. Some will not actually have that level of self awareness but you can bet that the movers and shakers do (Jim Murphy was an obvious example).

    When you hear of talk about coups and rebellion, refuseniks to a Corbyn shadow cabinet etc, what you are witnessing is the same well oiled propaganda machine that was in evidence during the Indy Ref. it’s the Deep BritNat (Establishment) State doing it’s puppet master thing all over again.

    Whether a Corbynesque rump Labour Party of whatever political hue would be good for Scotland is difficult to answer but the slow moon car crash currently on display is popcorn heaven.

    I’m enjoying every minute of it!

  40. dakk says:

    This scenario is probably more plausible than the ‘great grey hope’ Corbyn transforming Labour into this mythical socialist party that never was.

    However even if it does happen, I believe you are correct in that it would damage Scotland’s chances of independence.I say this because I know too many Labour BritNats who would go with the left wing party and still see Scotland’s Indy as anathema,(including English Labour lefties).

    It is this dichotomy which unfortunately means that what may be good for England and even to a lesser degree wider UK,is still ultimately detrimental to Scotland’s democratic rights.

    Also,I’m not sure middle England would vote for the rump Red Tory party if they didn’t think they could ever form a majority on their own(glory hunters).

    Interesting though,and it may happen anyway,so we would have to make the best of it in our usual begging crumbs from the table way.

  41. Effijy says:

    Labour being split seems to be so much better than the current Labour torn to shreds.

    Please don’t encourage the term Labour Centric!
    This group are Right Wing and want to offer Red Tory as their alternative.
    There is a Left and Right divide and the Right have no cause to
    be there. Labour were never founded to make £millionaires out of their leadership and put the filthy rich and global corporations before the well being of the majority.

    Right wing Labour has even said that the party comes before the people? Again they were not formed to be anything other than for the people, by the people. We don’t want to put right wing Labour in to fill the only lifeboat so that we can all drown.
    Who needs a peoples representative when there are no people?

    On the Marr show, I heard Alex Salmond say that he thought it inevitable that there would be another referendum.
    He also said that he would not promote who the next Labour leader should be, but if it’s Corbyn, he would know he stood on Welfare
    reform and Trident renewal.

    BBC News comes on minutes later to distort the statements to SNP
    working toward another referendum and Slamond can work with
    Corbyn in an alliance?????

    Not what was said at all, but what I hear is that a great deal of BBC money must be spent on having expensive Spin News Editors on tap 24 hours a day who can skew any statement to scaremonger little England.
    It seems that they are in mortal danger of seeing Leftie Loonies and Hateful Haggis Bashers in charge of their economy, when they can be pleasantly lied to and robbed by the Bullingdon Tory Boys they know and love so well.

  42. Ken500 says:

    The Labour Party is financed by Tory bankers

    The SNP is financed by it’s members.

    Westminster is (disproportionately) financed by Scottish taxes. Scotland has been a money stream for right wing bankers criminality.

    No taxation without representation. Scotland can be outvoted 10 to 1.

    The majority of SNP members will demand #Indytwa is put in the next Holyrood manifesto, and people in Scotland will vote for it.

  43. r esquiredo @ 11:26 am:

    “DevoMax in my opinion would not be a stepping stone to independence. It would kill independence dead in its track”

    Totally disagree. What we were promised would mean us paying Westminster a bill for the common interests of defence and foreign policy. When Scots saw they were sending cash south for the privilege of being a nuclear target to protect someone else and to be dragged along with the maniacal foreign policy of the establishment I think they’d come to their senses pretty damn quick.

  44. BornOptimist says:

    Not only can I see all the benefits this brilliant article presents I can imagine that should Labour ‘split’ in the future and produce a relatively more ‘friendly’ Government in Westminster or at worst, a Tory Government facing a sympathetic opposition/coalition, reaching an Indy settlement between Westminster and Holyrood would be a lot easier.

  45. Andyk says:

    they have multi-party systems all over europe and it seems to work quite well, so why no here?

  46. @Socrates MacSporran

    The LibDems could of had a much greater influence out of government rather than shackled to them.

  47. @Socrates MacSporran

    The LibDems could of had a much greater influence out of government rather than shackled to them.

  48. galamcennalath says:

    The contrast between UK politics and that of our European neighbours manifests itself in all sorts of ways. FPTP is the problem. IMO it forces wide disparate groups into single parties in an attempt to make headway. Additionally, it papers over cracks and avoids issues which might fragment parties.

    The ‘normal’ model where there are a large number of parties who then need to cooperate is infinitely more democratic than the UK system where the party with 35-45% of the vote gets near absolute power.

    FPTP isn’t the ideal framework to move forward towards democracy, but perhaps it should not be used as an excuse to avoid progress!

    So, yes, at this time in history Labour should form two separate parties, as Stu so eloquently put.

    Also, very importantly, the Tories have been badly spilt over EU membership. They became electable again by ‘papering over’ their internal EU problems. However this is all going to burst to the fore again over the next couple of years. I think it is a reasonable proposition that pro and anti EU Tories also split along left/right lines. A split Tory party would be a good thing too.

    Finally, do these splits in Lab and Con effect their Scottish branches to the same extent? I suspect not. The obvious move would be for these to become totally different parties from the London ones.

    With PR voting a multi party (many more that 2 or 3) system would undoubtedly bring a great of democracy to WM!

    Is a multi party system possible with FPTP? I have to say, I think it would struggle.

  49. Ross Patton says:

    i never understand why people use the 1983 election as an example of a labour loss. these results were not that bad, its just that our ridiculous and outdated first fast the post hugely skews the country wide picture and makes it look as if its a bad resort. The only way forward is to move to PR and we need a uk wide campaign and protest to make this happen.

  50. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Yes, they can take all their MPs to the Commons in a big taxi, but, they have been there before and come back.”

    When were they last as low as eight MPs?

    (Answers own question: 1970.)

  51. Jack Murphy says:

    OT slightly.Senior Labour Baron Resigns.
    “Labour Peer ,Baron John Sewel,has resigned from his role as the House of Lords Deputy Speaker after a video emerged of him allegedly taking cocaine with two prostitutes……………….
    in London’s Dolphin Square.” 🙁

  52. Robin Stevenson says:

    You’re right Stu, this is as big as the SNP can get with 56 – 59 MPs, beyond that – to have any realistic influence in UK politics, – we then have to look for a party that has the same social democratic agenda and are prepared to work with the SNP, can we honestly see Labour in Scotland working hand in hand, shoulder to shoulder, with their “arch enemy?” Surely IF the Scottish branch resorted back to what they once stood for, they could possibly win votes back “From” the SNP, therefore,[not unrealistically] taking us back to square one? More Scottish Labour Mps and fewer SNP MPs.

    IF the SNP would like to lead the charge and be the real opposition in Westminster, then they have to build their party beyond Scotlands borders, not prop up their main rival in order for them to win back SNP votes.

  53. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “i never understand why people use the 1983 election as an example of a labour loss.”

    Indeed. 1983 was a perfect storm for Labour – they’d suffered a hugely damaging split when the SDP broke away, but they were still leading in the polls right up to the Falklands War. If not for General Galtieri, Thatcher may well have been a one-term PM and the UK might look very different now.

  54. sunniva says:

    What shy unionist means is that In 1983 the creation of the SDP split the non-Tory vote. This allowed the Tories to win that election. And others. Without proportional representation the Gang of Four’s project to create a third progressive centrist force was doomed, and a third party would be equally fatal now.

    Charlie Kennedy eventually took the SDP off-piste by merging it with the flagging Liberal Party to create the LDs. And during the 1990s the third force idea did have some traction with the voters under the LDs.

    But that project also succumbed to the polarisation inflicted by the first past the post system, and ended, as we know, in the LDs forming a fatal coalition with the Tories.

  55. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “They are finally starting to wake up down south,know any good English journalists Rev that you could teach how to become Wings over England ?”

    Lots 🙂

  56. Dr Jim says:

    Hardly worth worrying about though is it, the travails of English politics will take a very long time to unravel and will in all likelihood remain the same Whitehall will see to that

    We’ll be Independent by then and the SNP will be in Government for some considerable time in order to get Scotland sorted out

    There’s always room for ideas but we’ve got the Professionals working for us at the moment and nobody gets everything they want but everybody gets something

    It’s coming soon

  57. bjsalba says:

    Stu, let’s be generous to the Lib-Dems and let them have a people-carrier. That way they could allocate the remaining seat to a person with a combined Driver/Special-Adviser/Researcher role.

  58. Swami Backverandah says:

    Hiya Rev.
    I sent a long one in about 11am seems to have disappeared.
    I did punctuate and put paragraph breaks.
    Even removed an extraneous apostrope.
    Am I in spam for mentioning “Green” perhaps?

  59. TamTheBam says:


    Sunday Times today says Ken MacIntosh has polled almost a quarter of members of Scottish Labour have been polled ….giving that as 3,000 people.

    So current SLAB membership is only slightly north of 12,000.

    Compared to over 100k for the SNP.

    Is this the first figure we have seen on membership numbers?

  60. Muscleguy says:


    Re RIC. I hear sort of what you say but RIC will never be that vehicle, though it might give birth to it, possibly. For a start RIC is a coalition that includes at least three parties and possibly four, if the SWP are as serious as their pretty exemplary behaviour suggests. Both sorts of Socialist play nice together in RIC, but not out of it.

    But the main problem is RIC has no membership. We voted expressly not to make it a membership organisation. We’re more of an Anarcho-Syndicalist Collective. We might lend our support to a party’s campaign though taking part will always be up to a person’s conscience. I helped Stewart Hosie get the vote out but some of us in Dundee RIC hate the SNP. As you doubtless recognise you do not have to be SNP to be Yes or achieve Independence, though some of their acolytes want you to believe otherwise. Scot Goes Pop gets a bit like that sometimes and attracts people who call the Greens ‘over entitled’ for wanting people’s votes or even expecting some people might vote for them.

  61. galamcennalath says:

    @Dave Beveridge
    @r esquiredo


    A few years ago ( not being specific about when ) DevoMax would have probably slowed down moves to independence. Then again, a few years ago there was less momentum for independence anyway.

    However now, I agree the Dave, DevoMax would only be in position for a short time before the ‘common services’ on defence would become a huge issue. Another (dare I suggest) inevitable UK Imperial military escapade and/or Trident replacement are issues which would finally break the Union. With DevoMax in place, that breaking would be much simpler!

    However, if the ‘new federal UK’ under which Scotland had DevoMax were to be more European less American in foreign policy and give up Trident, then it might indeed have longevity.

    Either scenario is hypothetical … DevoMax won’t happen and rUK wouldn’t be turning from its right wing imperial ways anytime soon.

  62. frogesque says:

    Let Labour and its northern branch office go its own way. If that means knocking lumps out of itself then so be it.

    At the moment there is no reason why a candidate cannot stand as an independent aligned to the SNP. A London constituency would be the natural choice and I’m pretty sure a crowd funder could help out.

    My instinct is to keep well away from any shade of the pinky party. They are duplicitous and not to trusted.

  63. Brian Powell says:

    “know any good English journalists Rev that you could teach how to become Wings over England ?


    Where were they?

    This is similar to tweets I see from Labour supporters of Corbyn. All the things they can do and are going to do if Corbyn is elected.

    Where were they in the run up to the GE? Where was the swell, the movement of activists? Where were the journalists who should have been putting out the Corbynite-type message?

  64. muttley79 says:


    I have no idea what rationale you are using in your post? Cat Boyd would be a asset at Holyrood, but to say she is better than Nicola Sturgeon is completely baffling. Sturgeon has far more political experience than Cat Boyd. Also, you talk about the radical governing party in Greece implementing privatisation there, and then say we should be backing the RIC instead of the SNP!

  65. handclapping says:

    I don’t get the interest in “Labour”. Its a dead parrot; look at the way its been losing voters to UKIP. Its not because voters are right wing extremists but its voters teed off with the “Westminster politics” that Labour and Tory are engaged in.

    What the rUK electorate want is somebody who will tell it like it is. The UK is going to the dogs, everybody senses that, and the Tories are only “winning” because of those that see and use them as Linus’ blue blanket. Consider how Churchill got the population on his side by promising blood, toil, tears and sweat. We are in much the same position now and it won’t be Labour, or however many different Labours, that rides to the rescue.

    We should stop agonising over the well deserved demise of “Labour” and put our efforts into promoting an EPEL party in England that will promise an English Parliament for English Laws and be affiliated to the SNP promoting alternatives to austerity, end of Trident and they mad licking of America’s arse. There are millions out there waiting for a lead, for an alternative, as the rise of UKIP has shewn.

    Stop analysing the death of a corpse. Start filling the void it left behind.

  66. heedtracker says:

    Fascinating. For England, Scotland’s only ever been a little side show really, a very tasty asset on the books, nuke weapons dump, keep on extracting the regions resources, SLabour unionist cohort delighted to be part of it all.

    Their real problem is an England long divided up into deeply entrenched socio economics and Bliar and Brown’s New Labour did what tories do, divided it even more.

    No matter who wins Lab, blue tories are in power for a really long time. Cameron scraped in with Clegg, they all successfully terrorised Scotland BBC style with Project Fear, they won very well last time, they are only going to get more and more powerful and keep winning.

    The North of England grinches but they are blue tory too. Already they’re getting set for England’s HS2 powerhouse of the North etc and they know life is good in tory boy teamGB, Or at the very least, life under Gordon Brown’s strange prudence prudence prudence fraud was really no different and here comes UKIP.

    As far as England’s concerned, Scotland’s not much at all and having voted NO, its even less relevant now.

  67. Grouse Beater says:

    A coalition of the English Labour left and the SNP is a comforting notion … so long as Corbyn, (assuming he’s leading the Labour faction) is as keen on Scotland’s autonomy as the rest of us, or at least substantial, irrevocable home rule.

    Will he task colleagues to create an English-affiliated Scottish labour party that is genuinely free to support Scottish interests? Betting is still open.

  68. Swami Backverandah says:

    (giving it another shot)
    I’m inclined to agree with this, having thought for some while that the main differences in English politics seem broadly speaking to come down to Tory corporate crony capitalist privatisation policies vs green, anti-trident, anti-privatisation sentiment.

    A Green Labour left could scoop up many of those missing voters who traditionally vote left, and would rather not vote than vote Green. thus a coalition of Labours with SNP et al support could result in Government.

    On the election outcome, my reading is that many middle voters went Tory to secure the EU referendum, and they want out.

    One school of thought has it that if England votes out, and Scotland in, this could be grounds for new Indy ref. But after witnessing the emasculation of the Greeks, it’s not a given that – apart from Indy supporters taking this route – Scotland would vote to stay.

    There’s a battle for hearts and minds in the making.

  69. Clootie says:

    Lord Sewel is another example of the character of those involved in New Labour. Selfish, indulgent greedy, corrupt etc etc

    He is far from a rogue case. He was living the unionist dream……and he will continue as a Lord and no criminal charges will be prosecuted.

  70. Scott Borthwick says:

    Interesting. Back on 23 July, I posted the following comment on The National’s Facebook page:

    Labour will eat itself. Time to wind it up and let the party split down its serious fault line. To the left, Real Labour; to the right ‘centrist’ (yeah right) ‘I can’t Believe it’s Not Tory’.

    Nothing you’ve written here has changed my view. The two wings of Labour cannot co-exist, either as one party or two separate parties.

    I also suspect that EVEL will ensure that the SNP would be excluded from any future coalition.

  71. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Inthe short term we want one of the prats, not Corbyn to win but in the longer term the Labour party is finished

  72. a2 says:

    Couple of things

    Firstly it’s the left, “trad” party members that seem to me to have most bought into “SNP-BAD” the hardest, especially up here. The tory right of the party just want power for power’s sake so are most likely to accept a compromise with the SNP.

    This may rule out a three way alliance.

    There’s got to be a split though, if there’s any hope for labour in the UK. I’ll predict there will be the attempted coup if Corbin wins but that will result, not in the Left splitting off but in the “centerests” having no choice but to leave taking their burst ball with them. They may of course calculate that trying to overturn him before the next election will be shooting themselves in the foot.

    Either way, unless they split this year we are stuck with the tories for at least another election while they faff about.

  73. Macart says:

    Time frame.

    Basically whatever happens to parliamentary Labour, split, don’t split, vere further rightward, or not, ongoing infighting and schism. Time frame is all when you’re looking at anything which would prove either a. electable b. effective as a political unit or c. split, rebuilt and re-purposed.

    Whatever the outcome, it will be a party geared toward England’s electorate, as it should be, its where the numbers are. In the meantime and whilst all of this stramash is being sorted through what we’re looking at is almost certainly a further ten years of true blue conservatism.

    The question to ask Scotland’s electorate is how much Conservative government are you willing to stomach in the intervening years? Also, whatever entity emerges from Labour’s long night of the soul, are you willing to accept that future Conservative governments are always an election away and outwith your power to prevent?

    The future of these islands going forward and the true settlement of the constitutional question must surely be a confederation of independent states and parliaments. A strong social union with independent governments seeing to the particular needs of their own electorates. We all get the government we vote for and THAT is surely real choice for the electorate.

  74. Swami Backverandah says:

    Just in addition, I think it’s highly unlikely that a Labour Left will get anywhere near a sniff of Government. It’s not in the interests of privatising, capitalist, TTIP-loving, Trident-renewing, arms-contracting, hugely wealthy banking and other international players to allow that to happen.

    If they can ‘coup’ the Greeks, strictly come England’s a pushover.

  75. R-type Grunt says:

    I haven’t had time to read the other comments above but this the first time ever I’ve had issue with your content Stu. Corbyn winning would be a total disaster for the independence cause. The people who turned from Labour to the SNP would feel comfortable in returning to Labour & we’d be right back where we started.

    It seems it’s me who’s turning to scorched-earth tactics. I’m beginning to hate being Scottish.

  76. graeme stockton says:

    I have always advocated SNP standing for the London Assembly, it is PR and London has the 3rd largest Scots population in a city .
    The SNP would also get Scotland message across to the Capital.
    No time like now to do so.

  77. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “By splitting into two, they would split their own vote, making it harder to defeat the Tories in our FPTP system.”

    Read the article. It does address that point.

  78. Iain Gray's Subway Lament says:

    It’s unlikely to be the left that leave Labour when push comes to shove. The Blairites are like the Cameroons and basically cowards so they are the ones who tend to scurry off and find more lucrative jobs/corruption like Jack Straw, David Miliband and Blair did.

    So there is no easy or clean way out of this for Labour and the PLP. Either they accept Corbyn should he win. (which they won’t) Or they go back to an Ed Miliband strategy under Burnham or Cooper.

    That of throwing tiny scraps to the left while sucking up to the right-wing tabloids and pursuing the same pointles right-wing triangulation which destroyed them in scotland and annihilated the lib dems everywhere.

    The most hilarious thing for us though is that Labour’s utter chaos and split is only the beginning! 😉

    Next year it’s the tories turn as they split over being pro-Europe or anti-Europe. The nasty party’s swivel-eyed loons losing thier minds over Europe is guaranteed to be even more entertaining than Labour’s current debacle and shambles.

    As if that wasn’t enough the tories get to do it all again when the cowardly Cameron runs away from the Europe split and chaos he created as the tories have to find another leader before 2020.

    Funt times ahead! 😀 😀 : D

  79. dakk says:

    Jeremy Corbyn talks the talk much in the same way as the likes of George Galloway and Tony ‘I don’t want my mother to become a foreigner overnight’ Benn,(like there is something diminished about being foreign.)

    These words from Benn exposed his’ othering ‘ Britnat sensibilities,but in general he came across as the textbook socialist,same with Galloway,until they thought they might lose their last ‘jewel in the crown ‘colony.

    Then we see their true colour,and it’s not just red.

    No true socialist would ever want to be party to the war crimes and injustices perpetrated by multiple Labour governments,so there can be none now in the Labour Party.

  80. george paterson says:

    The only people who are “doing their heads in” with the current candidates (except Corbyn) are those who used the Labour Party as a means to get ultra rich with a populist party. Blair, Alan Miliband, the two Milibands, McTernan, Balls and a hoist of women toffs (to name but a few). Scotland has shown where its priorities lie. The rest of the UK is in turmoil which suits the rich and privileged (Tories). Just check on their blood lines and they almost all made billions from the Slave Trade (as did many privileged Scots). Now they are keeping their wealth at the expense of their manufactured POOR.

  81. Heidstaethefire says:

    in answer to shy unionist above, pre The Falklands/Malvinas War, Thatcher had been the most unpopular Prime Minister on record. The conflict saved her.

  82. Mad Jock McMad says:

    The Labour tactics are reminiscent of the first days of the Somme, as alluded to by Mr Blair though not the way he meant.

    The choice is do they learn the lesson, as Haig and his staff eventually did, or do they continue doing what they are doing sending their troops to endless massacre at the polls.

    I doubt Labour has the spine to face up to any mutiny with out destroying itself ….. the Union backers will be key as is where they put their money. Yet even the unions are in conflict, split over to Corbyn or not to Corbyn.

    In effect Labour are a disorganised mess at every level and I only sense there will be an angry sintering of the party or a particularly bloody night of the long knives which will leave them in much the same mess, such is the hatred between Bliarites and the rest.

  83. Croompenstein says:

    @Andyk – they have multi-party systems all over europe and it seems to work quite well, so why no here?

    They are trying to turn us in to America Andyk

  84. andy mills says:

    One move that could expedite matters greatly is if the Unions would transfer their support from New Labour to TUSC.

  85. muttley79 says:

    Corbyn winning would not be a disaster for the prospects of independence imo. The main reason being that the New Labour element in England would simply not tolerate him as the UK Labour leader. Given the noises from the right of Labour and the MSM over the last few weeks, then it is pretty clear that a significant number are going to walk away from Labour if Corbyn wins. The trade unions would support a `Real`Labour Party over a New Labour Party type one. Wealthy donors would back a New Labour Party.

  86. Dr Ew says:

    I like the ideas and the principle, but like most divorces this one would likely be complex, exhausting and bloody.

    One of the big issues when considering a split is who gets to keep the assets, the liabilities, the TU donations, the employees, the branch network… holding on to that infrastructure is, I think, one of the main reasons we haven’t seen a breakaway Independent Labour Party in Scotland (that and they’re too riven with corpulent time-servers who haven’t got the cojones or the wit to attempt such).

    The SDP lesson of the 80s might mean the “Middle Labour” option could breakaway, merge or form an alliance with the LibDems, and bring their big City donors with them, taking over the existing infrastructure and organisation of that benighted party before it crumbles away in harsh daylight of vastly reduced state subsidies and MP support. That’s not an easy fit either, the authoritarian and the liberal, and likely to be Plan B or even C for the New Labourites. First and foremost they’ll want to win the Labour brand and purge the Corbyn followers, no matter how hellish the consequences. Enforce your will at all costs remains the Blair-Mandelson mantra – just ask an Iraqi. Or indeed any ordinary Labour voter who watched the car crash Better Together campaign as it careered through the central reservation.

    But never say never. I do not think I’ve ever lived through such a turbulent and unpredictable political climate and I just missed voting in 1983. Nuances of campaign tactics and dud leaders aside, I think the English voters went for the Tories because they wanted to believe the illusion of stability, something traditional and solid in what is a maelstrom of British fragmentation, European uncertainty, rampant ‘no alternative’ neo-liberalism, spiralling debt and deep societal discord. Anything can happen – and probably will.

  87. Clootie says:

    Heidstaethefire says:
    26 July, 2015 at 1:11 pm

    …you don’t think the Falklands War timing was by chance?

    A minor issue that could have been dealt with through political channels was too big a chance to miss.
    War, sinking the Belgrano , photo in a tank turret all things designed to appeal to the “British Empire” mindset of middle England (The Oil reserves also factored).

    The maintenance of the illusion of an Empire is a major driver for all the unionist politicians. The lives of people abroad are a price worth paying for an election win and a seat at the big table (Jobs and speaking tours after retirement are a bonus)

  88. arthur thomson says:

    The chaos in the Labour party is an essential element in exposing the true nature of the British establishment. It is one of the pillars on which the establishment depends. It promotes and maintains the myth of a non-existent democracy. The calls to stop the leadership process evidences this – the Labour Party is no more a democratic political party than the Tories. Better together they have hijacked the democratic process in their self-interest. A plague on both their houses.

    I only want to see the chaos grow, weaken and overwhelm the Labour Party – especially at this time when the disgusting abuses of the establishment are ripe for exposure. A Labour party in meltdown will be less able to conspire with the Tories to continue to cover up and justify the abuses they have BOTH been responsible for. Exposing and bringing about action against the perpetrators of the abuses – including the GCHQ surveillance of Holyrood, ’embedding’ in Syria and all other scandalous behaviour – should be right at the top of the agenda of the SNP at Westminster.

    It is not in the interests of the common people for the Labour party to be resuscitated.

  89. dakk says:

    Jack Murphy. 11.59

    Thanks for that link from the Sun.

    Particularly liked the picture of Lord ‘Sewer’ snorting with his wedding band of fidelity displayed like a mark of decent family values.:)

  90. Democracy Reborn says:

    Stu, re. 1983, it’s not quite right to say that Labour was leading in the polls right up until the Falklands War.

    Have a look at all the polls between 1979-83 in “UK Polling Report”. Incredibly, despite the internal Labour strife between post-79 between left and right as a result of the ‘betrayal’ by the Callaghan government, Labour led in every poll from the ’79 election up until around October 1981. The Falklands War did not start until 2nd April 1982 with the sudden Argentine invasion of South Georgia.

    1981, and particularly the latter half of that year, was the real turning point. Labour was continuing to tear itself to pieces between left and right. Michael Foot was elected leader, monstered in the press for being too old, out of date and left wing. There was a particularly nasty deputy leadership contest between Denis Healey and Tony Benn which Healey won by barely 1%. Benn, like Foot, was naturally skewered by the bulk of the MSM for being loony left.

    Against that backdrop, add in the SDP which was created in 1981, taking a few dozen right wing Labour MPs with it. The SDP/Liberals actually out-polled Labour and the Tories in October/November 1981, and in fact got over 50% in a December 1981 poll.

    The breakthrough for the Tories was February 1982 when they began to out-poll both Labour and the SDP/Liberal Alliance. The Falklands factor certainly buttressed their support, because they remained ahead in the polls right through to the June 1983 GE which was a disaster for Labour, Thatcher being re-elected with a 144-seat majority. It’s a bit too simplistic to say that the Falklands conflict, of itself, won it for the Tories : the economy was also starting to pick up by early 1982. But it’s interesting to speculate what might have happened if the Falklands hadn’t taken place. I *suspect* that the Tories would probably still have won, albeit with a reduced majority. Reasons? A divided opposition (although they were cumulatively out-polling the Tories); perception of Labour still being a divided party; MSM blitzkrieg on Labour having loony left policies (Gerald Kaufman on the ’83 Labour manifesto : “the longest suicide note in history”); Thatcher (certainly in England) being preferred over Foot in leadership qualities; return to economic growth.

    What are the lessons, then, for the current Labour leadership contest? There are still many members who have memories of the 79-83 period, including I would suggest most of the candidates. Indeed, Corbyn was an active Tony Benn supporter at the time. One difference is that there is no divided opposition in the form of the SDP : the Lib Dems have sold the pass. If Labour had a leader in the mould of Nicola campaigning on a clear anti-austerity/neo-liberal agenda, I’d say Labour’s prospects were fair. But it ain’t gonna happen, and neither is your suggestion that the party split in two. The memories of the 83 split are still too fresh in the minds, and the party has learned the lesson of a divided opposition. *Per* Blair, principle will continue to be sacrificed for the pursuit of power. And we’ll be continue to be spoon-fed by SLAB and their MSM acolytes that this is the new ‘consensus’. Anyone off-message will be demonised – as we’re already seeing happening to Corbyn. If he wins the leadership (and I hope he does), there will be no split by the right. They’ll do what most of the right-wing did after the SDP breakaway : keep their heads down, collect their salary, perhaps refuse to serve in the shadow cabinet, occassionly voice dissent from the sidelines. If Corbyn is defeated in 2020 they’ll say “we told you so”, and then it’s back to business as usual electing a new leader who’s willing to work within the contours of whatever (God forbid) Tory agenda prevailing at that time.

    To all anti-Tory No voters : still feeling better together?

  91. Swami Backverandah says:

    from wiki:

    “Sewel is married to Jennifer and has two children and two step-children. He enjoys cricket, golf, reading, hill-walking and cooking.”
    Needs updating to include latest hobbies.

  92. Clootie says:

    Extract from the Guardian latest. Unelected and you can’t get rid of him!!!

    …The allowance for peers is £300 a day, and does not apply to Sewel, who is paid a salary of £84,525 for his role as chairman of committees. As he declared his main residence was in Aberdeenshire, he was also entitled to a tax-free office holder’s allowance of £36,000 plus travel and other expenses.

    His responsibility is to oversee the work of the various Lords committees and ensures they are not working in conflict with one another, and using their time and resources to best effect. He has also sat on the committee responsible for members’ privileges and conduct.

    Sewel is a former senior vice-principal of the University of Aberdeen and a former parliamentary undersecretary of state at Scottish Office, serving as the minister for agriculture, environment and fisheries between 1997-1999.

    Sewel is not required to resign from the Lords until an investigation by peers.

    It is also open to the upper house to sanction a peer by denying them access to Lords facilities or suspend the member from parliament for a specific period….

  93. Pam McMahon says:

    You’re flogging a dead horse.

    I can understand where you are coming from. We spent many years in different parts of England, vainly searching at election time for somebody to vote for to represent our values and beliefs, but only found it when we came back to Scotland.

    I don’t believe the Labour party will split in the way you fondly imagine, until it decides that people, principles and integrity are more important than gaining power.

  94. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “I don’t believe the Labour party will split in the way you fondly imagine”

    I didn’t say it WOULD. I said it was the only thing that could save it.

  95. Mark Harper says:

    As far as Corbyn goes, our problem, Scotlands problem isn’t the Labour party or the Tory party. Our problem is westminster and its corporate masters, it’s ingrained cronyism to royalty and the elitist system that it feeds and is fed by. Changing Labour is only chucking clean sawdust on the same dirty barn floor.

  96. Joemcg says:

    Reading the above confirms that a left leaning socialist outlook Scotland being tied to this union has turned into a nightmare scenario for us and we are trapped banging our heads against a brick wall. It could have all been oh so different last September. It’s shite being Scottish.

  97. Pete says:

    A lot of political comentators have been keen to bring up the potential problem of Tory suporters and socialists signing up to vote in jeremy corbyn. I can see the headlnes now should he be elected leader:

    Torys and communists unite to elect corbyn labour leader.

    Tory suporters doom Labour to years of infighting and electorial defeat.

    It’s all about controling the media narative.

  98. Dr Ew says:


    “Sewel is married to Jennifer and has two children and two step-children. He enjoys cricket, golf, reading, hill-walking and cooking.”

    When I checked Wikipedia around about noon today “prostitutes” and “cocaine” were inserted after “hill-walking”, I kid you not! I showed it to my wife and thought about posting a link here but when I checked again, about 1pm, the original, sanitised version had been restored. Boo!

    I suppose a “Sewel Motion” may take on a different meaning now…

  99. Kid Spotlght says:

    This battle is for the soul of the Labour Party. If the 48 rebels break away and call themselves the ‘Real Labour Party’ it would be the grossest act of crass stupidity in political history.

    They would effectively gift (ie meekly surrender) the many, many achievements of the pre-Blair coup ‘Old’ Labour Party to the parasitic Bilderberg/banking/corporate approved New Labour faction – who could then claim full ownership of a ‘Labour’ identity. An identity built on the suffering and struggle of millions of working class folk north and south of the border over many decades. Blairites are middle class Tory chancers, period, they are not the heirs to Labour’s working class traditions.

    If there is a split, it will be the from the right wing (again) and it will evaporate into hot air (again). Vince Cable, ex-Labour, arch ("Quizmaster" - Ed), post office giver-awayer, where art thou?

    Corbyn is not Foot, and this is not 1983. His views are nuanced and far from being hard left wing. Those duped by Blair and New Labour (see the NME article) deserved to be. It was all too easy to see what Blair was about in the (almost) three years he was Labour leader in opposition.

  100. biecs says:

    Sewel has resigned.

  101. heedtracker says:

    As one more teamGB imperial master snorts cocaine off of prostitutes, another UKOK day of shysters in Scotland trundles along.

    Thanks again proud Scot buts.

  102. Les Wilson says:

    Well, I would champion any increase in power at Westminster, this could be the way to do it.
    However I would want no compromise for our Independence whatsoever.
    So we would need to get it formally agreed, as to what intentions the left Labour party would have for Scotland.

    Guaranteed and sealed, before any alliance. We cannot just forget how labour has behaved nor the negative policies that has constantly worked against us, for a millennium.

    This is our space now, we need to keep it, it is our only hope.

    If and only if our position is safe, and we can rely on the SNP to do that, should we enter such a deal. I am very cautious of this, but not paranoid, with our ” deal” being totally acceptable to us the only option.

  103. Joemcg says:

    Love that line stu “using grotesque scorched earth tactics” but it begs the question how did yes lose if that is the case? Or did we really lose?

  104. Ally A says:

    This has been on my mind for a few days, and I think it needs a third left-of-centre party to emerge from this to ensure that the electorate’s views are at least to some degree represented at Westminster.

    Currently with where the Labour party is positioned on the political spectrum and with its members whipped to follow there is no party to represent (English) people who hold left-of-centre views.

    Surely this can’t be right or representative? Isn’t this a democratic deficit?

    Good post this has needed discussing.

  105. Thomas William Dunlop says:

    Blairisn and the neolibera coup are only part of the problem for the traditional Social democratic worker orientated parties.

    They are stuff full of careerists with such a narrow base of experience, they turn to the answers to the wrong questions looking for solutions. For example they seem entirely absorbed with the idea of the pursuit, capture and maintenance of power, rather than thinking about what would be good for people.

    Another problem is that they also appear to regard the party as the be all and end all of everything. Thus they subconsciously ask what is good for the party therefore it must be good for the people. Thus any hurt to the party brings out very protective feelings. As for their competitors, we all know that their hatred for the SNP in Scotland is pathalogical in nature which led to their demise here

  106. Gordon says:

    If Corbyn wins and Labour are resurgent in the polls, will he live to fight the 2020 election? He is 66 already, he would be in his 70’s. He might have a heart attack or fall down a mountain or hang himself while walking his dog.

  107. arthur thomson says:

    Labour and Tory, two cheeks of the same arse. Unoriginal but nonetheless true.

  108. Rob James says:

    When it comes to the crunch, it’s a safe bet they’ll abstain.

  109. Dan Huil says:

    If Corbyn wins Labour will be unelectable in England. People in Scotland will see that voting Labour will be even more pointless than it already is.

  110. IvMoz says:

    Watching Corbyn on Marr, very impressive.

    Blows Kendall/Burnham/Cooper out of the water. Talks sense.

    He will not win labour the GE 2020, but will cost the SNP votes.

    We need a Burnham win.

  111. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    I don’t care what Lord Sewel does with consenting adults and I rather feel today for his wife, children and family.
    Let’s not stoop to the depths in the company of the hypocrites of the tabloid press.
    As somebody once said “let ye without sin……..

  112. drawdeaddave says:

    Rev “The thing is, there couldn’t be a better time for that to happen than now”

    How very convenient that Labour are in such a mess that they don’t know their left from their right, just as things like the Scotland Bill & the welfare Bill are making there way through parliament, we have an “Official” opposition party that is as much good as a chocolate fireguard & have the excuse of being a party in turmoil, all very convenient from a right wing Conservative & unionist party point of view..

  113. Morag says:

    In the way it says. Real Labour win seats in the north, Middle Labour in the south, basically.

    I meant within constituencies, as regards splitting the vote. You seem to be implying an electoral pact, so that Red Labour stand in the left-wing seats (North, and London boroughs?) while Blue Labour stands in the more right-wing seats. So they’re not splitting the vote within constituencies.

    I struggle to see how this could work in the real world. I’m open to persuasion, but wouldn’t voters look askance at the other half of the party and hesitate to vote for them? Wouldn’t it be derided as a stitch-up and manipulation?

  114. Swami Backverandah says:

    I couldn’t give a rats toss what any lawmaker does lawfully either, @Dave McEwan Hill.
    It’s the hypocrisy that irks.

  115. I’m a person of few words and even less punctuation
    here are my thoughts in pictures.    

  116. Kevin evans says:

    Hi fellow wingers,

    I don’t like the anti SNP stuff appearing on face book to do with the “named person” act that’s being introduced. A few people I know who are yes voters are asking questions about it.

    Could someone on here please explain in a bit more detail what’s going on so I can pass this info onto others.


  117. call me dave says:

    Another turn of the screw, Salmon haunting the UK establishment.

    Never a dull moment keeping their feet to the fire.

  118. Joemcg says:

    Call me Dave-aye the comments are worth a read. They are apoplectic with rage!

  119. caz-m says:

    I have a different take on all this. I think if Corbyn was to become the leader of the Labour Party, he would draw support back from Labour voters in Scotland who had turned to the SNP at the last election.

    I am being selfish here, I am only thinking of Scottish Independence. IMO we need a right-wing Labour Party, then left-wing labour voters in Scotland will continue to support the SNP.

    It’s the same reason that I supported the Tories winning the GE. It is the quickest route for Scotland to become an Independent Nation.

    If Labour had won the GE, Westminster would have turned into a talking shop and would have put Independence on the back burner for years to come. IMO.

    A new left wing party will emerge in England because of all this in-fighting.

  120. Stoker says:

    The biggest problem facing England and their battle against the various shades of Tory is the exact same one we face – the media.

    We, Scotland, are so much further along the road to overpowering and defeating that particular beast thanks to sites such as WOS etc.

    The creation of sister organisations such as WOE & WOW are long overdue. This point has been made several times on WOS over the years. It would be our own little version of starting a fire in the enemies camp.

    We need to help our cousins south of the dyke and what better way than to give them the tools to slay the beast. I’m sure you, Rev, have the contacts who are more than capable.

    Scotland’s No1 problem, as we all know, is outside influences from a corrupt foreign owned media with the BBC as ringleader.
    All other problems stem from that fact.

    England and Wales’ problems are similar, their people are fed a routine diet of utter pish and stale lies.

    Combat this and we all progress in a better direction.

    NOTE: Look how successful our crowdfunders are. Can you imagine what a WOE could achieve with a far larger market than we have.

  121. heedtracker says:

    The biggest problem facing England and their battle against the various shades of Tory is the exact same one we face – the media.

    The UKOK media is merely England reflected back at itself. And it’s owned by same establishment that think they own Scotland. Never forget, England is Great Britian and Scotland is British, therefore England owns Scotland. All the UKOK media is doing is keeping England’s grip on Scotland as strong as it ever was.

    “They are trying to steal our country” stated British Prime Minister Cameron many times in the last GE. Who is “they” and what is their country, we’re in the middle of journey to find out.

    That was all in neo fascist Sunday times, Dail Heil etc attacking the most dangerous women in teamGB, who now has Jeremy Corbyn for company.

  122. chris kilby says:

    An elegant and insightful analysis. I myself had a wee bit of an epiphany…

    1945-1979 – The post-war consensus. Welfare state, NHS, commitment to full employment all endorsed by every Conservative PM from Baldwin to Heath.

    1979 – Thatcher’s election marks a political paradigm shift to a free market model in the wake of the energy crisis of the 1970s and the economic chaos and industrial unrest that followed which proceeds to systematically dismantle all that. A process which continues to this day. What used to be called 19th Century Liberalism, is now called Neoliberalism but at the time was called Thatcherism. An article of faith still adhered to by her disciples with the religious fervour of true believers – just look at IDS’ frantic fistpumping behaviour during Osborne’s last budget. Bizarre.

    2015 – Are we in the process of yet another political paradigm shift? Away from the Thatcher model ultimately caused by the global economic crisis of 2008 (itself the result of neoliberal excesses) and the austerity/poverty which inevitably followed? Instigated by the post-Scottish Independence Referendum rise of the SNP/collapse of Labour in Scotland and subsequent rise of Jeremy Corbyn/Labour’s “lurch to the left” (ie, return to the post-war consensus which used to hold the centre ground)?

    Interestingly, 1945 -1975 (when the energy crisis really hit and Thatcher became Tory leader) was a period of 30 years. As was the period between Thatcher being elected PM in 1979 and the global economic crisis of 2008. Give or take.

    Thatcher and her children in the Tory and Labour parties have had 35 years. Maybe it really is time for a change. Past time. No-one in their right mind in 1975 thought Thatcher stood a chance of becoming Tory leader. The same way no-one in their right mind thought Corbyn stood a chance of becoming Labour leader. But that was a few weeks ago. A lot can change in a few weeks. Just think how much things could change in another five years…

    Epiphany or wishful thinking? You decide!

  123. call me dave says:

    Austerity! £12bn in cuts. Oh wait!

    The cost of bombing Libya was at least 13 times what was spent on rebuilding the country after the end of the conflict, it has been revealed. 🙁

    Footie: second half if you want it.

  124. John from Fife says:

    O/T The Tories are threatening to give the Scottish Government the Smith Commission poison chalice in time for the 2016 Holyrood Elections. There is also talk of sensible concessions to the bill as well. Needs to be looked into.

  125. heedtracker says:

    In the way it says. Real Labour win seats in the north, Middle Labour in the south, basically.

    One major socio economic, cultural void between Scots and English is that for your average English man and women of any racial background, voting Conservative is posh. So if you’re on the way up the socio economic ladder in England, you’re probably going to vote Tory in aspiration as much as anything else.

    It’s very different in Scotlend and I don’t know why. Growing up in Aberdeen in 70’s, Aberdeen experienced a large intake of working class English people seeking oil sector jobs, well paid oil sector jobs. So almost immediately everyone I met at school and uni who was working class and seemingly natural labour voters, very suddenly and all to a man and women were all Tory voters. Some even taking the daily telegraph.

    WTF was actually invented by Scottish lefties, in Aberdeen in particular watching as British ex military, or say Geordie nurses, welders and bookkeepers become ladeedah Tories over night, as their oil patch pay tripled over night.

    I exgerate not. Snatcher Thatcher and co knew all of this, as they sold of councils housing for nothing. It’s the Tory way.

  126. IvMoz says:


    I agree.

    The perfect storm is a Tory Uk Government, with a Burnham or Kendall as the UK labour leadership.

    I want independence at all costs first & foremost, I don’t want labour or the lib dems to get their act together. That’s will affect the SNP.

    Let’s strike while the iron’s hot & Indyef2 asap.

  127. Grouse Beater says:

    I can never tell which topic will catch the mood but this one has taken off:

  128. Chic McGregor says:

    I don’t think an alliance of two Labours can work, and for the same reasons as to why an independent separate Scottish Labour would not work.

    They would simply be too divided on domestic policy on a day to day basis. They could not form an alliance, at least not with each other.

    I think ‘middle Labour’ would simply vote with the other two Tory parties in plarliament.

    But I do think a proper anti-neoliberal party will emerge somehow, human nature abhors a political vacuum.

    A huge percentage of the English electorate are currently disenfranchised and that cannot go on much longer.

    You can point to the umbrella nature of the SNP as an example of those with different domestic ideologies managing to work together but in that rather unusual case there is a very significant other goal which binds them, at least for the duration.

  129. msean says:

    Just seen what Mr Salmond said re another independence referendum,but the commentators said we Scots don’t want another one. That must mean that we do then. 🙂

  130. Grouse Beater says:

    McSean: That must mean that we do!


  131. Iain More says:

    Corbin could win Labour leadership but he wont win England. I think the right wing of Labour will split from Labour to form an SDP mark 2 funded by the Tory/UKIP right to do so and backed up by a rabid right wing Press and Media. Nothing change sin the UK context, not even after the passage of decades since Maggie T.

  132. Stoker says:

    heedtracker wrote:
    “Never forget, England is Great Britain and Scotland is British, therefore England owns Scotland. All the UKOK media is doing is keeping England’s grip on Scotland as strong as it ever was.”

    How could i forget, i’ve lived it every day of my life just like everyone else and just like others, my first, foremost and last concern is full independence for Scotland, nothing less.

    But that doesn’t take away from the fact that there is a desperate need for one large organisation in both England & Wales who’s sole aim is to galvanise a mass singular movement pulling in the opposite direction to Toryism.

    Something very similar to our ‘Yes’ movement which can reach out to and galvanise the masses. A Wings Over England and Wings Over Wales would be excellent starting points.

    Knowledge is power!

  133. heedtracker says:

    I can never tell which topic will catch the mood but this one has taken off:

    It’s a horrifying legacy, Crash Gordon’s rich, Flipper Darlings rich, Chritoher Mould’s rich etc
    Currently Slab are raging at SNP for their 134k lost college places but back in 1998ish, one of the first things Crash Gordon did was end the state funding of clever comprehensive kids to go to private school,. I know this as a single mum of 4 I know had two clever kids at Gordon’s in Aberdeen, paid for by tax payer. Crash ended all that and the boys were kicked out by Gordon’s mid term after launch.

    Also, I have old buddies thst worked at the now Aberdeen College further ed, trades, HND, NC night classes ettc. Almost instantly Crash Broon cut their funding with massive job losses, careers ended, departments shut down, huge fall in student numbers. It’s was all horrifiyng to warch, especially after Labour win 97. Local MP’s Anne Begg, frank Dorran etc made all the ight ooh ah oh dear, shame shame noises but it probably doesn’t need to be said that they were all unionist liars and con artists, making today’s gernerstion of smirking SLabour activists look even more ridiculous

    People,don’t forget. As soon as an alternative became a viable vote option for Aberdeen, Begg, Dorran etc were finished. but Slab unionists are still reeking vengeance in Aberdeen.

  134. Joemcg says:

    Probably been mentioned on here before but caught a bit of V for Vendetta last night. Watched it well before the build up to the vote and never realised or thought that there would be definite parallels to what happened and is happening in Scotland at the moment. Quite chilling. Great film.

  135. “Bittie Glakit says:
    26 July, 2015 at 3:01 pm
    I’m a person of few words and even less punctuation
    here are my thoughts in pictures.

    … hahaha, excellent 🙂 a picture’s worth a thousand words.

  136. CameronB Brodie says:

    I agree that England needs the political choice a new progressive party would offer. I am concerned though, that such a development would not be truly progressive if represented by the Marxist rump of British Labour. They tend to base their world view on old theory, which was of questionable value when first baked, IMO. I also doubt if a coalition with the SNP is a certainty. The SNP are nationalists verging on Nazis, are they not? The SNP’s primary objective is the destruction of Britain, is it no?

    Dare I say it, but I hope England’s left wing find a truly progressive third way.

    @ Iainmacwhirter
    Apologies for being unkind, I have good days and bad days. That’s my excuse and I’m sticking with it. 😉

  137. heedtracker says:

    Knowledge is power!

    Maybe Stoker. I’m a cunning linguist. I know that language is power, words are power, and who weilds them are the BBC powerful.

    Scotland has foodbanks sounds nice. What that really means is Scotland has beggars. Scotland’s people made beggars as stinking rich elitists feed off our resources, as a supper rich English nationalist like JK Rowling in her castle, tells the Scots they are safe and secure living as beggars in their own rich country.

    Beggars Stokers. Scot’s have been beggared. That’s what teamGB has done to the people of Scotland.

  138. galamcennalath says:

    IvMoz says:
    at 2:42 pm
    “Watching Corbyn on Marr, very impressive.
    He will not win labour the GE 2020, but will cost the SNP votes.
    We need a Burnham win.”

    Yes, I thought he talked a lot of sense.

    AND ….. I also agree that he represents a threat to the SNP and to moves towards independence.

    I don’t see the Tory policies and WM’s arrogant antics as our biggest problem – I see those has helping us along the road!

    I see our biggest problem as the 20-25% of voters who still stick with Labour, and probably with a NO stance.

    We need to convert more of them to Indy supporting parties and a YES position. What we definitely don’t want in the run up to Holyrood 2016 is for Labour to become more attractive again to Scottish voters!

    We need to have Unionists as Tory Max, Original, Lite and Cherry.

  139. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    caz-m at 3.30

    I agree but I rather hope that most Scots who find Corbyn attractive initially will then have a look at what is left in the Labour Party in Scotland and see sense .

  140. brobb says:

    I don’t like the anti SNP stuff appearing on face book to do with the “named person” act that’s being introduced. A few people I know who are yes voters are asking questions about it.

    Could someone on here please explain in a bit more detail what’s going on so I can pass this info onto others.

    Hi Kevin, the named person act is really just an attempt to simplify processes when a child is facing any difficulties in life. The majority of children will be unaffected as they will not require any additional support outside family. If there is a problem or concern, anyone can contact the named person so that any action needed can be coordinated rather than piecemeal, with all relevant people including the child and family kept in the loop about any decisions.

    The act simply formalises this in law and is in no way a spy charter to undermine parents rights and responsibilities. So, if nursery staff believe a child may have undiagnosed learning difficulties they can contact the Health Visitor (named person for under 5s) to set things in motion re diagnosis/support etc rather than the nursery staff trying to contact and organise support with lots of different agencies.

    The reporting about this act is on a par with the usual SNP bad stuff we are fed every day. For example Alex Salmond spoke on a range of issues on the Andrew Marr show today but guess what was repeated on every radio bulletin – the prospect of another referendum. Just as well Stu has taught us how to question what we read or hear 🙂

  141. Dan Huil says:

    Corbyn would only be some kind of threat to the SNP if he wins the leadership and declares the Labour party in Scotland to be completely and genuinely independent from the Labour party in England – unlikely.

  142. starlaw says:

    Corbyn may win and lead a party capable of picking up votes from those who had given up on voting, Scotland however must remain focussed on Independence or we are back on the road to no-where, Labour in Scotland have lost the goodwill they once enjoyed without Question, the people trusted labour through generations that trust will never come back.

  143. Brian Powell says:

    Watching Corbyn making sense does highlight the extent to which we were stitched up by DR, Herald, Scotsman, BBBC and the various parties in Scotland and Labour in UK.

    Labour failed abysmally in Scotland( and in England); it would have been obvious to the commentators they were peddling lies and now Scotland is saddled with the results.

    Maintaining the power status quo at Westminster comes first and last with them, the people in Scotland don’t figure in it at all.

  144. IvMoz says:

    @Dan Huil

    If Corbyn becomes leader he will get airtime nation-wide on MSM.

    As many people only follow MSM, they will see Corbyn UK labour as indistinguishable from Scottish labour.

    I know people who knew Miliband was Labour leader but didn’t know Murphy was the Scottish version, simply because of national news.

    Corbyn would take votes from the SNP.

    Vote Burnham or Kendall.

  145. johnj says:

    Dead right Stuart, and if you’ll forgive me jumping on the bandwagon I’ve been thinking this for months. Labour needs to split, leaving three political groupings which can form alliances. This will isolate the extreme right in the Tory party.

  146. CameronB Brodie says:

    frogesque says @ 12:21 pm, 26 July, 2015.

    ….At the moment there is no reason why a candidate cannot stand as an independent aligned to the SNP. A London constituency would be the natural choice and I’m pretty sure a crowd funder could help out….

    Why not Croydon? That would rub Boris up a bit. 🙂

  147. Dan Huil says:


    The MSM would also make it very clear that Corbyn’s labour would be unelectable in England and therefore highly unlikely to form a Westminster government – not a very good reason for voting Labour in Scotland.

  148. heedtracker says:

    Another round of whoppers from rancid Graun, although it doesn’t actually matter what they’ve got going in Scotland.

    “Why BBC, Gawker and the FT must fight to keep editorial independence
    Jane Martinson

    Why should anyone trust them if they are influenced by advertisers, owned by faraway private corporations or bullied by the government?”

    Same UKOK outfit that vomited Project Fear over 5 million people thinks ads on Eastenders will make any difference.

  149. Tackety Beets says:

    Thanks brob @ 6.35

    I too , like Kevin , was unclear on the ” Named Person” situation.

    You make it sound simple and quite a good idea .


    The Wonder o Wings .

  150. CameronB Brodie says:

    I would hope the ” English Parliament for English Laws” party would support moving the English Parliament to Manchester. Possibly even capitol status. That would encourage too much democracy though and we all know how it works in UKOK plc land. A land where the Establishment employ the principle of ‘pooling and sharing’ to insist we are Better Together, whilst at the same time decoupling the practice of collectivism from the concept of social security.

    Don’t listen to me though, I’m, a Nazi sypathiser. Honest. 😉

  151. bowanarrow says:

    This is grrrate news. All Scotland needs to do now is for
    the labour party to become popular in Scotland and we wont
    need the SNP. The “REAL” labour party can offer us “REAL”
    devolved government and we can, at last, get back to where
    we were. Nowhere! If the SNP carry on as they are, this is what is likely to happen.

  152. IvMoz says:

    @ Dan Huil

    Of course labour are unelectable in England but one of the SNP’s USP’s is that they are anti-austerity.

    Now there may be a new player in the same market.

    Corbyn comes across as reasonable man. He does & will appear to the dis-enfranchised.

    People will see him on MSM & they’ll see him rather than Kezia as Labour.

    His coronation would not be good for the SNP.

  153. Brian Powell says:

    So along the decades of voting Labour we got a stream of Tory Governments, now with the worst so far.

    The argument concerning Corbyn is if we vote Labour because of him it will be OK this time, promise.

  154. bjsalba says:

    If the Unions are smart, they will keep on encouraging their members to be direct Labour Party members. They need to make it clear to the MPs that they need to tow a Real Labour Progressive line, not a neo-Liberal Tory look-alike.

    First they should concentrate on the Leader Candidate constituencies then go for the fence-sitters – which seem quite numerous.

    But then, when were the Unions able to see further than the end of their noses.

  155. Jimmy says:

    It all sounds as plausible
    as a ‘Back to the future’ script.

  156. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    bowanarrow at 8.09

    “If the SNP carry on as they are, this is what is likely to happen.”
    Not quite sure what you are getting at and what’s grrrate about it. Do you mean that the SNP continually increasing its support is good for the Labour Party?

  157. Rock says:

    This is similar to what I had posted a few days ago:

    Jeremy Corbyn will not be allowed to become Labour leader.

    If he does manage to pull it off, he will be sabotaged from both within and outside.

    He seems to be a genuine socialist.

    This is the moment for him to abandon Labour and start a Socialist Party with a clear agenda.

    Most of the other Labour MPs who rebelled will probably join him.

    We in Scotland have the SNP but South Britain badly needs a party which is genuinely on the side of the disadvantaged in society.

    It just doesn’t make any sense for genuine socialists to remain within the totally dishonest right wing Labour Party.

    If they still continue to remain within Labour, they are basically cowards.

    They should have left at the time of the illegal war.

  158. David McDowell says:

    If the SNP goes throws its lot in with a left-wing English Labour breakaway alliance I will not vote SNP.
    I’ve got no interest in Scotland participating in Unionist politics.
    That’s why I vote SNP.
    Simple, isn’t it?

  159. Rock says:

    “Middle Labour” would either form a coalition with the Tories or allow a hundred years of Tory rule rather than allign with Real Labour and the SNP.

    They are so corrupted and rotten to the core that we should not have absolutely anything to do with them.

    Let them fade away completely like the SDP.

    A trully left of centre Real labour party could easily win more than 250 seats on its own.

    But the British establishment would never let a left of centre government last long.

    Full independence for Scotland must remain the SNP’s number one priority, otherwise it too will get corrupted.

  160. Sinky says:

    I see Ian Murray on BBC complaining that SNP should concentrate on Holyrood issues rather than another referendum

    When will BBC ask him why he goes on about Holyrood issues in local press which are not within his locus?

    Or will they challenge him to say which Labour leader he supports and when he waffles they should say well I suppose you will be abstaining then.

  161. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    On Ian Murray…

    On ‘Reporting Scotland’ tonight, He came out with tripe about Salmond (paraphrasing here) throwing the gauntlet down to Nicola to come up with a timetable for IndyRef2.

    A total misrepresentation of what Salmond said on the Marr programme, but it was allowed to stand, uncontested, as “news”.

    No doubt the same propaganda clip will be replayed later tonight.

  162. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi DerekM.

    You typed,

    “They are finally starting to wake up down south,know any good English journalists Rev that you could teach how to become Wings over England ?”

    I started reading the link below, on and off, last year.

    His post today is headlined,
    Scrap the leadership election – Have the Blairites gone completely crackers?

    He’s pro-indy, not for just Scotland but, I believe, Yorkshire as well.
    Here’s one of his posts from August last year:-

    Wednesday, August 20, 2014
    Scottish independence and the “heavy price” of voting no

  163. Effijy says:

    Why did this guy Labour Peer, Baron John Sewel resign?

    Westminster’s media friends could suggested that he has become
    addicted to self raising flour. Bring in character statements
    from an unknown source at the Bakery, and Bob’s your uncle.

    They could have held one of those enquiries such as the one that was supposed to investigate Leon Britten.
    Just appoint his best mate to conduct the investigation, and if you don’t get away with it appoint his second best mate, if that fails just spend years pretending to investigate until they die of old age.

    There is always the Tony Blair enquiry about him taking the UK into an illegal war.
    You just feed back every 2 years that it’s at least 2 years away.

    Then of course there is the old dementia trick, keep voting in the Lords and a Board Meetings, driving yourself around London in your Jaguar, and when the old bill knock on the door, and in your sick line while the ink is wet.

    How stupid can this old fool be if he thinks there is any form of justice remaining in English politics???

  164. CameronB Brodie says:

    arthur thomson @ 1.42pm.

    Totally agree.

    Apologies to you also, I thought you were a guy. Must be your cunning lingualism and the strength of your delivery. Not that they are either necessarily or solely male attributes, of course. 😉

  165. Effijy says:

    Sunday Times today says Ken MacIntosh has polled almost a quarter of members of Scottish Labour have been polled ….giving that as 3,000 people.

    So current SLAB membership is only slightly north of 12,000.

    Compared to over 100k for the SNP.

    Is this the first figure we have seen on membership numbers?

    Please remember that Dim Jim backed up by Dipity Dug suggested that SLAB had 20,000? Don’t tell me that Labour is run by liars!

    Also take into account the numbers on WoS who proposed joining SLAB just to get a Vote.

    Genuine SLAB members across the whole of Scotland, IMO, are less than 10,000. At my SNP branch meeting, the party membership
    was put forward at 125,000.

    The Greens, SSP, RIC, can’t be too far behind SLAB’s membership numbers?
    (Hearts FC have as many season ticket supporter in one corner of the Capital City)

  166. Tam Jardine says:

    David McDowell

    I’m with you on this one. I have zero interest in England electing a true left wing government even if there was the remotest possibility of that happening.

    We all object to England dictating our fiscal policy, our foreign policy, our defence policy. Giving Cameron a bloody nose over fox hunting is one thing but I really couldna care less which unelectable politician they decide will lose elections for the labour party.

    English people need to do this stuff on their own. And if we can show them the way all well and good. But we are their colony and in that servile position we remain until independence.

    We need to forget about this bullshit and focus on the 2016 Scottish General Election and figure out how we are going to win a landslide for the indy parties, how we are going to build 60% support for yes and how we are going to nullify the arguments against independent and build a stronger yes campaign.

    Which labour leader loses the 2020 GE is up there with the discovery of habitable conditions on a planet 1400 light years away.

  167. Shuggy says:

    Stoker 4:41 pm wrote:

    “Something very similar to our ‘Yes’ movement which can reach out to and galvanise the masses.”

    The Yes movement grew from the grass roots up. They need to organise the same thing for themselves. To do that they need to care enough, which means they have to shake off many years of disillusion and disengagement. I’m not sure they’re ready to do that but who knows?

    Perhaps those campaigners in the North of England (the “Scotland, take us with you” folk) can galvanise their fellow citizens.

  168. HandandShrimp says:

    I see Libby’s article on Alex saying another regerendum is likely in the Groaniard has brought all the Project Fear faithfuls in from pasture. Remarkable seeing all that pap again. It actually looks a lot less believable the second time of trotting out.

  169. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Yes indeed!

    Re my post of a wee while ago, Murray’s clip was repeated on the BBC Scotlandshire news just now!

    They don’t give up with the $h!t…

  170. Mealer says:

    So.Here we go,yet again.In that stinking cesspit of sleaze and corruption now referred to as the House of Turds,the deputy speaker Lord Sewage has,allegedly,been snorting cocaine off a prostitutes breasts.I read it in the online Sun.A caption came up on screen offering me a free 30 day trial.It seems they’re all wallowing in it.

  171. Chic McGregor says:

    @Bittie Glaikit

    Great stuff!

  172. Dr Jim says:

    What’s a Labour Party?
    Isn’t that one of those English parties that change their principles every election to suit what they think might help them win

    And how many years have they F….d over Scotland again?

    Oh I know, every F…..g year

    Who’s this guy they want in charge now coz that’ll be completely different won’t it, AYE RIGHT

    Like I said, it doesn’t matter who’s “The Leader” of anything down south it’ll do what Whitehall tells it to do regarding Jockland

    I hear folk say “we don’t want to live in a one party state” in Scotland,
    What do people think we’re living in now Tory Labour I can’t believe it’s not whatever

    Thing is whatever we choose in Scotland, we choose it when we’re Independent, there’s no choice now
    England chooses our Lords and Masters every time and we suck it up like good British subjects

    I’ve been lucky enough, as many on here have to have met and spoken to our First Minister the previous First Minister half a dozen MSPs a couple of MPs and not one of them made me feel like they thought for one second they were my superior or Masters

    One other thing about our political representatives, we know where they live, we can see and talk to them anytime we want, we get emails from them
    I was lucky enough to put forward an idea and it was accepted, nothing big, or smart, but that’s the kind of party we’ve got, they pay attention

    Try emailing or talking to Cameron or any of that lot, they want nothing to do with us

  173. Proud Cybernat says:

    But didn’t Dim Jim (remember him) tell us that only the biggest party gets to form the government? Two Labour parties would be unlikely to ever be the biggest single party.

  174. Marc Sosal says:

    Friend of mine…an SNP MSP actually sounded the party out pre 2015 GE about standing in Berwick, to make a point if nothing else, and although, in the end, it was decided not to do it, it certainly wasn’t dismissed out of hand. Not a bad idea if you ask me.

  175. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    Putting aside my own personal political position I think we have to show some caution at this point.

    Despite Labour ruling the roost in Scotland for years through the FPTP voting system Scotland has never been a left wing country and Labour never achieved a majority of the popular vote.

    As substantial numbers of previous Labour voters put their trust now in the SNP we must be very careful that our rhetoric is not driving away others whose vote we will need if we are to achieve a significant majority for independence.

    We probably need more evidence of the “broad church” SNP at all times. This does not have to be Toryish in the current understanding of that as I believe Scotland has largely divorced itself from the political positions evident down south and is very largely nonTory.

    I would describe in lots of Scotland a strong belief in communalism (made that word up)rather than in “socialism” which means different things to different people and to which there is traditional resistance in some places.

  176. Mealer says:

    Dave McEwan Hill 10.53
    Wise words.

  177. Lochside says:

    Here we go again, speculating about the ‘left’ and a new emergent ‘Real Labour’ party in ENGLAND.

    Well the last time Scots threatened English power in 1638, the English Puritans supposedly sided with us and then when the chance came, if you pardon the expression, royally fucked us over.

    Cromwell was the result. What makes anybody think that the Left in England gives any priority to Scottish aspirations?
    This is a NATIONAL question, not just a political one.

    Otherwise, we are as well to work with Corbyn and form a new British Labour party for the future and forget about the whole purpose of voting SNP.

    Let the English fight it out. Divide and rule will suit us. We want Independence now…not to help the English Labour Party find its soul.

  178. heedtracker says:

    Apologies to you also, I thought you were a guy

    I am Cameron! I’m so sorry, its my lousy written English, like that thar CiF made it seem I was a mum of clever boys that got booted out of Gordon’s in Aberdeen, when Labour shut down the private school fees.

    I don’t know how many kids lost their places at private schools when Labour stopped the program but its a fascinating switch/flip in red to blue tory political ethos, with John Major’s tory gov paying for kids that couldn’t afford private schools and Bomber Bliar gov kicking it all into touch, almost instantly they got elected.

    It was quite rough on those boys though, 2nd year, mid term, leave for another posh school day, called into the head’s office, told your out and that’s you, back home for 3pm.

    But yesterday WoS’s thing from NME had the £35 a week dole money called the John Major Music Scholarship. All gone now.

    But no, I am a dude:D

  179. Rock says:

    Dave McEwan Hill,

    “I would describe in lots of Scotland a strong belief in communalism (made that word up)rather than in “socialism” which means different things to different people and to which there is traditional resistance in some places.”

    Care to explain the difference between “communalism” and “socialism”?

    Do you mean Catholic v Orange Order type of “communalism”?

  180. The solution to Labour’s woes must lie in getting an English Parliment elected on proportional representation where they can focus on Englands needs alone as would be the case for all the home nations.

    That would allow what is now Westminster to be down sized and moved to, say Liverpool, more central where they could deal with soley UK and International matters leaving domestic politics to the devolved parliments. The House of Lords well that could go half of them don’t know where they are anyway (Tanner) Sorted.

  181. caz-m says:

    Dave McEwan Hill 10.53pm

    Dave, the best way to unite the broad church of the SNP is for Nicola Sturgeon to tell us that Scotland will be going to the polls in 2018, so we can get out of this madhouse, where we are constantly begging our Westminster masters for some more powers just to survive,

    I don’t like begging, especially to the English Establishment.


    I gave you and Dunoon a wee mention on the previous post Dave. It was nice meeting you yesterday.

  182. Papadox says:

    All I want is Scotland to run its own little country without the INTERFERENCE from a neighbour who has delusions of grandeur and lives in a bully boy past and tries to rule Scotland by fear and lies with a air of superiority.

    Whatever the political parties decide to call themselves in an independant country is of no consequence to me. So long as the electors of Scotland vote for them that’s all that matters. I most certainly DO NOT want to be run by a foreign country or any of its agents.

    As for a foreign country pumping its PROPAGANDA & LIES into Scotland and having the audacity to charge us for it shows their utter contempt for us, (or is that love?).

    The English establishment is hell bent on making mischief between Scotland and England so that it can punish us till we get back into our quarters under the stairs, then rub our noses in it.

    As my father used to tell me “WATCH WHAT YOU ASK FOR ….” Westminster should maybe listen before it makes a complete arse of itself AGAIN.

  183. Thepnr says:

    The Labour party is already split, that much is obvious. Whether that will result in a new political grouping emerging is up for debate though I believe it will.

    I very much doubt that this will make much difference in Scotland, those that have now left Labour and shown a preference for the SNP are unlikely, I think, to switch back anytime soon.

    It’s possible that the opposite can happen, anyone paying attention to Labours current predicament can’t fail to notice that the dominant voice is that of the right.

    I doubt this chimes with the beliefs of Labour voters in Scotland. This is just the beginning of the end for Labour.

  184. shug says:

    We should start presenting candidates in the North of England. It would give the BBC a problem when we are a national party (in the UK). We can propose moving the border to create a Greater Scotland.
    The reason is dissatisfaction with poor and inept government from Westminster. The border can be set by the wishes of the people.
    Gosh it would spoil their breakfast!

  185. caz-m says:

    Kezia and Ken are on BBC Scotland’s, Scotland 2015 show tomorrow night. It will be interesting to see if Kezia toes the Harriet Harman Party line and distances herself from Jeremy Corbyn. We need to know Kezia.

    Are you against the cuts or are you abstaining, just like your wee worthless colleague, Ian Murray.

    Should be worth a watch.

  186. mike cassidy says:

    Politics came up in an interview with Sheffield musician Richard Hawley in October 2014.

    I wonder if he would vote for a Corbyn-led Labour Party!

    I’d rather eat my own shit than vote Tory or Liberal and I’ve struggled with Labour to be honest. Most of us are not alone in thinking that. It’s like, who the fuck do we vote for?

  187. Tam Jardine says:

    …anyway – should we no just park this whole indy/devolution debate until Lord Lang has worked this whole issue out?

    Baron Lang of Monkton, of Merrick and the Rhinns of Kells. One may as well declare oneself to be the master of the North Sea, or all Silver Birch or helium atoms or the Lord of 7.15-7.30pm. Lord of Merrick AND the Rhinns of Kells indeed.

    From now on I declare myself the Baron of the number 9 and the letters T and J. And the Nith. Merrick (highest point in Galloway) has no master – there are folk who climb it but it is hardly tamed! What delusion some humans suffer from!

    It forms part of the deliciously named Range of the Awful Hand which coincidentally describes the peripheral countries of the union. Within range.

    Lang opines that the union is hingin by a thread. Well in that case Lord Lang can I suggest we deploy a chainsaw just to be on the safe side?

  188. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    caz-m at 11.34

    Agree entirely. The sooner the better – and lets make sure all our support know that we have to get a majority on the list as well as first past the post if we have Ref 2 on our manifesto.

    Nice to meet you yesterday. Thanks for the remarks. Our Forward Shop is now known as the Gang Hut as there is so much going on in it all the time.
    Anybody who wants to bring a Chinese or Indian carry-out can join us on a Saturday evening!

  189. boris says:

    Now is the time for England to establish it’s own parliament. In terms of legislation it would be a mirror image of Holyrood albeit a fair bit larger in terms of MEP’s (euro MP’s would need to find another name). The parliament would be based at Westminster, taking over accomodation presently used by the House of Commons. A reduced UK parliament would be relocated to the House of Lords. The lords would be severely culled in numbers to around 100 in total and found a home somewhere in London

    WingsoverScotland would continue much as at present but retitled “wingsoverScotlandandEngland”.

    Articles written to the site would address topics aimed at one country or another of in the case of a joint interest both.

    The Rev would need to expand his staffing meeting the new challenges. The English regions are badly served by the present system of government.

  190. charlie says:

    as for lord sewell why do toffs (even blairite toffs) think that when they take cocaine there has to to be prostitutes present? Ive not found out why he left the Labour Party but he’s been picking up his HoL allowance for doing exactly fuck all, can we put that in the Barnett Formula?

  191. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    boris at 12.09

    And you would destroy the case for independence as a result. Do you think we are all daft?

  192. Macca73 says:

    The SNP can only gain from this. The election for a leader in Scotland must be in just as much turmoil I imagine just waiting to hear who they have to take orders from!

  193. James Dow says:

    Kenny reply The future is now. And it is Nicola Sturgeon.
    And if you refer to her again please spell her name correctly.

  194. James Dow says:

    bowanarrow reply. What part of England do you live in?

  195. @Dave McEwan Hill, @Rock

    Maybe “communitarianism” comes close to what you’re getting at with “communalism”? (not a better word, but maybe better known?)

    Just from my experience, the most striking cultural difference between Scotland and England (if I can be allowed to generalise wildly for a minute), is the importance given to social goods and common welfare here – as opposed to individual rights and private property. I’ve found that English people stress the latter more, in general.

    Not that this makes the Scots ‘better’ at all: we have less respect for privacy at times, and can be more outspoken in our critical judgements of others, which can cause a lot of friction. an Englishman might favour discretion, and mind his own business a bit more – which has its merits.

    However, there is great value in the prevalent Scottish notion that the common good comes first. It mitigates against the formation of a rigid class system, and defuses anybody’s attempts to lord it over their neighbours because of wealth or position. “Wur a’ Jock Tamson’s Bairns” is a noble sentiment. The, “aye, but ah kennt his granny” thing tends towards egalitarianism, although it’s a bit tied in with the ‘cringe’ – we can be a wee bit too ready to dismiss real achievements by those around us.

    But as Dave said, it’s a general cultural tendency that doesn’t always go as far as ‘socialism’. A broad church SNP can get away with providing a decent basic social safety net, keeping education and the NHS free, and land reform (which would be anathema to Southern England) – but wholesale redistribution of wealth, or lavish unemployment benefits that undermined the incentive to work, would be too much for a big chunk of Scots voters.

    It’s easy to point to reasons for the differences. In Scotland: presbyterianism and the kirk sessions; the clan system, and a more pastoral economy in the highlands that meant most of the land had no single ‘owner’; the co-operative movement; the actual socialism of the Red Clydeside era. In England: all the land ‘enclosed’ in mediaeval times; the same hereditary ruling class for 1000 years, and no major invasions; a sense of inevitability about the established order. Whatever.

    A belief in social fairness is still a real thing here, but will evaporate the longer we’re chained to Anglo-American neo-lib economics, and its media apologists. If we’re ever going to create a better country, with a constitution based on social democracy, we’d better do it very soon.

    [how’s that for a random bit of sociological speculation, grounded in sweet f*** aw? I should be in Bella ;)]

  196. Dal Riata says:

    The UKOK media going into a frenzy because of Salmond’s “independence is inevitable” statement in his interview with UKOK’s Marr.

    The Guardian puts up an article by Libby Whatzerface on what Salmond said which gets 2,400 comments, so far, the majority going from negative to outright abusive.

    The Guardian are nothing but cowardly hypocrites, as we know; so right-on with their anti-racist and anti-misogynistic stance – except when it comes to all things Scotland and its independence, then it’s anything goes, especially in its CiF section. Strip away the Guardian’s fine robes of self-declared middle-class respectability and you find that they are but Establishment whores underneath after all.

    And talking of…

    The BBC, too, giving it Project Fear 2 (or, is it now 3?). The ‘horror’ of Salmond’s words managed to get up to third place from the top of the BBC’s ‘nationwide’ ten o’ clock news, after an Englishman winning the Tour de France and Mr. Sewel being an Establishment Lord and getting caught sniffing coke off a prostitutes breasts for £300 a-week.

    And they dig out the “once in a generation” thing and another of something similar from Sturgeon, and get the wee nyaff Murray to bump his gums for UKOK and Rule Brittania. Well done, BBC. Here’s to you, with lots of purring and Seig Heil-ing.

    And finally. BBC Scotland [sigh] Ach, just the same unionist and anti-SNP shite as from the mothership, with just a hint of ‘regionalism’, interviewing two people in Glasgow, one who talks about something like changes needing to be made, but not actually saying, ‘Independence? Oh, yes, let’s go for it!’, while the other one says ‘Blah, blah… now’s not the time for it.’ And more purring and Seig Heil-ing for you, BBC Scotland. Congratulations.

    What a farce. The UK’s unionist mainstream media is anti-Scottish – and BBC Scotland is a willing partner in the cabal.

  197. Dal Riata says:

    @scunterbunnet at 1:13 am

    Great post there! Your ‘thesis’ is spot-on.

  198. CamernoB Brodie says:

    Dave McEwan Hill

    Re. “communalism”. 🙂 Perhaps unconscious Communitarianism, which I think, might be a natural extension of Scotland’s Presbyterian history?

  199. @ Dal Riata
    Thanks. You’re bang on the money too at 1:25am

    Except I spotted a wee typo: “£300 a week”. It’s £300 A DAY those geriatric hoormaisters and pederasts [allegedly] get for sleeping on a green bench.

  200. * red bench

    … past my bedtime. Oidhche mhath leibh.

  201. CameronB Brodie says:

    Great minds…. 🙂

  202. Scott says:

    Interesting analysis, but you’d want to make sure you understood the motivations of people who aren’t voting before going in hard on starting a new party.

  203. CameronB Brodie says:

    Great post, btw.

  204. Dal Riata says:

    As scunterbunnet says, there is indeed a typo in that post of mine (above @1:25 am), and it should read £300 *a day* and not £300 a-week.

    No Lord is going to snort his cocaine from anyone’s breasts – never mind a prostitute’s – for only 300 smackaroonies a week, FFS!

  205. Ken500 says:

    25% of Robert Gordon (fee paying school’s) pupils are on bursary/grants. A requirement for the charity status.

    Gove received a free/public funded education but implemented charges for others.

    10% of pupils have additional needs but teachers do not receive 10% additional needs teacher training. (unless they specialise). Additional training would help the teachers and the pupils.

  206. Ken500 says:

    Westminster is taxing the Scottish Oil sector at 55%, that is why people are losing jobs.Total mismanagement by Westminster. (Foreign) multinationals making vast profits tax evade through the City of London., damaging British business.

  207. Joemcg says:’s like Groundhog Day on the zoomer forums with the old lies being peddled ad infinitum. Thing is most of them look even more ridiculous and fantastical now. Yet these dafties STILL believe em!

  208. caz-m says:

    Mundell telling us this morning that Full Fiscal Autonomy will lead to a £10Billion pound black hole for Scotland.

    I thought it was to be a £7.6Billion pound black hole.

    Was 7.6 Billion not scary enough?

    Terrible interview. Gary Robertson let Mundell get his bit in about, more powers for coming Scotland, telling us we should just get on with it and forget all about Referendums.

    OK Fluffy, away and report back to Cameron and tell him you done good. (aided by a poor BBC Scotland interview)

  209. Clootie says:

    Ken500 says:
    27 July, 2015 at 6:03 am

    Ken – it’s closer to 80%

  210. Another Union Dividend says:

    When Ian Murray (due on Radio Scotland after 8.10 am) goes on about SNP failures perhaps BBC might ask him if Labour will support Ref2 at Westminster if SNP gain a mandate next May.

    Will they ask Murray who he supports in leadership contest?

    Will they ask Murray what additional powers for Holyrood will Labour include in their 2016 manifesto?

    On Education, will BBC mention Nicola Sturgeon’s visit to China or the establishment of 21 additional classrooms across Scotland to teach Mandarin?

  211. Juteman says:

    That’s twice i’ve heard Labour claiming they have a quarter of a million members. Where are these figures coming from?

  212. caz-m says:

    Does Ian Murray still not realise that people can change their minds on things that they voted on in the past. He keeps reminding us that the NO vote had a “decisive” 55% to 45% victory last year.

    So according to Murray, that must be the way the vote is going to go every time, no one will have a change of heart.

    Well Ian, I remember a certain Party won 41 seats in the 2010 GE and then in the following election they ended up with ONE MP. Surely this demonstrates that people do change their minds.

    So Ian, I wouldn’t dwell too much on how past results as a way of trying to prove a point.

    You insignificant little closet Tory.

  213. Joemcg says:

    Seems to have been the Murray and Mundell show since May 7th across all media. 56 SNP MPs. Did that really happen?

  214. Sinky says:

    I see the BBC giving Ian Murray the last word as usual.

    Failing a two or three way debate, it is normal BBC UKOK procedure that the opposition make their claims and the government of the day responds.

    Apparently several SNP supporters have joined Labour to support Corbyn.

  215. North Chiel says:

    Totally agree with “Dal Riata at 0125 am . It is patently obvious that Holyrood will get little or nothing
    as regards further “devolution” from Cameron’s ” patsy” Mundell .The time for “pleading” with the Tories in Westminster over the ” Devo max/vow con ” is fast running out.The Westminster Aristocracy/Tory ruling class never change, they have bled Scotland throughout history exploiting our land and people and have NO INTENTION of conceding ultimate control of our resources and assets to OUR people .They will use ALL MEANS at the disposal of the British state to thwart the aspirations of the people of Scotland.
    The only means of ” persuading ” these people to concede anything meaningful is to “hold a proverbial gun to their heads” and ” demonstrate” to them that we mean business. Consequently the SNP needs to “spell out ” exactly what powers require to be “returned” to the “sovereign people of Scotland ” ( detailed in the 2016 manifesto ), following the “Devo max vow con” and following the overwhelming mandate given to the SNP at the recent general election.
    If the mandate ( detailed precisely for 2016 ) is not delivered by Westminster IN FULL within a reasonable time scale and certainly prior to the next Holyrood election, then Cameron and his “Eton Cabal” should be left in “no doubt” that failure to deliver will result in a second referendum with or without Westminster “consent” .
    It’s time to stand up to these “political thugs” as thier strategy never changes Ie. Before Scotland is “starved” into submission.

  216. Les wilson says:

    Derek McKay had a good interview with Gary Robertson this morning.
    Robertson trying hard to get something out of Derek but he shocked Robertson by telling him that the SNP end game was Independence.

    Derek explained that the SNP support Independence.
    Simply shocking! The BBC must be amazed.

    The Unionists are foaming at the mouth again, BT will soon be out in the open again, they are still there just in case we get uppity again.Let’s keep taunting them, our time will come.

  217. Sinky says:

    What additional taxes will Ian Murray devolve to Scotland?

    The Income Tax proposals are a Tory Trap supported by Labour as Scottish Parliament has no say over allowances or bands.

    Where is the money coming from to pay for Murray’s additional welfare powers as Income Tax only represents around 19% of Scotland’s GDP.

    Call Kaye at 9 am on Indy Ref2

    Call 0500 92 95 00. Text 80295.

  218. heedtracker says:

    “Lord Sewel criticises Alex Salmond in prostitute video”

    Hootsman headline.

    UKOK TeamGBists killed satire ages ago but I want the next and final referendum by Friday.

  219. Wee Alex says:

    I really wonder if the unionist parties understand democracy. I’ve just listened to Ian Murray spout on about AS and NS declaring the referendum was once in a generation so there should not be a 2nd referendum.

    Well Mr Murray, in a democratic organisation, it’s the members of the party that decide. The leadership may have personal views but still only one vote each.

    But of course Labour don’t believe in democracy. Jeremy Corbyn looks like he has the support of the rank and file but others are shouting foul and want the vote postponed.

    There will be a second referendum Only if the SNP get the popular support of the voters. That Mr Murray is democracy.

  220. Macart says:


    Murray is insignificant, he’s merely trotting out the party line. If he’s not aware that no party drives the issue of independence or its timing then he shouldn’t be in the job. The brainfarts of two of our remaining three are worthless white noise at the end of the day. The only snake we need concern ourselves with is Westminster’s viceroy in Scotlandshire, Mundell. He’s the lad who carries Westminster’s veto on all things devolved and Scottish.

    As for timing of the next referendum or questions in manifestos? That isn’t down to the SNP and never was. The SNP as a party are playing a blinder in WM, their continued work governing in Scotland appears sure handed and secure. I’m not sure why folk always seem to think its down to the SNP to make independence magically happen. The only people who can make independence happen is us, the electorate. All the SNP and their allies can do is facilitate the process, provide the machinery for delivery.

    What they can do is give people the nod when the numbers are right, when that tipping point is reached, (I’d say regular polling over 55% personally). They can continue to provide good governance and build people’s confidence in their government institutions. They can give people the confidence to say, ‘aye, we can dae this’. ‘Course it would help if our own media weren’t bought and paid for lap dogs, hopelessly corporately and politically compromised. That would kinda make things easier in terms of informing people about their rights, political history and constitutional standings right enough.

    But at the end of the day the only people who will determine where and when indyref2 happens will be us, the Scottish electorate.

  221. Sinky says:

    Sorry should have said according to White Paper on Independence Income tax is estimated to be the largest onshore source of tax revenue in Scotland, raising £10.8 billion in 2011/12,19 per cent of the Scottish total.

    VAT and National Insurance contributions were the second and third largest sources of onshore revenue, generating 17 per cent and 15 per cent of total estimated Scottish receipts respectively.

    The Jimmy Reid Foundation has published a fresh analysis of the Smith Commission proposals. Click on this link

    In terms of solutions, respected economists Jim and Margaret Cuthbert argue the Smith Commission proposals will not be workable unless further reform is carried out in three main areas:

    1. Recognition that fundamental constitutional change is required, not just in Scotland, but at Westminster. The paper argues satisfactory implementation of Smith depends on implementing a properly federal system at UK level.

    2. Scotland requires much greater powers if it is to have a chance of making a success of increased fiscal responsibility. These powers are required in three main areas of a) more taxation; b) more economic powers; and c) ability to exploit and benefit from its major natural resources.

    3. Technical problems surrounding the implementation of the Smith proposals need to be tackled. No satisfactory solution can be found without a radical simplification of the whole approach but such a simplification would only be possible under a federal approach.

  222. CameronB Brodie says:

    Les wilson
    Astonishing. We’ll be gettin’ telt next that British Labour support the Tory’s anti-social vandalism of the UK’s welfare infrastructure and the stealth privatisation of Scotland’s social capital, supranational free-trade agreements such as TTiP…Oh…

  223. Stoker says:

    Juteman asks:
    “That’s twice i’ve heard Labour claiming they have a quarter of a million members. Where are these figures coming from?”

    The tombola.

    Dal Riata wrote:
    “What a farce. The UK’s unionist mainstream media is anti-Scottish – and BBC Scotland is a willing partner in the cabal.”

    BBC Scotland is nothing more than a London branch office serving another London branch office, Slabber.

  224. Les wilson says:

    CameronB Brodie says:
    Yeah, that would be astonishing indeed, just not to us!

    Call Kay, on the subject this morning. First up ( just to set the tone) was a Unionist from Aberdeen, who I am pretty sure I have heard a number of times on the same program, anti SNP rant.

    Now Duncan holli on anti SNP usual, slagging off the SNP in Westminster. Expecting many more plants and selective texts quoted.
    No change, in BBC (ever).

  225. ahundredthidiot says:

    What’s wrong with you people?

    If I am sitting in House of Lords with a six figure income, trust me, I’ll be snorting coke with a couple of prostitutes! – and thinking about the people of the UK as ‘SUCKERS!’

    On a more serious/realistic/cynical note – when news like that hits – I go immediately to RT/AJ to see which village we are bombing without any democratic or legal authority.

  226. call me dave says:

    They can’t believe their not labour!
    Let’s call the whole thing off!

    I hope none of us have been naughty.

    BBC ‘Your call’ Do you want another referendum?

    Ian Murray will save us with his amendments…Aye right!

  227. tfa1903 says:

    Best let the english sort out their own mess. We have our eyes on a far bigger prize-independence!

  228. CameronB Brodie says:

    I’ve just realised why we need a Scottish Labour party, as there is already a British Labour party. It’s cause we’re so very needy in Scotland. We need to get back less than we contribute as we are incapable of making important political decisions for ourselves. We need the paternal guidance of an anti-democratic den of vipers, shysters and degenerates.

    Must be true though, some important Scottish Labour wifey on the BBC telt us.

    Still, I can’t find any mention of Scottish Labour at the Electoral Commission’s website. 😉

  229. Les wilson says:

    Calling Kaye just announced she will be talking about the weather FFS sake. Then something about sky diving.
    What that tells me is that ( their usual tactic) that when the calls are going against them they change the topic, they have fillers to call on in such a situation.

    That is our National media for you.

  230. scotspine says:

    Kaye Adam and the BBC have a “chat” topic of Referendum 2. Which Political commentator do they invite on? Hothersall!

    No place for a professional Independence Orientated Political commentator to reply though!

  231. Macart says:


    That Hothersall fella? Really?


    From what I hear he’s a bit of a soundbite fan. Whatever the party line of the day is, is exactly word for word what will get repeated. Now if only a few taxing phone calls could be fired his way to answer… 😀

  232. call me dave says:

    But fundily Mundell whipsered out “God”! “Please let there not be a 2nd referendum”, but he was on a lonely country road when he did it. Not a food bank in sight.

    ‘This is like Stop the War with bells on’: Jeremy Corbyn team shocked at momentum

  233. Joemcg says:

    Could actually be a good tactic this promising a 2nd vote at the scottish elections therefore guaranteeing an even bigger margin of victory for the SNP. In turn this will show we have a mandate to hold the vote.

  234. Macart @ 8.54.
    While agreeing with the points you make Mac, I think the one you make near the end is the most telling.
    I am of course referring to the “media”. I’m sure most of us are resigned to the fact that whether it’s print, voice, or vision, the vast majority will be steadfastly opposed to Scottish independence.
    As we see from the hysterical reaction to Alex asserting yesterday that there will be another referendum, we all know what will be coming down the line when we actually announce the date when we, hopefully, take control of our own destiny.
    In relation to our major media obstacle, I refer of course to the B.B.C, I had the misfortune to see Reporting Scotland yesterday evening, and is it just me, or has the “S.N.P bad” theme, got even worse since the departure of Boothman?
    Three, out of the first four items, and that in what I think was a ten minute programme, were trying to be detrimental to the Scottish Government, and even with the item about Sewel, it seemed with his Aberdeen connection, it again was attempting to discredit all things Scottish, despite the link being somewhat tenuous to say the least.
    So I believe this is , and will remain so, our major problem in the run-up to the next independence referendum, and it aint going to go away, and while I am aware that all the independence websites do a great job in educating the people, it’s going to be another hard slog around the doors in order to convince the the electorate to vote for independence. Every ward in our constituency had a majority
    for Yes last time, but we have to be ready to do even better when we get the opportunity, in the not to distant future.

  235. CameronB Brodie says:

    Sorry, I should have been more specific with the search I posted earlier. I still cant find any confirmation with the search, “Is Scottish Labour a registered party?

    So I did a little scratching, and…

    Who is eligible for a grant? (Policy Development Grants)

    The total grant is £2 million per year and distributed via a formula based on representation and performance at national and devolved legislature elections. To be eligible for the grant, a party must have at least two sitting Members of the House of Commons and have taken the oath of allegiance provided by the Parliamentary Oaths Act 1866.

    There are currently eight political parties eligible for the grant:

    Conservative Party
    Democratic Unionist Party – D.U.P.
    Labour Party
    Liberal Democrats
    Plaid Cymru – The Party of Wales
    Scottish National Party (SNP)
    SDLP (Social Democratic & Labour Party)
    UK Independence Party (UKIP)

    I’m confused. ;(

  236. Joemcg says:

    “Lord Sewel criticises Alex Salmond in prostitute video!!”Proud scotchman, that’s a humdinger of a headline! No wonder your paper is going down the pan. When you read it the good lord is actually jealous of Alex getting attention on a flight both were on!

  237. galamcennalath says:

    Joemcg says:
    ” like Groundhog Day on the zoomer forums with the old lies being peddled ad infinitum. Thing is most of them look even more ridiculous and fantastical now. Yet these dafties STILL believe em!”

    There will be politically active Unionists who actually believe them, even though they are intellectually capable of seeing beyond it. These people are however part of the hard core who will always be blind to alternative arguments.

    I believe the same old same are being peddled so much, especially MSM and TV, because that is all they have as a tactic. They are trying desperately to keep the Gutless and the Gullable on side.

  238. Stoker says:

    @ scotspine (9.40am).
    I picked up on that too and couldn’t stop effing & blinding at the radio and letting them know that if they had the Rev on to counter his pish they could refer to their phone-in as balanced.
    And that’s the polite version.

    Somehow i don’t think they heard me but i do have the sore throat and broken radio to prove it.

    First time in a long time i’ve attempted to listen to that pathetic excuse for a “national” radio station but it did remind me why i don’t – it’s utter pish and bad for the blood pressure.

    It’s also the first time i’ve ever heard the Drunken Horsetail speak and i know it will be the last – DH voice = Off button.

  239. Les wilson says:

    No doubting political programs today we will get selective members of bitter together getting plenty air time across our glorious media.Ref a future Indy ref, Scotland would have a £50billion black hole, SNP bad Snp bad……

  240. Tackety Beets says:

    Ken500 says:
    27 July, 2015 at 6:03 am
    Oil Tax @ 55% ? ? ?

    Happy to be corrected , I thought Osbourne bumped the OIL TAX up to circa 80% in 2011 budget.
    This lead naturally to a withdrawal or reduction of Investment by some Oil Co’s

    Perhalps Osbourne knew, in view of a iScot Ref comming,it would reverse some investment and weaken the Indy Ref case?
    Not convinced he is that bright , but I will concede on this occasion it is likely.

    Any way he was able to show a wee concesion in a recent budget but I’m not clear exactly what it was.
    A Tax concession on some types of investment ?

    We cannot deny that iScotland’s collection of 100% of the 80% Oil tax is still more than we currently get under “Pooling and sharing”
    PLus all the Income tax Oil workers pay ….. that in itself is a pretty penny ?

    Yee can take your imagined £7.6 now £10Bn black hole and shuv it up yer ain black hole Fundily Mundily,Murray an’ Carmichael !

  241. ann says:


    I think that may be the 250K figure includes the 140K who have paid £3.00 to register to vote in the Labour Party Ladership competition.

  242. Tackety Beets says:


    Kall Caye with an E , that wid drive ye t drink !

    Nae bias today folks …… FFS !
    Turn it aff !

  243. galamcennalath says:

    North Chiel says:

    “SNP needs to “spell out ” exactly what powers require to be “returned” …. failure to deliver will result in a second referendum”

    Yes. I agree that should central to the manifesto for 2016. This, in effect, is our solution to austerity and other Tory ideological policies – sufficient powers to take a different direction.

    I would widen it a bit though. An obvious other reaction should be a promise of a 2nd ref if Cameron tries to take Scotland out of the EU against our wishes. Spell it out explicitly as party policy.

  244. Fred says:

    Anent the BBC, I switched off when Torrance popped up.

    I take it The Shadow, Murray, gets weighed-in for this job and would forfeit this wee earner if he grew a pair and voted against Harman? As for prostitutes breasts, you wouldn’t think that a damp mammary organ was the ideal platform for this coke-snorting business but what the hell do I know? 🙂

    Nana, thanks again for the info’ I thought their noble lords got expenses on top of their meagre £300 a day.

    @ Tam Jardine, like it!

    Will Podmore has doubtless parted with his cash & principles, joined the Labour party & is subverting away at this very moment in time?

  245. ronnie anderson says:

    Did Kevin Livestream the Helensburgh nite out , anybody got the link Thanks.

  246. galamcennalath says:

    Just a thought.

    Abstention seems to Labour’s main policy on everything.

    Wonder if Labour will also abstain from IndyRef2 😉

  247. schrodingers cat says:

    how likely are the other labour mps to mount a challenge against corbyn should he elected by the rank and file?

    if he is elected, slab will be delighted and it would give them a spring in their step, no doubt about it, but if 3 months later, he is removed in a coup…..even the remaining slab believers will realise that slab is dead.

    25% of the population voted for the scottish labour and unionist party in may, the big event that nicola mentioned, which will cause 10% to cross the floor and support indy, may well be this civil war in the labour party.

    keep yer powder dry, 10 months is a long time in politics. i would defer the decition on indyref2 until the spring conference.

  248. Nana Smith says:

    O/T link

    Apparently somewhere in this document Lord Sewel calls for Barnett to be cut. I did start reading the document but to be honest I lost the will to live.

    Someone with more stamina may want to look see.

  249. Dave McEwan Hill says:

    It’s knickersinatwist time at team union. This is great. They are in terror of a referendum 2.

    Is this because,having fiddled the first one,they know they will loose the next one?
    They are feart. They are shitting themselves etc etc etc
    This should be the message.

    Anent “communalism”, which I introduced in a previous post, and socialism it is all a matter of perception.
    In many parts of Scotland, including the part in which I presently live, the majority of voters have not voted Tory and will never do so. They however do not identify as “socialists”.
    Socialists they suspect are noisy, agitated folk that come from Glasgow and Govan and Motherwell and mining villages etc etc.

    I don’t think most folk need labels and this is very true away from urban Scotland.

  250. Alcedo Atthis says:

    Rev, until now you haven’t put a foot wrong in my eyes; I’ve agreed wholeheartedly with just about everything you have ever posted on here. But on the prospects of the Labour Party re-discovering its heart and soul, I don’t think you have ever been so wrong.

    “And in any case there’d be no practical reason for “Real Labour” to be as hostile to independence as the current Labour is. With no Scottish MPs left to lose anyway, it could afford to see an independent Scotland far more rationally…”

    1) The Labour Party was never really socialist — I know various people like to talk in lofty terms about Labour’s part in creating the Welfare State, etc., but the truth is the demand for that came from below (the people who had just been through two cataclysmic wars). The Tories after the war had the same plans (to create a welfare state with nationalised industry etc.) The parliamentary Labour Party basically declared war on its own grass-roots support in 1928.

    2) A left-leaning Labour Party in England would be devastating for the SNP and its support based and probably put an end to the Scottish Independence movement. Their (Labour’s) support in Scotland would rise dramatically and, of course, SNP support would fall. Why opt for independence when we can get a square deal in this new Britain? Many up here would fall for that junk and any negotiations that took place would take place with the SNP in a much weakened position.

    The good news is that this is all nonsense and will never happen anyway. Labour might go through yet another identity crisis but a real left-leaning party in England will never — ever! — be tolerated. Even so, anybody who gives excited support to this chimera is going to be left looking pretty silly and soon and in that they are doing the Scottish Independence movement no favours at all.

  251. Jack Murphy says:

    Fred at 10:28 am.
    I have a couple of observations—-expect the Prime Minister to delay the imminent announcement elevating Alistair Darling and others to the House of Sewel.
    Secondly,what causes the greatest offence to me and many others in this whole Labour Sewel affair,is his attitude to women and their race/country of origin.
    “branded Asian women “whores”. [!!!!!!] [the Sun].
    Totally unacceptable.

  252. heedtracker says:

    “In the videos, Sewel, who has been a peer since 1996, is asked whether he receives expenses, and explains that he now gets a flat-rate allowance of £200 a day, though he alludes to the system being less rewarding than it once was. “It’s all changed and disappeared. People were making false claims,” he is heard saying. “Members of her lordship’s house … are right thieves, rogues and bastards at times. Wonderful people that they are.”

    Usual rancid The Guardian reportage there.

    Oddly enough these staggering phoneys can’t bring themselves to tell us what the coke snorting old shagger says about Salmond. Oh well maybe the gits are saving it for their scotland section, under their huge UKOK deep fried mars bars and aren’t the sweaties silly section.

  253. Joemcg says:

    Yep, agree with other wingers this is a mini dry run of what the onslaught will be like once another vote is announced. It will not be pretty.

  254. heedtracker says:

    Its ok! Libby Carrell saves teamGB, again and again, over and over. Coffee time with the teamGB newspapers really is getting a tad samey, pass the coke and the prosies M’lud.

    Nicola Sturgeon urged to explain SNP position on second independence vote, and why the sweaties love deep fried mars bars so much.

  255. sensibledave says:


    … just a few observations.

    1. You are wasting your time if you believe that you will achieve Independence by hoping the English will rise up and insist upon it. THE ONLY WAY SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE WILL BE ACHIEVED IS AS A RESULT OF A REFERENDUM IN SCOTLAND… and you have to convince the No voters – not anyone else.

    2. For reasons that we may not understand, Scottish politics seemed to have moved left whilst English have moved right. This theme that Labour lost in England because they weren’t “left” enough is just ridiculous. 55% voted right of centre. Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party is absolutely top of the Tory’s wish list. To try and rationalise otherwise is to be beyond deluded.

    3. The denigration of almost every party, politician and institution, that isn’t the SNP, really is just silly and doesn’t achieve anything. Read through any threads here and it is just Tory=bad, Labour=bad, Liberal=bad, Westminster=bad, etc, etc – the whole of the UK is, apparently, BAD. Keep going with that – I’m sure you are converting thousands with those sentiments.

    4. If the Tactic is to keep doing things to “p*** off” the English so that we “give in” and enforce Independence against the will of the majority of Scots, then you are also deluded.

    5. At some point soon, the SNP robot politicians will eventually display some Independent thought and start expressing individual views left or right of the SNP whipped party doctrine – just like every other mature party. The SNP MPs at Westminster will, at some point, object to some tactic, or other, imposed by the unelected Ms Sturgeon from above – that ends up making them look stupid or dishonest in the eyes of their constituents and the rest of the country. My bet is that Tommy Sheppard will be the first one to stick his head above the parapet after his experience on Newsnight following the recent fox hunting non-debate where he was made to look a complete prat.

    6. By your own pronouncements, The SNP is the only mainstream anti-austerity party in the UK. Whilst you stick with that as the major plank of your political and economic strategy – then “soft Nos” are unlikely to convert simply because, to many, an extreme left government is more abhorrent than remaining in the Union.

  256. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi Ronnie.

    Helensburgh wasn’t Livestreamed. Keep looking into ‘off-topic’. I may have a video later on today, and some pics.

  257. caz-m says:


    BBC Scotland is like a wild beast ready to attack any vulnerable group who is even thinking of changing over to voting YES. Pensioners will be top of their list again.

    Media Bias

    These are the four main weaknesses of the YES campaign.

    Overcome these weaknesses and we win our Referendum.

  258. caz-m says:

    Hello Ronnie Anderson

    Are you back home in North Briton or are you still in Spain?

  259. Fred says:

    The nicely timed deep-fried Mars Bars furore was a bit of free publicity conjured up by a Stonehaven chippy anticipating big queues comensurate with the said toons folk festival. 🙂

  260. Ali says:

    They can do what they like. Democratic deficit in Scotland will remain as we don’t vote for any of them

  261. Joemcg says:

    Think Stu should take the Blair Jenkins role next time. Imagine the fireworks on the telly! He would tear em up for shite paper!

  262. schrodingers cat says:

    Media Bias

    cant do anything more about media bias
    currency and europe were the main focus bt bt, but their arguements were rubbish, they will do so again, regardless of what we do or say.

    pensions, yeah we should target pensioners too, they are the weakest demographic who supported yes.

  263. Macart says:

    @Alex Beveridge

    Second attempt (crappy connection today).

    Must admit to not watching Beeb news Alex and haven’t done for several years, but I can well believe what you say. I tend to watch only specifically recommended shows on iplayer if I’ve missed anything of note.

    The fact that half our nation goes unrepresented by the media in general is a black shame on our democracy, but then it shouldn’t be so surprising. Its not our media and putting Scottish in front of any title will never make it so. The titles in Scotland are of course owned elsewhere by people who own no empathy or loyalty to the local readership, their allegiance is to their own corporate agenda, much larger markets and political leanings elsewhere. Hell they don’t even owe loyalty to their Scottish based staff. They couldn’t give monkey’s if their titles wither and die in Scotland. Collateral damage on a PR exercise as far as they are concerned.

    The SNP can’t force them to print what they don’t want to, simple as that and all the raging against the machine won’t make it so. Worse, it would lead to dangerous precedent if they could. They’d be no better than the establishment who manipulate our daily perceptions at the moment. No, there are only two ways to change the media. Own it, or influence the market. Be the change.

    It goes right back to what I’ve been saying since September 19th. The grass roots of the independence movement must keep communicating. We are our own news service. We ARE the change. We support our online sites and bloggers, feed people through social media and make sure the news hits the streets, workplaces and doorsteps. Independence has to be fed by the people not party politics. Its central government’s greatest lie, that the party political system drives everything. It bloody well doesn’t, WE do. The people.

    The same goes for any change to our system of government. Its not for any party to dictate to us where or when, merely to provide the machinery at OUR bidding. The SNP can’t deliver independence, otherwise we’d have had it long since. It requires the popular support of public opinion. If the people want it, they get it and that goes for every party in Scotland. They’ve spent an inordinate amount of time and effort convincing people that a. they are powerless and need party political direction and b. that being independent and empowered with choice is a bad thing.

    Our job is to disabuse those parties and make sure that choosing to be independent is both achievable and desirable.

  264. Bob Mack says:

    Watching sailing on television.
    Commentator on TVstates “This is a chancd for team GB to bring the Americas Cup back home to ENGLAND”
    No wonder I can’t stand this union.

  265. Socrates MacSporran says:

    I simply cannot understand the stupidity of the current Tory Party leadership.

    Right now, they have an opportunity to change Parliament in a way which would guarantee lasting if not eternal Tory rule in England, but, they seem unable to see this.

    They have lang syne lost Scotland. It is never coming back to voting Tory. The Labour Party up here is currently in disarray, as is the Labour Party in England. That party may well fracture beyond repair, should Jeremy Corbyn be elected leader.

    Support for Independence for Scotland is currently hovering around the 50% mark. So, if we conclude that the rise from the 45% who voted Yes back in September is linked to Cameron’s back-tracking on the Vow, if he can deliver true Home Rule, he can perhaps put Independence back in the box and keep it there.

    Real federalism – could deliver a lengthy spell (I would not go as far as to say eternal) Tory rule in England, while keeping the Sweaties onside as regards defence and foreign affairs.

    Best surely to go for this while Labour is at sixes and sevens.

    Why not bring-in real devolution, based on Westminster. A senate to cover UK matters – defence, foreign affairs, welfare etc; an English parliament, with the same powers as Holyrood, with its members voted-in via a form of proportional representation, to cover domestic English matters, but, have the four domestic assemblies in Belfast, Cardiff, Edinburgh and London linked-in to Westminster.

    We could have a system whereby the constituency members in the four national assemblies/parliaments were also the members of the UK parliament/senate, spending part of each week in the Belfast, Cardiff, Edinburgh or the lower house in London assemblies/parliaments, on domestic English, Norther Irish, Scottish and Welsh business, the other part in the upper house in London on UK business.

    The “list members” in Belfast, Cardiff, Edinburgh and London’s lower house would spend their entire working week on purely English, Northern Irish, Scottish or Welsh domestic issues.

    There could be an Upper Senate, a revising body, to which each political party could nominate members, if so desired. For all its faults as an unelected body, there is still a level of political experience and good debate in the HoL which the HoC can seldom match, it would be wrong to lose this.

    Such a system might well placate the “soft” independence supporters who have supported the SNP because the alternatives are unpalatable, and keep the Union alive.

    But, without radical action – the Union is dead.

    I could live in a proper federal UK, which was not wedded to the needs of the City of London and the Establishment, but, I would far rather live in an indepedent Scotland.

  266. Macart says:


    The first three are easily dealt with. The first was in fact dealt with by parliament itself both prior to and post referendum and the Rev covered the technicalities in some detail on this site. Europe will deal with itself eventually as a separate referendum, again as and when the Scottish electorate demand one with a popular vote. Though in the meantime I’d say Europe and the upcoming in/out referendum may prove useful.

    Then comes currency. On this front we possibly do need to make a firm stance. I saw the reasoning behind the shared currency issue. It made sense as a short to medium term measure. Darling’s wheeze with the treasury backed by those snakes Osborne, Balls and Alexander was absolutely a bluff, but its a bluff that has changed the political landscape. I’d probably opt for going with a Scottish currency from the outset today and have those treasury pricks and the chancellor beg us for a Sterling zone arrangement.

    Lastly the media, see the post I’ve just put up in response to Alex. We are the change Caz and we’ve achieved so much in such a short space of time. We’ve made far more of an impact than any in the mainstream thought possible. I know we have it within ourselves to finish the job so long as we keep communicating and stay together till the job is done.

  267. galamcennalath says:

    Dave McEwan Hill says:
    “It’s knickersinatwist time at team union … Is this because,having fiddled the first one,they know they will loose the next one?”

    They know how the won first time … and equally they know it will not be as effective next time. The fear factor will recede as more people are exposed to the full picture, and, the whole DevoLots&Lots promise is dead in the water, proven to be pure deceit.

    “Anent “communalism”, which I introduced in a previous post, and socialism it is all a matter of perception.”

    I reckon most Scots are Social Democrats in the modern European style.

    To quote from there…

    Social democracy is a political ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy, and a policy regime involving welfare state provisions, collective bargaining arrangements, regulation of the economy in the general interest, interventions to promote greater equality in the distribution of income and wealth, and a commitment to representative democracy.


    To quote again …

    Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy

    My understand is the difference between nationalisation of all production versus considerable state control over the activities of private enterprise.

    I do not believe in public ownership of all industry. I am not therefore a socialist. The description of social democracy very much describes my position, and I believe the position of most Scots. Think that is your communalism!

  268. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “This theme that Labour lost in England because they weren’t “left” enough is just ridiculous.”

    Feel free to keep ignoring the facts. I know they’re terribly inconvenient.

  269. Joemcg says:

    Gawd! Just saw the front page of today’s Sun on Facebook! Don’t know if it’s the English only edition. Sewel sitting with his huge belly hanging out in PVC or leather gear wearing a peach coloured brassiere smoking a joint!! Funny as!

  270. Nana Smith says:


    Lord Sewel ensured the Dunblane dossier was kept secret for 100yrs.

  271. Joemcg says:

    Tactics wise maybe we should study the Quebec second vote like the unionists did the first. May get some pointers?

  272. Nana Smith says:

    Well this is shocking

  273. sensibledave says:

    Socrates MacSporran 12:15 pm

    You Wrote: “I simply cannot understand the stupidity of the current Tory Party leadership. Right now, they have an opportunity to change Parliament in a way which would guarantee lasting if not eternal Tory rule in England, but, they seem unable to see this”

    Let me help you with your understanding then. There is a Union. To date, no nation has voted to leave the Union. Until a nation votes to leave the Union, it will remain.

    In the meantime, development and devolution of governance of the various countries in the Union (including England) will continue. As an example, Holyrood exists because there was a desire amongst Scots for a Parliament – and because Westminster responded to those desires. Most of the MPs that voted for a Scottish Parliament were English.

    I know it is an anathema to many here, but most MPs at Westminster understand that that some things are above party politics. If the Scots show (i.e. in a referendum) they want Independence – then they will get it.

    EVEL is another area where there is clearly a will amongst the people of England. Westminster will respond in some form sooner rather than later. Please understand, in England, EVEL has got absolutely nothing to do with anything other than fairness and balance – and is nothing to do with any anti-Scottishness.

    The fox hunting issue personified the ridiculousness of the current situation as not fair, tenable or sustainable. Somewhat surprisingly, Ms Sturgeon and the SNP chose that subject to trash their reputation for honesty and integrity and have demonstrated, with stunning hypocrisy, they will put party politics above fairness to others in the Union.

  274. Joemcg says:

    Dave-Do you think it was fair,honest and not hypocritical or lacking in integrity when English MPs trooped in half cut and voted down all the Scotland bill amendments? I’m curious.

  275. sensibledave says:

    Rev. Stuart Campbell 12:28 pm

    “Feel free to keep ignoring the facts. I know they’re terribly inconvenient.”

    With the greatest respect, they are not inconvenient in the slightest. Analysis and statistics can be used to prove whatever point you may wish to predetermine. I prefer to look at the bigger picture:

    In England 41% voted Conservative, 14% voted UKIP and 8% voted LibDem. None of those voters want an extreme left government. That takes us to a total of about 63%.

    We don’t know what percentage of Labour voters want extreme left, but let us pluck a figure out of thin air, say 50% – around 15%?

    So, I make that around 78% that don’t want extreme left – and no amount of torturing of the data will make it otherwise.

  276. Rob James says:

    @Sensible Dave

    I normally accredit you with some sort of intelligence, but pray inform us who provided you with this hilarious script.

    You suggest 55% voted right of centre. WRONG. Over 96% voted for right of centre parties (Con,Lab,LibDem,UKIP are all right of centre by some margin)

    Your next point refers to our demonising of the unionist cabal, forgetting to mention the combined demonisation by the aforementioned and their cohorts, against the SNP, the Scottish people and nation. I think our use of this tactic seems to be having a more desirable effect than your own efforts (Scottish General election results)

    I have noticed in previous comments of yours that you take umbrage with people who allude to you being English without any evidence. Perhaps you should stop using the ‘Royal WE’ (paragraph4)

    You then rabble on about robot MPs and while we’re on the subject of Tommy Sheppard and the fox hunting bill, please remind me of the outcome of the Tories bid to repeal the act.

    Your final belief that the SNP is an extreme left wing party sums up your comprehension of politics. You might find that soft Nos are not particularly attached to political dogma and were browbeaten and frightened into their decision by the outright lies and smears put forward by the better together campaign, virtually all of which have since been disproved.

    So why don’t you toddle off and profer your advice somewhere else. People on here are too smart to listen to such utter nonsense.

  277. sensibledave says:

    @ Rob James 1:57 pm

    Para 1. All my own work.

    Para 2. You agree with me then (see comment that I wrote before I saw your 1.57pm post).

    Para 4 – No, absolutely not. I have never hidden, nor felt the need to hide, the fact that I am English – and as proud of being English that as you may be of being Scottish (you have fallen for the “English have no national identity” meme).

    Para 5 – You make my point for me.

    Para 6 – By SNP definition, it is the only anti-austerity party in the UK. You might also find that Scotland would have voted for Independence if people didn’t think that they were going to get a left wing government as part of the deal.

    Para 7 – I enjoy political debate.

  278. sensibledave says:

    Rob James

    … I missed the para 5 stuff about robot MPs. You wrote “You then rabble on about robot MPs and while we’re on the subject of Tommy Sheppard and the fox hunting bill, please remind me of the outcome of the Tories bid to repeal the act.

    I don’t know what papers you read or where you get your information, but there hasn’t been any attempt to repeal the act. There was to be a vote on relaxing fox hunting laws in England – so that it was similar to Scotland. However, the SNP threw its integrity and honesty under the bus and, contrary to what Ms Sturgeon specifically said on National TV before the election, she sent her robots to vote on a purely, unarguably, English matter – much to their obvious chagrin!

    I listened to the SNP MPs talking about becoming second class MPs because there will be matters affecting laws in England that they will not be allowed to vote on. Not a hint of irony when it was pointed out that the very same SNP MPs can’t vote on fox hunting in Scotland!

  279. Will Podmore says:

    Ken500 writes, “The Labour Party is financed by Tory bankers. The SNP is financed by it’s members.”
    Isn’t billionaire Jim McColl of Clyde Blowers a member of the SNP? He sits on the SNP’s Council of Economic Advisors. Now how many really progressive parties have billionaires on their Council of Economic Advisors?
    So how does this make the SNP any better than the Labour party? Or is your selling point that at least the SNP’s no worse than the Labour Party?
    And no, I’m not in the Labour party, just making the obvious retort to Ken’s comparison.

  280. heedtracker says:

    3. The denigration of almost every party, politician and institution, that isn’t the SNP, really is just silly and doesn’t achieve anything. Read through any threads here and it is just Tory=bad, Labour=bad, Liberal=bad, Westminster=bad, etc, etc – the whole of the UK is, apparently, BAD. Keep going with that – I’m sure you are converting thousands with those sentiments.

    One more reason I don’t criticiserise SNP sensible is merely because there’s like a gazillion swivel eyed paid loonies to do it all for me, from the giant lie machine farce that is the BBC, to the whole UKOK creep show that is every single neo fascist news media corp around.

    But maybe that’s just me, sensible.

  281. lumilumi says:

    Is there some mix-up in the 77th Brigade staff rota?

    Two sensibledaves posting at the same time?

  282. CameronB Brodie says:

    How does a federal state function with a hereditary monarch as it’s Head? Is the monarchy eternal? Genuine questions.


    In the meantime, development and devolution of governance of the various countries in the Union (including England) will continue. As an example, Holyrood exists because there was a desire amongst Scots for a Parliament – and because Westminster responded to those desires. Most of the MPs that voted for a Scottish Parliament were English.

    Was it not pressure from the UN to improve the UK’s democratic decentralisation that brought about the Scottish Parliment?

  283. CameronB Brodie says:

    Will Podmore

    So how does this make the SNP any better than the Labour party?

    A shift in the force, I sense about you. Not only in wicked, evil SNP, British Labour Nazi sympathies you also do see?

    At least that would be progress. Any view on duality or co-eternal binary oppositions in general? Also, do you think British Labour are nationalists?

  284. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi CameronB Brodie.

    You typed,
    “Was it not pressure from the UN to improve the UK’s democratic decentralisation that brought about the Scottish Parliment?”

    This is a quote from the link below,

    To the Heads of State and Government
    of the Council of Europe
    Vienna, 8/9 October 1993
    Presented by
    The Scotland-UN Committee

    “The Memorandum, in the form of a modern Declaration of Arbroath, was drafted in the light of the known Summit agenda, taking account of the relevant international law as well as the proposals for extension of the law that the Summit was to consider.

    S-UN Secretary John McGill sent it to the foreign ministries of all 32 CoE member states at the time, in order to bypass any attempts to suppress it, and also to all of the East European candidates for CoE membership.

    A Scotland-UN representative was present at the Summit as an observer.
    The Memorandum, in conjunction with confidential verbal diplomatic negotiations, formed the basis for a far-reaching programme of action by the Council of Europe to monitor the democratic systems of every European state, and to take action including sanctions where any country was failing to adhere to the global norms of pluralist democracy, the rule of law, and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The government of Scotland by a non-elected secretary of state failed to meet the conditions demanded in all three respects.

    The result was that the incoming UK Labour Government under Tony Blair was forced to head its legislative programme with bills for devolved government in Scotland and Wales.”

    So, it was an initiative by The Scotland-UN Committee that forced Blair’s hand. An example of Scots using their perceived sovereignty to go over the heads of the UK government.

  285. CameronB Brofie says:

    Cheers Brian. 😉

    Was that you trying to be sleekit?

  286. Rock says:


    “@Dave McEwan Hill, @Rock

    Maybe “communitarianism” comes close to what you’re getting at with “communalism”? (not a better word, but maybe better known?)

    I would avoid both words.

    Socialism only exists in the fringes these days after Labour stopped pretending to be socialist.

    The only division that matters for the moment is unionist or independence supporter.

    I believe most Scottish independence supporters are not “nationalist” in the “British Imperial Nationalist” sense of the word.

  287. Rock says:

    Brian Doonthetoon,

    “So, it was an initiative by The Scotland-UN Committee that forced Blair’s hand. An example of Scots using their perceived sovereignty to go over the heads of the UK government.”

    I don’t for a moment believe that the UN forced Blair’s hand.

    Didn’t Blair defy the UN to take the UK into an illegal war?

    Blair created a talking shop which could never have an SNP majority so that independence could be killed “stone dead” and Westminster could retain control over oil and other resources.

    As for the “Scots using their perceived sovereignty”, which Scottish plebs were involved in any of this?

    As for the Council of Europe, where was it when the unionists prevented a democratic referendum taking place last year?

    “Sovereignty” is a myth. Scottish plebs have absolutely no “sovereignty”. That is why Carmichael can defy the 71% of us who want him to resign.

    For more than 300 years, absolutely no-one has been able to force Westminster’s hand.

    Even with 56 SNP MPs, the Tory viceroy of Scotland lays down what is best for Westminster.

  288. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Hi Rock.

    My first reply to you was to what you typed,

    “The only division that matters for the moment is unionist or independence supporter.”

    And I agree with you 100%.

    But then you spoilt it by typing,

    “I don’t for a moment believe that the UN forced Blair’s hand.”

    You didn’t bloody read what I pasted! It was nothing to do with the UN! Try reading, instead of speed-reading. That way, you may get a better understanding of what people are actually typing.

    Once again, it was PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND, through the Council of Europe, who forced Blair’s hand.

    Please read and UNDERSTAND before you post.

  289. Rock says:

    Brian Doonthetoon,

    “Once again, it was PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND, through the Council of Europe, who forced Blair’s hand.”

    No, they didn’t and I explained why they didn’t.

    The Council of Europe refused to come and monitor the Scottish referendum last year unless the UK government asked them to.

    In other words, The Council of Europe told the PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND to go to hell.

    As to the two different points you mention, we agree 100% on some things, 0% on others and anything in between.

    Othewise we would be each other’s sycophants, the sort of relationship you have with Paula Rose.

    It is not a matter of spoiling anything.

  290. Rock says:

    Brian Doonthetoon,

    “You didn’t bloody read what I pasted! It was nothing to do with the UN!”

    The UN was specifically mentioned, so obviously it had something to do with the UN.

  291. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Jeez Rock, can you only read and understand ONE word or abbreviation at a time?

    The UN was NOT specifically mentioned.

    The Scotland-UN Committee was the name of the committee. That does not imply a specific mention of the UN, apart from the inclusion of the term “UN” in the name of the committee.

    Perchance you could do a wee bit of reading and educate yourself? We supply the links for you and you seem to depend on any quotes from the links to formulate your replies, instead of absorbing the information held by the links.

    So, read this, before you jump to any more conclusions.

  292. Rock says:

    Brian Doonthetoon,

    “The Scotland-UN Committee was the name of the committee. That does not imply a specific mention of the UN, apart from the inclusion of the term “UN” in the name of the committee.”

    Why would “UN” be included in its name if it had nothing to do with “UN”?

    Could someone set up a business and call it the UN something when it has nothing to do with the UN?

    It is you who need to understand better.

  293. Brian Doonthetoon says:

    Crap Rock.

    You get 0 out of 10 for that effort.

  294. Paula Rose says:

    @ Rock please read the link Bdtt has provided it – does lay out in detail the reason and purpose for it’s existence. Which may well need to be re-convened.

  295. CameronB Brodie says:

    Will Podmore
    Honest, I’m not goading you. I would be really interested in your thoughts on the first essay.

  296. Fred says:

    You three’s a perr if ever ah seen wan!

  297. CameronB Brodie says:

    @ Rev. Stuart Campbell

    I understand your desire to run an open comment section and applaud your efforts to that extent. However, I feel there must be some basic standards.

    By letting Will post, you are enabling him to promulgate a tired, delusional and anti-social pseudo-faith rapped up as ideology. This is the man that boldly rejected all idealism, in public no less, thereby rejecting the basis of human thought, just because it did not fit with the fallacious theoretical framework that binds his irrational conceptual outlook. He is a dangerous dissembler and is possibly MI5, or an asset of. Communism was certainly a creation of western financiers and their minions.

  298. CameronB Brodie says:


  299. CameronB Brodie says:

    Sorry, that should have read thereby rejecting the basis of how human thought is structured.

    Give me a break, I haven’t studied philosophy. Will’s got a degree in it, FFS. Perhaps, such cogs of the Establishment don’t confer with plebs. Especially once their dribble has been exposed as pish.

  300. Grouse Beater says:

    Dippydave: Let me help you with your understanding then.

    A contributor has to have a face raddled by acne to open a post with that infantile, patronising gibe and assume he has the warm attention of the object of his scorn.

  301. Will Podmore says:

    Cameron wrote, “By letting Will post, you are enabling him to promulgate a tired, delusional and anti-social pseudo-faith rapped up as ideology. This is the man that boldly rejected all idealism, in public no less, thereby rejecting the basis of human thought, just because it did not fit with the fallacious theoretical framework that binds his irrational conceptual outlook. He is a dangerous dissembler and is possibly MI5, or an asset of. Communism was certainly a creation of western financiers and their minions.”
    To start with his factual error – Idealism is not the basis of human thought; it is a philosophy – it is a system of thought which holds that the objects of thought are in some way dependent on the activity of the mind.
    The rest of Cameron’s post comprises merely a list of unfounded insults and smears.
    He even repeats the old canard that communism was created by financiers.

  302. CameronB Brodie says:

    Will Podmore
    I think you are deliberately avoiding the fact that binary thought is the basis of how human thought is organized. Such dualism is essentially idealism in action, as I understood things.

    He even repeats the old canard that communism was created by financiers.

    Not my opinion but the rather embarrassing conclusions of an esteemed Hoover Institute research fellow. All sounds a bit conspiracy theory until you actually take a look at some of the evidence.

    Wall Street Funded the Bolshevik Revolution – Professor Antony Sutton

  303. Will Podmore says:

    Cameron, idealism is the philosophical opinion which holds that the objects of thought are in some way dependent on the activity of the mind. Materialism is the opposing philosophy which holds that the objects of thought are independent of the activity of the mind.
    Read any history of philosophy for confirmation. Read Lenin’s ‘Materialsm and empirio-criticism’ for detail.
    You cite the fantasist and conspiracy theorist Sutton, you’ll be telling us next that the CIA blew up the twin towers on 9/11. It’s the same paranoid worldview.

  304. Are you saying that blowing up the twin towers could never have been a false flag attack?

    Not saying it was I am asking about the principle of it.

    You are saying you do not believe that Governments, businesses or organisations could ever do anything like false flag attacks, to further their own aganda?

  305. Will Podmore says:

    No James, I made the specific point that it is a paranoid fantasy to believe, as some do, that the CIA blew up the twin towers.
    It is as illogical and counter-factual as to believe that finance capital sponsored the Bolshevik Revolution.
    And yes of course there are false flag attacks, e.g. the Zinoviev letter, the Riga lie machine about the Soviet Union, the many CIA-sponsored ‘left’ websites criticising the Cuban revolution, etc.

  306. CameronB Brodie says:

    Will Podmore
    What is your evidence that Sutton is a fantasist and conspiracy theorist? I don’t think you have any, so you appear to be playing the man as your argument has crashed and burnt. Never mind, you have faith. You’ll get over it.

    You never did give me an opinion on dualism.

  307. J Williams says:

    Labour could easily split and both parts would be more comfortable in their own skins. As could the Tories actually. Both are very broad churches.

    Problem is that both have an eye fixed on the other continuously so Labour are unlikely to take that course when it would, in effect, increase the Tory majority in the immediate future and make future elections look very much like uphill battles. Like a nuclear disarmament it would have to be both of them splitting at once otherwise they will always be more worried about their election chances against the big rival than they should be about how transparent they look when they have no idea themselves what their policies should be (even vaguely).

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top