Wings Over Scotland

Don’t worry, there will be a few 1200-word blog posts along soon, dissecting every aspect of it in minute detail.  Meanwhile, the 30 seconds shown on the telly will be all that the man on the Lochee omnibus gets to see of it. (Why Dundee? Dunno)

Dire!

The one remaining discernible tactic is the ‘Salmond is untrustworthy therefore indpendence can’t work’ one – a logical absurdity, of course, but one which Labour deployed before in their drive to embody an entire country, with all its variety and diversity, and a country which was literally the cradle of civilisation, in the person of ‘Saddam’ or ‘the evil dictator’.  How much blood-letting was justified through that piece of chicanery..

It’s what comes of a basic lack of respect for democracy in and of Scotland.
 
The Scottish Parliament is the seat of our democracy as a nation. For elected representatives to be unable to override their personal feelings about individuals or parties with simple respect for the offices they hold and the institution they inhabit is either a sign of how low they will go, or simply naked contempt for genuine democratic institutions in Scotland.

I’ll say it before and I’ll say it again…

Unionist strategy of continuously attacking the SNP on everything down to the smallest things which matter little to the man on the street are destined to failure. It has been failing for years now yet still they persist. 

It will only decrease their vote share further in the long run. People vote for policy; if you have none or what you do have is unattractive, you will not get votes. It’s really that simple. Only a complete fool with think that that people might change to voting for NHS privatization and tuition fees etc because e.g. Mike Russel was out by 1.7% in a figure which is constantly being updated/changed.

There is no positive case for the union. What the unionist parties are doing with their current strategy is making this very obvious to the electorate. I’m surprised they can’t see this for themselves. Well actually, no, I’m not really.

I think a problem in saying that they are doing it deliberately (in Foulkes’ phrase), is that they are just both awful, awful politicians.  Lamont is just a typical Glasgow Labour unionist activist; inarticulate, no drive or ambition for Scotland, hates the SNP, and Salmond with a passion, and refuses to see any other party as a legitimate governing party.  She is so out of her depth it is not true, and she is always girning.  Davidson is obviously out of her depth as well.  She should never have been elected as leader of the Scottish Tories.  Davidson is far too inexperienced to be a leader of a political party in Scotland, and that even includes the Conservatives!  She is also one of those unionists who seem to hate their own country, witness her ‘performance’ at the British Conservative conference. Rennie is as bad as the other two.

It seems that Labour policy is simply “get Salmond” and thats about it, the others act like the creepy kids who always hang about with Bullies and join in. Its an utter disgrace. Now Lamont is following her masters tune and is trying to triangulate the conservative vote. While that might work for Miliband in the South, its not going to work up here. Any politician trying to claim the mantle of “that woman” as some sort of badge of honour is quite simply moronic.  One of the reasons I switched from labour to the SNP in 2011 is precisely this moronic behaviour in opposition – they clearly have learned nothing.

@James Morton
No, they have learned nothing from their defeats.  If anything, they are getting even more negative.

@s_s
They always come back to their default Nat-bashing.  That this has become a failed tactic does not stop them in the slightest. 
 
 

@Ron

 If people think Holyrood is a poor quality rabble, a town council..

That tactic only works if all parties have largely the same policies and are just as bad as each other; then you only have smear and character assassination left. However, this results in a low turnout/turning people off politics rather than them specifically voting a different way.

If you have another party which is perceived as different with good policies, then the above tactic fails in the face of them. This is exactly what is happening in Scotland; Westminster tactics don’t work here against the pro-independence parties.

It may be hard to take at times watching the relentless negativity, but rest assured it is harming the no campaign not the Yes. We’ve been through nearly 2 years of it (or negative max at least since the last election) yet polls show e.g. the SNP to be on largely the same share as they got in May 2011.

There’s a danger of it harming the Yes campaign if they get caught up in it, though. For instance, I’m getting very tired of seeing SNP MSPs using the #BitterTogether hashtag on Twitter. We’re supposed to be embarking on a positive campaign, but that just seems like nonsense when elected representatives are using negative language. I’m also not a fan of “anti-independence”, which sounds clunky as well as negative, but I’m apparently in a minority with that one.

If all people are seeing is Salmond and others playing the unionists at their own games, then they have no reason to think things could be better if they vote for independence.

The SNP need to start acting as if they’re being interviewed for the job of being Scotland’s government. After all, it’s effectively what they’re doing anyway. Perhaps they think that by allowing the unionists room to rant and rave that people will say “urgh, I’m not listening to anything this shrieking idiot says”, but instead, they’re showing people what things might be like under independence (although that’s not actually true – but it’s the perception created).

They should leave the insults and needling to us ordinary plebs. As much fun as it is to wind up Labour in the chamber, they should rise above it. FMQs is utterly pointless. It does absolutely nothing to help the Yes campaign, so the best thing the SNP can do is make it so dull that it becomes neutralised.

@Doug Daniel
 
Agree with you here.  We pro-Independence supporters need to rise above the gutter that appears to be inhabited by many – certainly not all – of the pro-dependency parties. It is hard to remain aloof when all about you there is flying crap and mud!  But we have to try harder.
 
I despair when reading some of the comments below articles in the Herald or Scotsman, not just from a small number of rabid Unionists (who hardly ever back up their “opinion” with facts or evidence, and fall back on ad hominen attacks) but also a smaller band of rabid Independence supporters who fall into the same trap.
 
We ARE better than that, so let’s keep plugging the facts, supported by proper citations, and let the undecided decide.
 
Hail Alba

Glad to see this thread. @DougDaniel I’m totally with you, and another comment I saw earlier in the thread.

Salmond has to rise above it all, keep a calm voice – and a calm face. He is the First Minister, his Ministers are the Cabinet, and his members are the Government. The rest are all “just” opposition members, and can get away with slightly worse behaviour – that’s almost expected of Opposition really.

One of the reasons in Guardian I changed my avatar from Private Walker was to show I was Indepenndence Yes, while criticising hell out of Alex, the SNP and even the YES campaign. I’d started doing that – and getting attacked by “my own side” as a Unionist!

If anything, over the next few months, I intend getting harder – far harder – on my own side. And Alex Salmond – as the figurehead – neeeds to be of impeccable demeanour, answering nasty criticisms with a smile and humour, rather than shouts and an angry face. Perhaps, as the Herald I think said, he is knackered – well, it’s less than two more years, he’s spent nearly 40 to get this far.

Just another 5%, Alex ….

Aplinal,
the problem is that so many of the average population do exist on “sound bites” and not on facts or rational and reasonable arguments. Their only means of debate is to make ad hominem attacks.

Their upbringing, their education, their standing in the community, their personality, their mood, their level of understanding of political events, may all preclude them from making pronouncements with facts and citations on Comments pages.

However we will need ALL voters if we are to accomplish independence. We will need the irrational and unreasonable, just as much as we need the well informed and the deep thinking. Realistically, we will need people who will rather tell you to F.O. than invite you in for a cup of tea.
We also NEED the “Bravehearters” and the “over-emotional” patriots.

This dismissal of some of the core support for Independence just plays right into the hands of the Unionists, who wish us to disassociate ourselves from the “Bannockburn” brigade and the “vile”, angry “cybernats”. However by doing so, we may risk alienating a loyal and real, section of support for Independence.

@Ron

Bringing the competence not of one party or the government into question, but the parliament itself.

Possibly, but then Scots will not choose Westminster over Holyrood as the latter is the picture of incompetence and they have no ability whatsoever to change that as their votes largely don’t count. In Holyrood the electorate can and have influenced both policy/public services and the future of Scotland. This is why only 5% support a return to Westminster rule vs up to 70% for all but independence.

Remember, the scottish unionist parties are seen as exactly that; largely undifferentiated from their Westminster party. Scottish Labour have made a huge mistake by reversing the differences between them and Ed’s London group, one which will result in a slow erosion of what support they have left. Ed is doing a great job of assisting here with his now open admission that Labour are a right-wing party. The more we hear about ‘one nation’, the more we see Ed with the jacks flying behind him, the more he admires thatcher… the closer Scotland will come to independence.

—-

I agree with Doug D on pro-independence people steering away from name calling etc. Keep it positive. No harm in we jibes about policy reversals etc (e.g. AS at FMQs) but leave name calling to the unionists.

@smallwhitebear
 
I realise that we will need all the votes we can.  Although s_s seems more confident in the eventual result (IIFC 65-70% YES).  Certainly the YES campaign needs some good ‘sound bites’ that is clear, and I also think that in the next 12 months – before the White paper – Alex Salmond will have a more and more reduced ‘role’ in the campaign as the non-politicians start to push it forward. 
 
So I do find FMQs rather tedious right now (can’t these political leaders actually LEAD a discussion on POLICY and IMPACT rather than mindless, boring, pathetic ad hominen bile), and I still maintain that the SNP (and other pro-Independence parties) politicians especially need to be ‘squeeky clean’.  In many ways the pro-dependency cabal’s attacks on the MAN will not actually divert from the YES Campaign.  In fact the opposite. 
 
As bloggers, being professional, factual, assertive (without being abusive) constructive about the challenges ahead, and accepting these challenges will, I think, do more to hang on to the “Bravehearts” as well as demonstrate to the waverers that Independence is nothing to fear.  We don’t need to be the same as the pro-dependency lot to achieve that.

I don’t know if this is of interest, but we all talk about how people don’t always have access to the internet to get information about things like the McCrone report.  With the right content, this could be really useful if it was distributed properly.  An online fundraiser to fund it?  10,000 units (4 pages) for £1000:

link to makemynewspaper.co.uk

@Jake

All those three possibilities also exist in the event of a no vote but on top of that you get Tory/One Nation Tory rule from London as a bonus. Labour etc being crap will not be detrimental to a yes vote referendum in any meaningful way IMO. More likely to encourage a yes as they represent the union. If they keep this up then they will cease to exist as a party in Scotland post independence. 

I’m still confident of splits developing in the pro-union parties as the big day approaches. Some out of principle, some to save their own skins. This is quite typical historically in such situations.

@doug daniel
I’m as guilty as many of snide labelling of the ‘campaign to preserve the union’, but I agree with your general thrust and am trying to use more considered language (honest).
As far as anti-independence goes as a label – the problem is that in addition to being a label, it is a very accurate, concise description (which is just about all you can ask for in a label/name)of the current state of the ‘campaign to preserve the union’.
 
Perhaps we could all ‘crowdsource’ a less negative sounding label amongst ourselves? If we get more than one decent suggestion we could put it to an onsite poll (Rev willing).

At FMQ to day I did enjoy the bit when the camera focuses on Lamont frantically reading up on the next response provided to her!
I enjoyed Alex Salmon’s performance today. He roared like a bull.  
In the face of the incoherent hostility coming from Lamont if he was consistently calm and polite some might perceive him as a bit effete. If he adopted a superior intellectual tone that would offend some people. So he has to mix his response style. Sometimes witty, sometimes reasonable(!), and sometimes roar like a bull.
i’ve noted that when he does get a ‘unloaded” sensible question from the opposition he answers it politely and with respect towards the individual.

Joan Lamont Davidson has comfortably stepped into her role as being of no consequence, 

And what is Mr Brian Taylor’s role at FMQ? To show off his braces? What is he for?  

A former world bank consultant who is a convert to yes I think the negativity did it for him

link to scottishtimes.com

What’s wrong with calling them what they are, Unionists?
Johann Lamont = Ian Paisley.

Some of the Unionist thinking is pretty scary Arbroath.

I prefer the term British Nationalists myself. After all they have tried to make nationalism a dirty word. They have yet to see the irony and hypocrisy of there behavior . If we can get them to admit they are British Nationalists this would be a good first start into a proper debate. 

At least McMahon didn’t need to have his insult written down for him to read out, like his leader does.

The shenanigans we see each week at FMQ will continue unabated for as long as the unionist parties at Holyrood continue with their long established practice of providing an inexhaustible supply of humanoid drones masquerading as leading politicians.

“Recreations: supporting Celtic FC”

link to debretts.com

Unusual to see a Celtic fan crying conspiracy.

@macdoc
 
They are never going to admit that they are British Nationalists, although it is undeniably true.  They prefer to be called unionists, although even Jim Murphy does not want to be called this anymore! 😀   I think for them to admit they are BritNats would be an acknowledgement that they have been fulminating against the SNP, for promoting Scottish Nationalism, for over 50 years on a false pretense.  Therefore, this definitely can’t happen.  They would lose their smug, wholly undeserved, air of superiority over not having been involved in supporting nationalism as a ideology. 

@macdoc
@rev

The problemwith ‘Britnats’ is that it is pertinent to a geographical area rather than the political union which we would like to see broken up.

Ach, let’s avoid the niceties. They are all essentially British imperialists, relics of a long-gone age.

” I wonder if this is a different tactic. Or at least at a different level. Bringing the competence not of one party or the government into question, but the parliament itself. A plague on all their houses, as a deliberate tactic.”

I think that’s exactly what it is. They want to turn everyone off politics, make us think “they’re all the same and nothing will change so what’s the point of even joining the debate, far less voting yes”. And, of course, to make sure Scots and Scotland all look incapable, incompetent and small.

I’ve notices the unionist pages using things like the Edinburgh trams as a reason to prove Scots could never go it alone!  Despite that being entirely a Labour project the SNP government was totally against. They basically want to make us look incompetent. 

Of course, this could very much backfire, as right now all 3 Westminster parties are simply making it look like Westminster’s general incompetene is infesting even the Scottish parliament and certainly making me feel even more strongly that we need rid of the whole useless lot of them.  

One worry though is, if trying to make Scotland look rubbish is their tactic, what will Glasgow Labour will try to do to undermine, for example, the Commonwealth Games in 2014? Because that tactic will clearly involve making Scotland look like a disaster and embarrasing us on the world stage then and whenever else they can. 

Aren’t we just seeing the death throes of the British Labour Party in Scotland?

Johann Lamont is just an old political dinosaur who hasn’t moved on with the times, she is clearly out of her depth and is lashing out hoping to land a punch but instead she is just constantly making a complete and utter fool of herself.

I think it fairly clear that part of the Labour Party strategy is to try and demean and undermine the Scottish Parliament to try and weaken the SNP.  However, with each new slur, false accusation and smear they are actually creating the opposite effect thus doing their own cause more harm than good.

Labour Party supporters must be cringing every time she stands up to speak.
 

May I just ask people who wish to post links to FMQs or any other Holyrood business to link to Holyrood TV rather than the BBC? Why do we need to go to the enemy’s website when they just use a feed from the Parliament’s own TV service anyway? Archived FMQs can all be found at link to scottish.parliament.uk
 
FMQs can also be watched live on Holyrood TV without having to see or hear Brian Taylor!

@Cath

I don’t see it as a ploy to discredit the Scottish parliament as, to discredit the parliament they would have to deliberately discredit themselves. This would elevate their actions to the equivalent of ‘political suicide bombers’ and I don’t believe any  of them have the moral courage to be martyrs.

I reckon that the unionist troika just don’t have the political knowse to debate their case in a reasoned manner and perforce resort to the politics of the playground.  All yah, boo sucks and he/she who shouts loudest etc.

Let’s not forget that they are effectively their parties third elevens. The first two are troughing it in wasteminster as MPs or advisers etc.

 Someone really should tell them about EMPTY BARRELS! 

When I’m on my best behaviour I do try and refer to them as unionists (I’m trying Stu, Honest :lol:) but I do admit to also liking the term Britnats. However knowing, as we all do how very much in favour a certain Mr. Murphy is of being called a unionist then I think I’ll stick with that for now.
 
With regards to a certain Mr. Smart. What can I say?
Not very smart is he?
I must admit though I’m beginning to think that he has a certain desire to become a travel advisor for visitors to Zimbabwe the way he keeps referring to anyone and anything from the S.G. as being better placed in Zimbabwe.
 
With regards to Mr. McMahon he is, in my view, yet another fine example of Labour’s finest in their bully brigade. I find it extraordinary that anyone can behave, as he did yesterday with his “your out of order” comment”, and yet he finds his expulsion from the chamber today as going to far. What planet or even universe is this guy from?
Surely he must realise that no one can behave in the manner he did, showing disrespect to the Presiding Officer, and not receive some form of punishment from the P.O. The penalty that he received is, in my view, the very least that he could/should have expected. As for his “press interview” well that was just puerile and pathetic. His behaviour throughout this whole episode has been childish at best. Is he not intelligent enough to recognise that he just can not disrespect the P.O.’s position and not be on the receiving end of a suspension at the very least.

The thing is, it doesn’t matter what us lot call them. We’re just ordinary folk chatting about independence, and I don’t buy this “oooh the evil Cybernats are putting everyone off independence” pish that we get from certain quarters of our own side.

It’s the politicians. They’re the ones that have to be seen to be rising above the negative language. If I see a normal person going “Look at the anti-independence parties all holding hands #BitterTogether” on Twitter, I don’t bat an eyelid. But when an MSP or MP does it, my toes curl. In fact, I can’t help feeling that the internet would be a much better place if certain politicians just didn’t use it (Angus MacNeil in particular just seems to cause nothing but trouble at times – the recent SirIanBlair howler was just embarrassing, and a recent tweet saying something like “maybe we need a Tax Payers Alliance for Scotland?” was so dire that even an MSP from his own party criticised him for it.)

Although McMahon’s dissembling “I did it but this is unfair.” – line is predictable, his “i have a loud voice cultivated by being a true socialist on the factory floor therefore I got caught and picked on.” might be more interesting.
Would it be okay for him to have made the remark in a quiet voice?
Is it ok to make disparaging remarks if you are a member of the Labour party?
Is he furthering the actual insult to the neutral arbitrator by saying they have a particular prejudice against the likes of himself?
I would suggest he has dug a little bit deeper under the foundations of the good wishes everyone had for a ‘better’ Scottish Parliament. 

NorthBrit says:

Most of the opponents of independence are SLab types who claim to be “proud Scots”, who if the SNP didn’t exist, would be whinging about evil Tories from the south of England.
Their motivation is not love of Britain, but hatred of the SNP, which is interfering with their god given right to govern Scotland like a particularly humourless and incompetent Warsaw Pact era government. 

Yes, the second paragraph was what I have been trying to describe for ages, that is a good way of describing it.  Their definitely is a real lack of imagination, and boldness, within the mindset of unionist Scottish Labour.

I was at a meeting tonight where john mason, willie rennie,  malcolm chisholm and david torrance were speaking. Willie was saying the snp victory was historic but less than half the people voted. Someone asked “why do you think that is?” and he said it’s down to politicians and the way they behave. Calling each other liars isn’t helping anyone he said. Malcolm chisholm wasn’t disagreeing. 

@AndrewFraeGovan
That’s partly what I’m saying. I agree that lots of people all around the world use British and English as meaning the same thing.
It isn’t though.
I don’t see why I should give ‘British’ to what remains of the UK alone. I can’t stop being British anymore than I can stop being European, or indeed Scottish. Everytime the relationships between the different nations in (the current) UK change, it can affect what ‘British’ is, but ‘British’ is still the thing that sums up all the neighbours who live in this part of the world.
I’m Scottish – I know it’s been done to death a bit, but the idea that being British is like being Scandinavian is what I’m getting at – Scottishness isn’t affected or diluted by being British.
That doesn’t mean I ‘call myself’ British anymore than I call myself European or anything else, but that in turn doesn’t mean I’m not.
 
Anyway, I was just pointing out why that that’s why I don’t like ‘British’ being assigned to the No camp. It’s not something I normally think much about though.

Paul Martin`s  for the high-jump!.

@mrbfaethedee sa
I don’t know what happened to my post – the middle seems to have disappeared.
It should have read:
Britain, Britannia = England. Ask anyone around the world.
Scotland, Caledonia, is part of Great Britain i.e. Greater England.
England is welcome to terms like ‘British’, etc as far as I’m concerned.
We’re Scottish!
 
 

I’ve got a wee smile on my face.
 
We’ve still got two years to go and they are really, really rattled.
 
The more information that people have the better informed they will be.
 
Johann Lamont is a gift that’s already been unwrapped before the prize has been given, thank you British Labour Party.

 To whom it may concern
That behaviour at Holyrood ,worked for you when you were in the Cooncil behind closed doors but in the full glare of the Country ,quite cringe worthy. However the good news is having  used up the goodwill of many voters ,if you ever get back into power (yes you Miss Lamont at the back ) ,do you really think the Scottish public won’t be watching your every word and normal service will resume?
Scotland is moving on , I heard a jokey comment a few years ago (no offence to ordinary Glaswegians,this is for the politicians ).
The Captain announces over the tannoy,we’re now landing in Sydney ,please put your watches back one hour.
The Captain announces over the tannoy,we’re now landing at Glasgow Airport,please put your watches back to 1970- that about sums it up for me. 

I decided to give FMQ a try yesterday, and witnessed AS tear a strip off of JL. Then, this morning I listened to Radio Scotland’s interpretation of events at around 6.45. To anyone who hadn’t heard FMQ yesterday, the impression given was that JL bravely launched an attack on AS’s competence, while he struggled to give an answer. We also heard more of what she had to say, compared to only a short snippet of him. There can be no doubt that BBC Scotland is working to an agenda, and the people of Scotland are being let down by this behaviour. They deserve a proper debate, not such obvious propaganda. I don’t think that their going to get it though.