The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The spurned lover

Posted on April 29, 2015 by

Remember that lovely British solidarity you were told by Labour to vote No for?


You probably need to read this, folks.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 29 04 15 20:36

      The spurned lover | Speymouth

    190 to “The spurned lover”

    1. Kenneth Shaw says:

      ….but they said they’d still love us in the morning….

    2. Paula Rose says:

      So how exactly are the devolved functions to be paid for? I would have added f*****g idiots.

    3. Croompenstein says:

      I don’t see an author claiming credit for that diatribe of pish Stu, perhaps Dunc could fill us in..

    4. Quentin Quale says:

      And whatever you do, remember SNP bad.

      So whilst the SNP plan on making all the UK a fairer and more equitable society Labour self destruct. They really have lost the plot. To paraphrase another great sage ‘Yer erse is oot the windae’.

    5. Murray McCallum says:

      Seems a logical way of pretty much ensuring Labour never get any MPs elected in Scotland ever again.

      The thrust of the message also alludes to the fact that voters in England determine the outcome of the General Election. If you are a British party, and wish to influence the outcome, why bother wasting resources in Scotland?

      I wonder if the anonymous article was written by their internationalist solidarity thunk tank?

    6. Gaavster says:

      And remind me, for how long now has Murphy been screaming at the top of his lungs that it was the SNP that wanted to scrap the Barnett formula?

      Seriously, you couldn’t make it up…

    7. frogesque says:

      Paula, the answer is simple. FFA leading to full independence.

    8. Stoker says:

      Independence for Scotland eliminates all talk of formulas.

    9. tinyzeitgeist says:

      They (Labour) want power at any cost. If anyone is in any doubt that the modern (NU)Labour party are closet tories, they need read no further than Labourhame. Utterly disgusting.

    10. galamcennalath says:

      I assume their alternative FFA?

      While we have discussed that in detail, and a lot of us think it will never happen, wouldn’t it be an astonishing twist on the path if pressure begun down south to actually promote it as a solution?

    11. muttley79 says:

      Ouch! 😀 Not much better together sentiments going on there. Are they suggesting Scotland finally gets access to our share of North Sea oil revenues, all taxation raised in Scotland etc?

    12. fred blogger says:

      it would be so simple for them if they could accept the principles of democracy, and not the principles of entitlement.
      the snp like it or not is currently a party of the union.
      they did say that scotland should have a strong voice in the union.
      voting for one party over another is democracy, not punishment of other parties, but a rejection of them, through freewill choice by voters @ the ballot box.
      yes, it maybe an angry rejection, but it is a rejection nonetheless.
      that the other parties feel punished over being rejected, is for them to acutely focus on.
      blaming the voter for being neglected and reacting to that, will not do!

    13. Valerie says:

      No author taking credit for this wonderful piece, which could have been shortened to – give them independence.

      The responses are quite mixed, some fairly intelligent, so you wonder why they hang around to soak up the drivel.

    14. Barbara Watson says:

      Cutting off noses to spite faces comes to mind, they really do not have a clue how to proceed in Scotland.

      I really do hope that Milliband scraps the Barnett Formula and give autonomy to the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish.

      It looks like Independence will follow sooner that expected without Labour.

    15. donald anderson says:

      Yeah, yeah, I still respect you.

    16. Connor McEwen says:

      Has anybody PINGED the leads to the BBC Barnett formula err err FACTS?
      Best yit?

    17. dennis ross says:

      Never bin so proud!blocked,by branch officer Murphy himself.!!

    18. Fiona says:

      especially if Labour was to rechannel the Barnett excess back into the UK-wide NHS.

      They don’t know much about much, do they?

    19. Marie clark says:

      I despair. Is this idea for real, scrap the Barnett Formula! Really!

      How do they propose that we pay for all the devolved functions.
      FFA, never going to happen. I don’t think that they’ve thought this thing through. Maybe we should ask Robert Peffers to explain it to them, cause they sure don’t seem to have a clue.

      See, if they hud jist left us alane last year to oor ain devices, they widnae hae a problem noo.

      As Robert is wont to say MAY THE FEAR BE WITH THEM.

    20. Muscleguy says:

      I’ve sent that link to my No, Labour voting wife. She voted No because she thinks her university job will go under independence as though Education is not a Scottish Shibboleth (I know). I asked how secure her job feels in the Union with Labour thinking this. Be interesting the response. At the very least she will be less interested in voting Labour on the 7th.

    21. Croompenstein says:

      Creepy Jim conspicuous by his absence in that photo of the rogues gallery with their big shitty red bus maybe he was atop an irn bru crate that day or telling someone to fuck off thrice.

      Can’t help feeling a wee bit sorry for JoLa in that photie she looks like a turkey on christmas eve or Calimero at a school reunion. Looks like Sarwar is knifing her in the back and her best pal Magrit is desperately trying to hold Ed’s hand.. eeuughhh

    22. John Moss says:

      Well, nothing new here. Labour would appear to be dumping us which is a very British thing to do it seems.

      What a shower of two-faced, hypocrytical and ungrateful bastards. But then should we be so surprised? –

      Equality and fairness is not what Westminister is all about. A win for SNP this May is just the start of a bigger battle to change a rotten system.

    23. joe kane says:

      Presumably any Scottish Labour survivors after their betrayal and abandonment by their London red tory bosses will be bayoneted.

    24. Craig says:

      I posted a comment on their website actively encouraging them to campiagn for the ending of the Barnett Formula and I would give them my full support

      Idiots don’t even realise the real consequences of what they are talking about

      Was it wrong of me to encourage them? 😛

    25. Craig says:

      Forgot to paste what I posted on their website

      “You know what, SCRAP the Barnett formula and then you will see that, not only will you lose Scotland forever, it will give us the ammunitation that is required for Independence, this is your problem Labour, you spend so much time spinning lies and decieving voters you fail to grasp the severity of the damage you will impose on yourselves, that is why the Scottish branch of your party is performing so badly, the lies and scaremiongering spouted during the referendum campaign and repeated during this General Election campaign has come back to haunt you all

      Go for it, you will be ensuring that apart from the die hard Unionists, the citizens of Scotland will be voting for Independence, I encourage you all to campaign for the scrapping of the Barnett Formula.

      GO FOR IT

      P.s. Before you accuse me of being a Cybernatz, know this, I voted Labour all my life and my support for them died the day they joined forces with the Tories in the referendum campaign

      P.s.s, before you bring up the Tartan Tories of 1979, I suggest that you read James Callaghan’s book “Time and Chance” and you will see the real truth, if you can’t be bothered buying the book, here is a link showing the relevant pages from the book.


    26. A (reluctant) Labour Member says:

      There’s a reason why it’s more commonly known as ‘Labour Unhinged’.

    27. Campbell1815 says:

      At least most of the comments on its own website, most of them labour people themselves presumably, seem to also lambast the article to the tune of “er, what?”, to be fair.

    28. Dr Jim says:

      Oh joy, do it and do it now i double dog dare you

    29. GrahamB says:

      They seem to be blind to the large elephant in the room – scrap the Barnett Formula and support for Ed from the SNP would vanish. Cue for another GE which Labour will not be able to afford anytime soon and they end up bankrupt. Don’t think they’ve thought this through, have they?

    30. JBS says:

      Labour Uncut: in a huff. What a shame.

    31. mogabee says:

      Would scrapping Barnett be a “material change”? Hmm.:D

    32. muttley79 says:

      Here is a comment from Lewis under the article:

      If Labour offered to scrap the barnett formula and replace it with full fiscal autonomy for Scotland, labour would gain popularity in both England and Scotland. Voters in England would like the thought of Barnett being scrapped while Yes voters who previously voted Labour may be tempted to return to the party they used to support due to it passing real powers to Scotland.

      There is just a few minor problems with that Lewis. Labour refused to support a second question in the referendum, calling it Alex Salmond’s insurance card. Now Labour in Scotland are telling anyone that will listen to them that they think FFA/Devo max would be a disaster for Scotland.

    33. Fiona says:

      Labour in Scotland are telling anyone that will listen to them that they think FFA/Devo max would be a disaster for Scotland.

      muttley79, I may be wrong, but you seem to have the impression that would be a reason for labour not to do it. Not so sure about that…

    34. Paula Rose says:

      As per usual none of my comments on the Labour-up-themselves site get through moddie stuff must be my nail varnish.

    35. Iain More says:

      Well that was a bit of a bitter rant. I doubt if they spent a second thinking about it before the rabies infected them. I feel Indy getting closer and closer if that is the attitude they want to take. It is something I would expect from UKIP or the Tories or maybe it is just British Labour showing its true colours.

    36. Sooz says:

      Oh my. They really don’t know how the Barnett formula is calculated, or on what, do they. Still, if they will INSIST on believing what gets churned out by the MSM, and by the unionist politicians desperate to keep their sticky paws in our assets, who are we to disabuse them of their confusion.


      How does one get expelled, I wonder. -D 😀

    37. Mealer says:

      I think it would be a really rotten thing for them to do to those remaining,mostly frail and elderly,Labour voters in Scotland.

    38. Paula Rose says:

      Night off in Glasgow on Friday then total commitment to getting the SNP elected on the 7th – then mes petites total dedication to the green cause. The loyal opposition is limbering up in the wings.

    39. Grouse Beater says:

      Just another example of how every political party with a branch office in Scotland is in reality beholden to all decisions made on behalf of and by Westminster exclusively for England’s economic interests.

      How many of the 55% that voted No realise this is the unacceptable situation?

    40. Capella says:

      Obviously what passes for political discourse at Labour Uncut.
      Is it edited by Kate Hopkins?

    41. Richardinho says:

      This is all hypothetical of course, but it seems predicated on the idea that the SNP would always back the Labour party in Westminster.

      But if a Labour government were to commit such an act of bad faith as this, effectively killing the Labour party North of the Border, then a reappraisal would surely be in order. The SNP could vote however they liked because Labour’s chances of a comeback in Scotland would be zero.

      I doubt it’ll happen therefore.

    42. Andy Hay says:

      Don’t you feel it coming? The perfect storm of Independence.
      I can’t see the Tories fighting so hard to keep Scotland next time round and Labour will know they cannot depend on Scottish votes any more. It’s just a question of when they go for it.

    43. Iain Gray's Subway Lament says:

      What I love about the article is that these deluded out of touch Labour twits actually seem to believe someone as comically unpopular as Miliband and Balls can “put Sturgeon in her place”.

      You’d think even among the Blue Labour right-wingers it might have dawned on at least some of them that wee Ed Miliband would be getting annihilated in England if the kippers hadn’t surged from 3% in 2010 to around 13(ish)% now. True, the incompetent Cameron and Osborne caused most of that but if you add that 10% or so back on to the tories (which is where almost all of it came from) and wee Ed would be getting completely hammered in England.

      Bottom line, wee Ed is a dud and he’s in no position to put anyone in their place.

    44. Genghis D'Midgies says:

      Seems OK to me – I’m sick of hearing about the Barnett formula anyway. Remember it won’t happen overnight.

      The only problem is that it’s impossible to trust the British civil service so we need an impartial team to oversee the whole process.

    45. Robert Peffers says:

      Now what was that again, I’ve been saying for many months?

      Oh! Yes! Now I remember, “The buggers don’t actually know what the Barnett Formula is supposed to do”

      And by the way, that applies to some of our friends too.

      Mind you it may well be a great idea to let them get on with attempting to do away with Barnett Formula and give them enough rope to hang themselves.

    46. Giesabrek says:

      Well, apart from the glaring omission that Scotland contributes more per head than most of the rest of the UK which addresses the difference in the Barnett formula, I kinda agree with the thrust of this article.

      Labour are now at a crossroads – Scotland looks to have abandoned Labour and so Labour will no longer be able to use Scotland to gain power at Westminster. They have to decide whether to focus on England to persuade enough voters to vote for them, which will probably require a further lurch to the right or do they gamble and try to appeal to the Scottish voters, who have overwhelmingly rejected Labour, by moving back to the left, potentially alienating a larger number of voters in England, all in the hope of gaining a few tens of MPs back from the SNP.

      If they have any sense, they will show English voters that they’ll stand up for them and cast off those ungrateful Jocks who’ve rejected them by getting rid of the Barnett formula.

      Of course this won’t go down well at all in Scotland – billions will be cut from the Scottish budget at a stroke and it breaks a condition of the Smith Commission. Moreover, this could be regarded as the significant change that could introduce a second referendum… and this time no amount of spinning from a compliant unionist media can make that budget cut look like a benefit of the union and so Scotland sets sail for independence shores!

    47. HandandShrimp says:

      Sounds like a fast track to independence from our friendly Unionists. Brown and darling must be going into face palm overdrive.

    48. BJ says:

      Will be interesting to see how Ulster deals with this this issue when they are told the English are calling on Westminster to scrap the Barnett Formula. I would envisage two words. F… Off!

      NI gets more than £2000.00 above the UK average of £8788 and they will want more for any support that is given to whatever party is in power.

      Nobody ever mentions that NI gets a bigger share of the Barnett Formula than Scotland, Wales or England.

      Maybe Westminster is under the illusion that the Irish like them. Try removing the Barnett Formula from them and see how long the support lasts in Westminster.


    49. Chris says:

      I know it’s been said many, many times, but I just cannot understand why, if Scotland is seen as such a drain on rUK, Scottish Independence must be prevented at all costs.

      A visitor from outer space might well look at what’s going on in the run up to this election and assume that last year a referendum had been instigated by rUK in an (unsuccessful) attempt to encourage a subsidy-addicted Scotland to vote itself out of the UK.

    50. Barontorc says:

      Q1) So ever wonder why we send every penny raised in tax in Scotland to the big pot in Westminster?

      A1) Because, the UK insists on it.

      Q2) So how do we pay for things in Scotland if all our tax dosh goes to London?

      A2) Westminster gives us enough money back as housekeeping to pay for things and that.

      Q3) How do they know in Westminster how much housekeeping we have to get from them for what we need?

      A3) There used to be a lot of squabbles about that until this wee guy in the Westminster Treasury called Barnett, says I’ve got a spiffing idea how to stop all this argy-bargy.

      What we’ll do is work out in advance how many people live in Scotland and look at what the Scots have to spend their housekeeping on and we’ll arrange to send them so much per head to cover these costs. Simples.

      Q4) So that means we in Scotland will get enough housekeeping and that it will go up if we need to do more things?

      A4) That’s right, but since we in Westminster hold all the money, we can tell the Scots what they can spend their housekeeping on and in the future if we’re really smart we can get the Scots to do lots of stuff that we can’t be bother doing for them and we’ll say it’s been devolved to you so here’s the extra money you’ll need to pay for it.

      Win-win all round for us in Westminster, eh?

      And so life went on more peacefully in Westminster, not so much argy-bargy and the tame Scottish MP lot just got on with it too, but then people who should have known much better started saying that the Scots were getting too much free money to spend on things and it should stop at once.

      This caused everybody who could care a little about what was actually going on to look at the background to it all and lots of little worms started crawling out from the old stones we were turning over.

      So we all looked a wee bit closer at Barnett’s Formula and guess what – eyes were opened.

      Why was it created? (According to the Telegraph)

      The Barnett Formula was designed as a temporary measure but has lasted for 30 years.
      Lord Barnett, then the Labour chief secretary to the Treasury, drew up a system for the division of public spending in 1978 partly to settle rows with other Cabinet ministers about spending allocations, and partly to allow for Scotland’s larger physical area, lower average incomes and its particularly acute needs in health care and housing.

      (And according to Wikipedia)

      The Barnett formula is a mechanism used by the Treasury in the United Kingdom to automatically adjust the amounts of public expenditure allocated to Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales to reflect changes in spending levels allocated to public services in England, England and Wales or Great Britain, as appropriate.

      So what the hell are they going on about down there?

    51. muttley79 says:

      I see SLAB have latched on to the ingenious plan of asking the SNP what is going to be in their manifesto for the elections in 2016. Never mind that it only gets issued in a year’s time. They want to know what is in it now! This appears to be their last stand; apparently the SNP have got a secret plan for another independence referendum, just over 6 months after the first one! I love it how it is the unionists who are so obsessed with independence and the SNP. 😀 😀

    52. Joemcg says:

      Chris-I asked that question on various zoomer threads for months and the stock answer was “we are saving you from yourselves!” Lol!

    53. Dr Jim says:

      They think the Barnet formula is some sort of English Piggy Bank they dole out money from
      Then again it’s not entirely their fault though is it, when their political representatives tell them porkies they believe the nonsense coz they want to

      As long as Westminster and the media keep pumping the poverty stricken whingeing moaning subsidised Jock stuff at them what else are they going to think, my English lot never believe any of what I’ve told them (I don’t really talk to them that much anymore, too tiring)

      You’ve got nice scenery but it’s too cold and it rains all the time don’t know how you can live there, other than that we suppose it’s OK for the odd holiday

      Anybody else got rellys like mine

    54. paul gerard mccormack says:

      sorry – slightly o/t, but a note of caution – my current fear is that the latent issue of fracking could split the SNP badly, should it be given the go ahead for reasons of rationality and scientific reports, irrespective of whether the public more or less unanimously don’t want it.

      Surely the politics of it must intervene at first minister level?

      It’d be the equivalent of, ‘it’s a disaster for scotland!’ just waiting to happen after we have voted for 59 snp m.p’s.

      Tell me i’m wrong to be worried.

    55. Jim Mitchell says:

      And none of us are surprised at this response and given the years of this attitude it can hardly be described as knee jerk!

    56. Paula Rose says:

      I love the way we all know what we’re talking about – thanks to many wonderful wingers. If I haven’t stroked you yet I will do soon xx

    57. Macart says:

      For any former no voters who wish a short summary.

      Put Sturgeon in her place – Scrap the Barnett Formula – Fix Labour’s problems in Scotland.

      This is Labour support saying this, LABOUR for God’s sake. Abandon Scotland but use its remaining Labour support to shackle Scotland’s democracy and economy. I’m not sure what you pictured as Scotland’s future post referendum, but I’m sure you didn’t expect this.

    58. Tam Jardine says:


      I suppose the stock answer should be to ask what is in the slab manifesto for 2016 Scottish General Election. Or the one after that in, what 2021? Or 2026?

      What, you say that’s ridiculous? That circumstances change and the manifesto will be written before each election according to the needs, conditions and political wind at the time? Aye… (slow hand clap)

    59. Thepnr says:

      @Andy Hay

      Yes, I feel it coming. Labour had no choice other than to fight to keep Scotland in the Union if simply because they needed all 41 Scottish Labour MP’s to give them a majority. They also foolishly believed they could hang on to those seats.

      The Tories would be certain to form the next government in rUK if there were NO busload of SNP MP’s on their way to Westminster in a couple of weeks and they would have joined up again with the Liberals.

      We no longer have need for Labour and the Tories want to see the back of the SNP. Tis only a matter of time now.

      Toasted bannock anyone?

    60. Mealer says:

      I’ve heard several people comment that many Labour Party branches exist only on paper these days because there’s only a few office bearers left.Would that be a fair assessment?

    61. Luigi says:

      It’s not just Scotland they are stabbing in the back. It is Scottish Labour that is about to be unceremoniously jettisoned by its own party. Where are all their Better Together chums now?

      Set adrift up shit creek without a paddle.

    62. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Robert Peffers at 8.47

      Spot on

    63. Rock says:

      Where does South Britain get the money to subsidise us?

      I thought it had a massive debt.

    64. lumilumi says:


      Do all these English journalists, pundits, think tanks etc. really think that the Barnett formula stands for transferring English taxpayers money to Scotland for their freebies?

      Seems like it. Apparently nobody in Scotland pays any taxes.

      Rober Peffers will be here soon to explain it but the “higher than average UK public spending” in Scotland is a reflection of administrating many functions of state/society, such as law, education and health, which have always been “devolved”, even before the reconvening of the Scottish parliament.

      [hits head agaist a brick wall]

    65. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Fiona at 8.01

      “Labour in Scotland are telling anyone that will listen to them that they think FFA/Devo max would be a disaster for Scotland.”

      FFA/Devo max would be a disaster for Scotland. It certainly would. It would take years to work out and then it would put independence back for a decade or two – or forever

    66. lumilumi says:

      On the subject of lovers…

      Here’s something that ocurred to me.

      A night with Scottish party leaders

      It’s a large, sprawling bar in a major Scottish city. Nicola walks in and I’d like to greet her but she’s swamped and I decide to wait. Over in the other corner there’s some creepy guy with a couple of mean looking companions and I shrudder and put some distance between us. Invited, I sit down with a jolly-hockey-sticks gal and her pal. I don’t agree with her politics at all but she’s good enough fun for me to go to the bar for a second round. At the bar, this gap-toothed idiot tries to come on to me. Yeuch. But I can’t help but feel a bit sorry for him. Not enough to talk to him, mind you. I make my way back to the jolly-hockey-sticks but keep my eye on Nicola. She’s constantly surrounded by so many people asking questions, regaling anecdotes, laughing and being happy and positive that I feel a bit silly. Nicola doesn’t need me, the people of Scotland don’t need me to point the way.
      “… and after the high kick, go in with a crushing right straight”, jolly-hockey sticks is saying excitedly.
      “No, just stick them with the pointy end,” I say.
      “Them. The others. You.”

      [NB. lumilumi used to practice fencing and stick the pointy end to adversaries.]

    67. IvMoz says:

      Let’s punish the Scots because they won’t fall into line.

      Can we not cut to the chase.

      It’s like the end of an abusive uneven forced marriage. Why drag it out. Nobody wins in this situation.

      Independence is going to happen.

      Why dance around it and all agree that it should happen now. End the suffering.

      They don’t want us or respect us. They abuse us.

      30+ seats or 40+ seats is a mandate.

      Strike while the iron’s hot.

    68. Davy says:

      Just spent the last 1/2 hour having a yap with my mate, he is/was a labour man all of his life but voted YES in the referendum as he thought it was the right thing to do.

      I fully expected him to be back voting labour for this election, but NO, he informed me he hopes they get totally kicked out of Scotland as he wants to see a new and fairer political system than what labour and the torys are offering.

      He listened to an interview with the young lassie “Black” who is taking on Dougie Alexander and said it was the most honest and refreshing political conversation he had heard in years, and to watch Nicola Sturgeon advance the cause for Scotland and the rest of the UK in such a calm and controlled manner impressed the living daylights out of him.

      My ex-labour mate is now voting SNP as he see’s them being good for Scotland and the UK.

      The trash who were writeing and commenting on that article are not the labour that my friend followed and grew up with, they are the self-centred troughers he wants kicked out.

      I am very proud of my mate.

    69. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Grouse Beater @ 8.21pm.

      You typed,
      “Just another example of how every political party with a branch office in Scotland is in reality beholden to all decisions made on behalf of and by Westminster exclusively for England’s economic interests.”

      I read that ‘beholden’ phrase yesterday.

      “Who actually exercises control of the ‘considered will of the people of Scotland’ in the UK Parliament,  Lord Cooper suggested, was purely theoretical and unlikely to be tested within the UK wide party system then in place (1953) across the UK, as any Scottish representation was beholden to their main UK party’s manifesto.”

      That’s from an article at:-

      I’d be interested in how you and Robert Peffers read the contention that Peter Thompson makes in his blog. Here’s another couple of extracts…

      “…and brings us to Lord Cooper’s point of Law in 1953 that Scots Law and constitutional practice does not recognise the concept of the ‘crown in parliament’ being sovereign as this is a singularly English legal and constitutional concept, a legal point conceded on the UK Parliament’s behalf by the Lord Advocate.”


      “When you get your head around this key legal and constitutional point, you understand why Ms Sturgeon’s Gioconda smile is un-shifting in the face of all the hostility from the opposition politicians, media, commentators and their attempts to claim the SNP will be beyond the pale and isolated.

      This is because any Bills, Acts or Statutes effecting Scotland can not pass the UK Parliament without the agreement of the ‘considered will of the people of Scotland’ which will, with 29+ SNP MPs, be in the SNP’s hands – even if the Tories and Labour do form a grand coalition at Westminster.”

      Is this why the UK establishment is in full, DEFCON 1, panic mode? And Nicola, a Scottish lawyer, is in laid back mode?

    70. Lea Rigg says:

      The only sensible option open to Miliband in the face of SNP domination is to introduce proportional representation to England and home rule to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland. The Tories would never again rule England and Miliband would go down in history as a socialist reformer his father would have been proud of..

    71. Bob Mack says:

      Nice little story
      My good lady was working with an English I.T. specialist today.She is Sikh.She told my good lady that she was normally a Tory voter,but this time she and her extended family had decided to switch to Labour.
      Further enquiry as to why they had decided to support Miliband revealed that she and her familes voting intention revolved around the hope that it would allow them to get SNP members in Parliament ,and especially a Party led by Nicola Sturgeon who they rated very highly.

    72. dramfineday says:

      Chris at 8.57
      “I know it’s been said many, many times, but I just cannot understand why, if Scotland is seen as such a drain on rUK, Scottish Independence must be prevented at all costs.”

      Plus one Chris and well worth asking at every opportunity. If we are such a drain on the system, why keep us? Cue much harrumphing, looking at feet and general blethers about “saving us from ourselves”. Fail for them and win for you.

    73. StevieMcB says:

      OT the Knives are out for Murphy.

    74. Free Scotland says:

      Stu, good job you archived that page. It may not be too long before it vanishes without trace.

    75. Tamson says:

      Tantalising theory over at Comment Isn’t Free, that Murphy is deliberately throwing this election, and making it impossible for Ed to run a minority government. The ultimate objective being, of course to restore the Blairites to power in the party. If he achieved that, he’d be well looked after, with a backroom job or even a peerage.

    76. Onwards says:

      I see the Scottish Sun is backing the SNP.
      English version backing the Tories.

      2 different editors.
      And Rupert always likes to back a winner.

    77. Legerwood says:

      The article seems to be saying that Labour should/will scrap the Barnett formula. But a few weeks ago Mr Milligan’s and Mr Murphy while attacking FFA said that Labour would keep the Barnett Formula. See:

      Earlier this year the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury said in a speech that the implementation of the Smith proposals would lead to the amount paid via the Barnett Formula being reduced by two-thirds. Which contradicts Labour’s assertion that the Barnett formula would stay if Ed becomes PM.

      Take all three ‘positions’ together and you see the complete dog’s dinner Labour has produced.

      So complete in fact that the only way out of it is FFA but of course they have comprehensively rubbished that.

      So a week before the vote they have absolutely no policy whatsoever for Scotland’s economic future. And they wonder why they are behind in the polls.

    78. jimnarlene says:

      How many nails are in “Scottish” Labours coffin now?

    79. Thepnr says:

      O/T Well, not unexpected. The Sun comes out for the Tories in the English edition and the SNP in the Scottish edition.

      In the English edition though the Number 2 reason for supporting the Tories is “Stop SNP running the country”

      Odd eh!

    80. Jimbo says:

      What about the Barnett consequential for Wales or for N Ireland? The author doesn’t say if the Barnett formula should be kept for them, or if they too should have full fiscal autonomy?

      Who in British politics can make a plausible case for a formula that sees Scots receive £1,200.00 per head more than some parts of England yet sees Scots pay £1,700.00 per head more in taxes than than rest of the UK?

      Who can make a plausible case for a public spending formula that sees Londoners receive, on average, 10% more per head in spending than every other region in England. Should London also have full fiscal autonomy?

      Having fought for years against Scotland having full fiscal autonomy, who in Labour would be willing to stand up and explain this massive U Turn to the electorate, in the knowledge that everyone knows he/she is lying to their back teeth?

      It’s now common knowledge that Labour puts the party before the people, always coming up with knee-jerk policies, not for the people, purely for narrow political gain. If they want to see Labour go even further down in people’s estimation I commend this plan and hope the author’s ‘magic bullet’ is fired ASAP.

    81. Paula Rose says:

      Um is that lover spumed or spurned?

    82. Mealer says:

      At the risk of sounding repetitive,could I ask you all to keep up the canvassing.The information gained is vital not just for next weeks election but for next years Scottish election too.If we know who our voters are and where they live it is easier to get them out to vote.It also gives us the opportunity to persuade undecideds,to get people to put up signs,join the SNP etc.Not long to go.Make the most of every day.Cheers!

    83. Luigi says:

      Thepnr says:
      29 April, 2015 at 10:06 pm

      O/T Well, not unexpected. The Sun comes out for the Tories in the English edition and the SNP in the Scottish edition.

      In the English edition though the Number 2 reason for supporting the Tories is “Stop SNP running the country”

      Odd eh!

      The Sun usually backs the winner(s). So, if things go according to the Sun, we have a Tory (minority?) govt and a big SNP contingent. What then?

    84. Tam Jardine says:


      What you say makes sense. Conventional SNP wisdom is the softly softly, gradual approach… responsible governance, push for more powers, and if the support is there include another referendum in the next manifesto.

      Something has changed though – the social union has broken or rather been broken at the same time as people in Scotland have woken up and are more politically aware than ever. Has anyone beaten the establishment in the UK? If it is routed a week tomorrow God only knows how it will react.

      The most surprising reaction of all perhaps would be if the establishment reflected on the result, decided that Scotland’s voice should be heard in Westminster and it’s time to move on from the divisions of the referendum and work towards a more inclusive, reformed union.

      As that seems extraordinarily, impossibly unlikely, IF we get the result we’re all hoping for and working towards, we need to be ready to adapt the softly softly approach to suit the actions of Westminster and the scale of result.

    85. icyspark says:

      Stop the SNP running the country by voting SNP!

    86. Charles Edward says:

      How now Brown’s Vow?

    87. icyspark says:

      @Paula Rose

      Could literally be either lol

      Spumed definition: produced a mass of froth

    88. katherine hamilton says:

      Hope Jim wins his seat. Hope he gets a Holyrood seat. Hope he wins 2016 Holyrood election. Hope they cancel Barnett. Go on Jimbob, run Scotland with nae money.
      Go on Jim, go on.
      Choobs doesn’t cover it.
      Roll on the 59!

    89. Dougie McLaren says:

      Not so much of a

      “thanks for the memories” (Max Bygraves)

      but a

      “get out of my life why don’t you” (Supremes)

      I’d like to see margret curan’s face reading this when she does her sharing of resources and she sees no difference between a granny in Dundee and a granny in Doncaster. News for maggie, jim and gordon is her labour colleagues in England do, what’s more they couldn’t give flying fox what happens in Scotland.

      My cheery wee song for labour is that “breaking up is hard to do” (north britsh Labour Party 2015)

    90. Alastair says:

      Scottish Sun backs SNP.

    91. K1 says:

      I’m in moderation for my comment too: This stuff is beginning to get right up my f***in nose.

      ‘Why have you made no attempt to show any basic understanding of ‘how’ the Barnett formula actually works?

      The monies allocated relate directlly to the devolved functions of each of the respective countries.

      So, Scotland has many more devolved functions than all other areas in the UK. When adjustments are made by the UK parliament to any area of policy where there is a corresponding devolved function, it affects the monies of the block grants allocated to each country with those devolved functions.

      If you are suggesting ‘removal’ of Barnett, then you are implying Full Fiscal Automony, which the entire Labour message over the last severall weeks in Scotland has been viscerally fighting against, and even if it did support it, the UK parliament would have to vote for it! And that’s never going to happen, because not only does London labour not support it neither do the Conservative. Given that the numbers of MP’s in England far outweigh Scotland, on any vote, a proposed FFA vote would fail…utterly.

      So how do you suggest Scotland funds itself?

      I simply don’t understand why such divisive and blatantly ridiculous arguments are being put forward by anyone in Labour. You are advocating a ‘scorched earth’ policy in Scotland simply because the outcome may not go your way. And as others have intimated, absolutely reneging on what Brown was guaranteeing and the Smith commission stregnthened in its report; that the Barnett formula would remain.

      It isn’t in the gift of Labour to treat Scotland this way just because they are not getting their way. It’s people who are voting, you are inciting a form of apartheid here…why on earth can’t you SEE this?

      Why don’t you look to the reasons why this is happening in Scotland?

      This article shows a complete dearth of any basic human decency and principle. Are you a Tory? I can’t actually believe someone from the ‘left’ wrote this.

      ***walks away, shaking head*** at the combined audacity and paucity of the argument contained within this piece. Talk about nasty.’

    92. MoJo says:

      Scottish Sun just came out in favour of SNP, with English edition pro Tory….

    93. DaveDee says:

      Jim Murphy interview just started on STV

    94. call me dave says:

      Dim Jim V Bernard

    95. Robert Peffers says:

      @Giesabrek says: 29 April, 2015 at 8:54 pm:

      “Well, apart from the glaring omission that Scotland contributes more per head than most of the rest of the UK which addresses the difference in the Barnett formula, I kinda agree with the thrust of this article.”

      Nah! Giesabrek, You miss the most important bit. Yes the Scots per capita GDP is higher than both England & the UK(basically the same thing), but the real problem is Barnett’s formula pays extra as its the formula that calculates the funding for the devolved functions that only three countries of the four get

      When the proper functioning of the Barnett Formula is known it becomes clear that the way the entire United Kingdom is funded insures no country actually gets more per capita funding than any other country.

      The differences are explained away when it is realise they are due to each particular country having a different range of devolved functions and England has none.

      In fact Barnett’s formula gives a larger per capita block grant to N.I. as N.I. has the most devolved functions. Next comes Scotland followed by Wales and England, by getting all functions provided by United Kingdom directly by United Kingdom Ministries, gets least.

      Ergo – Barnett’s Formula devolves the cash previously used by the United Kingdom Ministries to provide the function now devolved to N.I. Scotland & Wales from the United Kingdom Ministries. In fact, if properly run the Barnett Formula would be strictly fair.

      What makes it unfair is that many things that should be funded by a United Kingdom Ministry in England, (and particularly in London), are NOT funded by a United Kingdom Ministry. For if the United Kingdom cuts or increases a UK ministries funding then that triggers a Barnett Consequential and a plus or minus in the other countries Block Grants.

      So when they fund, for example, the London Cross-Rail directly from another source the N.Irish, Scots and Welsh taxpayers contribute to that funding but there are no positive Barnett Consequentials.

      So what of HS Rail Links, New London Sewerage systems, Chunnels, Domes, Olympics, National Galleries, Museums, Theatres, Ballets, Opera and God alone knows what else we pay towards but get no benefits back from? Not to mention we must fund our own versions from within the Block Grant?

      So Now do you see why a removal of the Barnett Formula can only happen in one of four ways?

      #1 – Take away Barnett and also the devolved functions and parliaments that are funded by Barnett. That’s rescind Devolution.
      #2 – Provide a new,(and less easy to skim stuff of to England/London), formula.
      #3 – Full Fiscal autonomy (real FFA).
      #4 – Independence for all four countries.

      The problems of the first three solutions are that they beggar the question of why is England not a devolve parliament but doubled up as the UK parliament. For that is the sole reason the UK system is a total cock-up.

    96. desimond says:

      Jim on Scotland Tonight..he continues to rant on and on and on

      Its like his campaign is sponsored by Nytol

      Still calling cuts savings…does his barber give him a hair saving.

      gaha..he just said its Bernards choice if he wants to call them savings

    97. Grouse Beater says:

      Am beginning to think Murphy is a drone activated by Labour to seek out SNP insurgents – what an insincere bore!

    98. HandandShrimp says:

      The Sun likes to back the winner so I guess its decision to back the SNP in Scotland is no great surprise given the polls and that its main rival backs Labour. However, it is a bit of a gamble to back Dave in England. The Tory campaign is awful and Ed might still end up in No 10.

      I don’t trust the Sun (that said trust in the press generally is at a premium)

    99. Triangular Ears says:

      O/T: Anyone notice Jackie Bird’s little dig there a few minutes ago?

      She reported how the Scottish Sun has come out in support for the SNP, but then curiously said “The English edition is supporting the Conservatives”.

      So there’s a nice wee ‘Tartan Tory’ reminder for everyone there. The only time the BBC highlights the difference between the editions of newspapers is when it’s to get a puerile dig in the SNP.

    100. call me dave says:

      Bernard 1 – Jim 0 tuition fees.

      In England £44,000 of debt per student on average. Jim voted for tuition fees for England. Why?

      Jim’s answer, the system is different in Scotland. DOH!

      Jim’s initial dulcet tones getting more strident already.

    101. Democracy Reborn says:

      That’ll be ‘pooling and sharing’ down the toilet, then.

      Has anyone told Hothersall, Farquharson, Gardham, Carroll, Clegg, McColm, Torrance….?

    102. desimond says:

      This is beautufully nowwaiting for interuptioner Jim to say “Oh Bernard fuck off fuck off fuck off!”

    103. Edward says:

      Love it when Murphy spouts that the Mansion tax , taxing London mansions will pay for Scottish Health

      Where as in England, Milliband is saying that the Mansion tax is for English Health services

      Think Murphy is an idiot thinking the money is going to stretch that far

    104. Chic McGregor says:

      Sorry, just gone apoplectic at Murphy on just now with Ponsonby.

      He just lauded zero tuition fees in Scotland and claimed that for Scottish Labour.

      Whit!!! The man who personally pulled the ladder up on tuition fees with the same two hands he is waving in Bernard’s face when he was president of the NUS?

      Fuck me, that takes the absolute biscuit.

      What is it with that c***?

      Is it revenge for him failing his exams three times and leaving with no degree?

      Has he no concept of honesty or decency?

      Sorry, sorry, sorry

      I’ll just punch the wall

    105. desimond says:

      There will be cuts of some amount at some time but it “aw depends”

      Get that on a billboard

    106. desimond says:

      Bernard is now being interviewed by a “ah know ur game” Murphy

      Bernard pulls him up about FFA and Jim smirks…he is truly horrible

    107. Alex says:

      Just give us full control – this is OUR money
      Stop your puerile playing around – don’t be so greedy
      Doesn’t matter what you call it, Full Autonomy
      Whatever London thinks of us, it’s our economy
      And whatever way you shake it, whatever threats you make
      Political change is on the way to make the establishment quake
      Accounting Unit finished, branch office now is closed
      The Feeble Fifty on their way, Labour is deposed
      Barnett Funding, Barnett Model, it matters not its name
      Barnett consequential, full potential, threats the only game
      Bounding Boris once remarked spend your pound down south
      Well, my little Tory friend, it’s time to shut your mouth
      For this unfinished business, we’ll take our chances now
      And make the Brown One sorry that he LIED about his ‘Vow’
      For this is Scotland and we will now deliver on our pledge
      To bring progressive politics to fresh and keen new edge
      You wanted us to be strong voice, you oozed fake goodwill
      So sit back and enjoy the ride – it’s going to be a thrill!

    108. John Boyes says:

      Talk about Teflon? Bernard Ponsonby appears to be failing badly to pin down slimy Jim.Really disappointing.

    109. DerekM says:

      sorry but i could not finish it, i got so far and thought man has this guy been at Jim`s glue bag ,its like that other numpty that thinks English independence is just the thing to sort out us Scots,but hey if they want to go for it who are we to try and stop them lol

      Do your homework slaberite dunce cap for you.

    110. call me dave says:

      Seriously worried that Jim will lose it and give Bernard a doing.

      Twice now Jim has sneered at Bernard’s questions, he doesn’t like and suggests that they have a vile purpose…Aye Jim that’s his job.

      Exposed as not fit for purpose.
      Maybe Bernard will nut Jim first!

    111. Free Scotland says:

      The STV bouncers will be chucking Jim Murphy out any minute now. And when he hits the pavement, the men in white coats will be taking him away in a wee yellow van.

    112. desimond says:

      Can a working class family have Generational Unemployment?

      Isnt that non working class family?

    113. desimond says:

      Whats that wobbly heid smirk all about

      Biggest party…snp bad….the guys just an autobot

    114. Robert Peffers says:

      @BJ says: 29 April, 2015 at 8:57 pm:

      “Will be interesting to see how Ulster deals with this this issue when they are told the English are calling on Westminster to scrap the Barnett Formula. I would envisage two words. F… Off!

      Aaaargh! For crying out, BJ, the whole functioning of the Barnett Formula is to insure that, allowing for the different levels of devolved functions. the actual per capita funding is identical.

      The per capita difference is due to the per capita difference in the vale to the English of the functions they get from UK Ministries that the other countries get from devolved parliaments.

      As the three devolved parliaments have different devolved function then the per capita funding reflect that difference. I’m just listening to that numptie Murphy right this minute claiming the Scots get extra and he’s either a consummate liar or a right stupid idiot.

    115. Aceldo Atthis says:

      I read that article on the Labour Uncut website. They sound sore and jilted. Pour souls.

      English politics is just rancid, even more rancid than American politics. As Frankie Boyle put it, in terms of choice;

      They are basically voting on what position they will be in when they get shafted, with the only difference being the Tories will deduct the price of cable-ties from their wages…

      At least the Americans don’t have UKIP and overt racism in the mainstream political arena.

      What the hell happened to the left down there? Were they disappeared?

      I won’t be investing. I’m out.

    116. K1 says:

      Jim Murphy is a liar, David Cameron did not prevent Labour forming a coalition with the LibDems. Libdems wanted Brown gone to seal the deal…he wouldn’t go. Ergo Labour walked away in 2010.

    117. desimond says:

      Bernard now bored with this idiot.

      Jim you cant be serious about doing 2 jobs?

      SNP bad!!


    118. desimond says:

      Bernard resorts to “Mr Murphy”

      The Rev and Cartoon guys must be wetting himself at “The Underdog”

    119. call me dave says:

      He’s raving now ‘A cry of pish reverberates round Scotland’

      Jim ‘two jobs’ Murphy but maybe none!

    120. boris says:

      The Barnett formula keeps surfacing, offered by those who wish to retain the UK as an example of on-going good-will towards the poor peoples of Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland by Westminster governments. But is it?

      At the time the formula was compiled and agreed the methodology used assumed total annual income to the UK was gathered from the entity that was the UK, (no distinguishing source of income.)

      It was decided that the formula would favour the three smallest nations since there was good reason to believe their needs were greater than England.

      The entire arrangement was turned on it’s head in 1980 when oil started to flow from the North Sea. This transformed Scotlands financial input to the UK coffers overnight providing the Westminster governments with riches beyond it’s wildest dreams.

      The windfall has been a cash cow for the UK for 35 years. milked wisely, as advanced by the SNP, the additional finance could have enhanced all parts of the Uk without need, over time for any Barnett formula financial distribution.

      But Thatcher decided Scotland’s new found wealth would be taken to the UK Treasury and distributed from there by herself. She effectively neutered Scotland who had no idea just how much money was flowing into Thatchers purse.

      Still, the message to Scotland was, Westminster is providing you with more money than you are inputting.

      Further measures were taken by Westminster removing all forms of heavy industry from Scotland. Coal, steel, Commercial Shipbuilding, Car Manufacturing, anything of significance was removed from Scotland, and transferred to England & Wales leaving only oil & gas in place. Overnight the economy of Scotland was brutally reduced then converted into a service economy, tied to the City of London and it’s corrupt centralised financial systems.

      The effects of the foregoing are to be seen in Scotland.

      Aberdeen & North East, including the Northern Isles. Oil & Gas has ensured a very good quality of life.

      Edinburgh & South East Scotland.(except the coalfields) Financial services, tied to London has ensured a good quality of life.

      Glasgow & The West of Scotland: Industry destroyed. Shipbuilding on the clyde tied to Ministry of Defence contracts sustaining a workforce reduced by 95% since 1980.

      About two thirds of Scotland’s population are still suffering the effects of Thatchers changes perpetuated and maintained by successive Westminster governments

      FFA devolved over the lifetime of the next Westminster parliament could be achieved without undue difficulty to Scotland.

      Early moves could be made to re-establish commercial shipbuilding in the Clyde, (the leisure industry is crying out for bigger and better cruise liners.

      Car manufacturing could be attracted to Scotland.

      Coal mining could be re-started so that power stations could be supplied with clean Scottish coal not the coal being imported from South America dug from the ground by slave labour involving children as young as 9yo.

      Scotland would have nothing to fear from a withdrawal of the Barnett Formula.

    121. desimond says:

      “With a week to go we arent even halfway”

      WTF is that man on?

    122. Sinky says:

      Murphy struggling to answer question about aiming to become the part time First Minister of Scotland.

      That’s how highly Labour MPs think about Scottish Parliament.

    123. desimond says:

      Tena Lady needed for Libby “Jim is so Good” from The Guardian

    124. Foonurt says:

      Kushies kin enn thurr drouth fae waatturr, haudin thurr heid doon. Bit ithurr burds cannae, huvin tae haud thurr heid abin in tultitt.

      Mon thaa purge.

    125. thedogphilosopher says:

      Hey Jim, your Branch Unit(ed) team is going into liquidation!

    126. call me dave says:

      Jim’s footie team…FGS!

      Bernard’s fed up with Jim. Scotland is not amused. Dreadful!

      Vague Jim.

    127. Sinky says:

      Murphy also lied about Alex Salmond and two jobs as Alex Salmond was not First Minister at the time.

    128. Dumb Unicorn says:

      Sometimes, Jim Murphy makes me laugh, but probably for entirely the wrong reasons.

      I have no idea what he’s actually trying to say, he just rambles on in disconnected soundbites….. “blah blah blah, SNP Bad, blah blah blah, Immovable Force, blah blah blah” – Wait, what? Immovable Force? What’s that then Jim?

      Wonder if he’s got any Unstoppable Objects up his sleeve.

    129. Grouse Beater says:

      First call for Murphy to resign after the election spotted on the horizon!!!

      A great quotation:

      “He was promoted because as a Westminster politician he understood Scotland’s problems but he didn’t understand he is part of the problem.”

    130. Training Day says:

      Softball stuff from Ponsonby. Murphy allowed to get away with blatant lies on tuition fees.

      Murphy still abject though.

    131. dakk says:

      I thought it was common knowledge that the editor of the Scottish Sun was a supporter of SNP,though is constrained by Murdoch as to the extent of his backing.

      Certainly, two Scot Sun journalists I know told me this around the time of the referendum.

    132. Chic McGregor says:

      Heard that Grouse Beater.

      His Et Tu Brutus moment and we are still a week away from the Stygian Stables clear out.

      Aplogies for the mixed Greco-Roman metaphor.

    133. Bill Hume says:

      I read it.. .but…..I haven’t read all the previous posts, so if anyone has expressed this sentiment before me, I apologise.

      Fuck the lot of them.

    134. Chic McGregor says:

      Scottish Sun support the only neg. of the day.

    135. K1 says:

      I note that my moderated comment has now vanished from that labour uncut site…says it all. Typical Labour behaviour; Not Listening, Not Learning, Not Democratic.

    136. thedogphilosopher says:

      @ Grouse Beater

      That quote sounds like something Master Po would say to Grasshopper!

    137. Chic McGregor says:

      As pointed out earlier Sinky.

      Salmond had significant constituent overlap in both constituencies, donated one salary to charity and resigned his Westminster seat at the first opportunity.

      In effect, they were getting two for the price of one.

    138. Marcia says:

      I would rather have the support of the Scot Sun instead of it attacking the SNP. It will do more good than harm. Labour would have wanted their endorsement. Tough!

    139. heedtracker says:

      “As Alistair Darling has said, in our small island we have more in common than divides us. I believe that’s the view of the majority of the United Kingdom.”

      Quotes Ms Cooper and now what do we have in common? SLabour want to scrap Barnett and desperately pleading tory boy world to vote tactically and save our small island.

      Why is this always a small island for the red and blue tories anyway. Its a fcuking enormous island.

    140. katherine hamilton says:

      Bernard missed a trick on FFA. When pushing Jimbob on the fact him, Millipede, Cameron, Clegg etc are saying “it’s not gonnae happen” he should have said –
      So Jimbob, if silly numbers of Scots vote for a party that wants FFA, and Westminster says NAW!! in totality, where does that leave the Union? Scots irrelevant again?

    141. Stoker says:

      @ StevieMcB (9.48pm).
      Re: The Knives are out for Murphy.

      I just read that Torygraph archived article you linked to and noticed that there was not one single credited quote.
      All the so-called quotes are from nameless sources.

      There may be some truth in the article but i’m inclined to think its more a case of Torygraph click bait mischief making.

      At least you had the savvy to archive the link, well done.

    142. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      That Libby from the Guardian was obviously watching a different interview, in a galaxy far, far, away, if she actually believed that the sMurph acquitted himself.

      What I found blatant was sMurph’s body language when Ponsonby quizzed him about the ‘two jobs’ scenario. The last time I saw anyone so stressed was – when? I’ve never seen anyone so stressed on live TV.

      He knew he’d been rumbled.

      Onnyhoo, why has nobody commented on my post about the constitutional crisis at 9.40pm? Is it less important than sMurph’s televisual performance?

    143. Tam Jardine says:

      Robert Peffers

      Very interesting post – Barnett can’t have been conceived in those terms surely as it predates the devolved parliaments. I have always found it perfectly straightforward to think in terms of the cost of services being higher to deliver in sparsely populated Scotland and across the water in Northern Ireland.

      Strange wiki entry seems to point towards an incorrect population ratio calculation that has never been corrected over the years but I suspect that is total shite. I would be keen to get your take on it:

      In the section titled ‘how the formula works’

    144. Robert Peffers says:

      @Chris says: 29 April, 2015 at 8:57 pm:

      “I know it’s been said many, many times, but I just cannot understand why, if Scotland is seen as such a drain on rUK, Scottish Independence must be prevented at all costs.”

      I’m going to state something here that to old hands will be obvious but may not have occurred to newer guys and gals or those not really Political geeks.

      What do you think happens to the running of the country when the parliament goes into election mode? MP’s are no longer MPs and the country goes on without them.?

      The answer is the country is actually run by the Civil Service. Now the numpties in the various political parties are mainly just division Lobby fodder to be whipped through the lobby to support or oppose the government. They mainly haven’t a clue what things like the Barnett Formula actually are meant to do.

      If you were paying attention you would know that even before the Barnett Formula began to do its actual proper function the numpties were moaning it was unfair to England. Fact is the formula was in place before devolution began but was being used to rebalance the existing inequalities in per capita funding.

      It only actually started to do its proper job when devolution began. So every now and again there have been motions by numpties to stop the Barnett Formula but as the actual function is to assure that the actual per capita funding should be equal throughout the united Kingdom that is proof indeed those numpties are ignorant of what they are doing.

      What then happens with these Westminster motions is that the Civil Service tell the PM and Cabinet that they cannot remove Barnett without also removing devolution and that this will end the United Kingdom and the lobby fodder get whipped through the voting lobby and the bill fails to become an Act of Parliament.

      As I said at the start – who actually runs the UK? Governments can fall with a vote of no confidence but the governance of the UK rolls on even after a new lot arrive in power. Think about it. After an election a new party with no experience of government takes up office and new ministers take over the ministries apparently seamlessly.

    145. call me dave says:

      “When you can snatch the pebble from my hand, it will be time for you to leave.”

      — Master Kan, Kung Fu
      Jim can leave right now..’he is a big part of the problem’

      I said about XXX threads ago that the only leader standing after this is all over will be

      Sturgeon and in Scotland Ruthie. (Miliband may survive now in UK)

      On the way out shortly

      Cameron; Clegg and in Scotland Murphy & Wullie 🙂

    146. Albamac says:


      Some of you may have read my earlier comments on Ian Smart’s tweets.

      I hadn’t heard from Police Scotland for a couple of days so I contacted them again, asking for an update on my initial query. I didn’t receive a reply by email but, while I was out this afternoon, police officers called at my home. This evening I received an email from a sergeant at my local police station, asking me to contact him by phone. I did so, soon afterwards, and although he said that, based on the my description of Smart’s remarks, he didn’t think any law was broken, he asked me to produce print-outs of what I had and bring them to the office so that they could examine them in more detail.

      I’ll do that tomorrow. It’s not far away, but it’s too far for me to walk without very unpleasant consequences. Last week I plodded down to my local shop, and collapsed against the shelves. I recovered and got home thanks to the kindness of the manager and staff. I’m not well enough for this sort of stuff, but I’ve started so I’ll have to see it through because I think it’s the right thing to do.

      It may have helped if I’d known that others who found his remarks distressing had joined me in voicing their concerns to the authorities. I was particularly surprised that neither Aamer Anwar’s office nor the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities offered advice or comment and neither saw fit to grant me the common courtesy of acknowledging my emails.

      So, all in all, a pretty depressing episode, regardless of the outcome.

    147. We Alex says:

      Not long home from canvassing, via pub of course.

      Labour in same area but didn’t stay long. Hardly surprising, it was 70% SNP in a “Labour stronghold”.

      no wonder Murphy is all over the place, he is being steamrollered and can do nothing about it.

    148. Thepnr says:

      Watched, not impressed. Ponsonby missed too many opportunities to call Murphy on the “biggest party” blather.

      Also when he was staunchly defending the Barnett Formula when didn’t Ponsonby quote this very article from Labour uncut to him. I’ll bet he read it before coming on.

      Did anybody else notice that when Murphy was answering a question his eyes appeared to move in opposite directions?
      I do mean opposite like one eyeball goes left while the other goes right. Never noticed that before.

      They certainly failed to address the interviewer.

    149. Cadogan Enright says:

      @Chic McGregor 10.47

      by my estimate thats 7 outright lies Murphy has told on Radio and TV today

      I think the Rev should do a special on it

    150. call me dave says:

      @Dumb Unicorn

      “Wonder if he’s got any Unstoppable Objects up his sleeve”.

      🙂 Not any rabbits or aces anyway, only jokers.

      Is there nobody who can rid us of this turbulent Jim? …asks Ed

      Only the electors in East Renfrewshire, bless them.

      Bernard still banging his head against the studio wall…asking “is that **@@## gone yet”!!

    151. BJ says:

      Robert Peffers says:
      29 April, 2015 at 10:57 pm
      @BJ says: 29 April, 2015 at 8:57 pm:

      Aaaargh! For crying out, BJ,

      Robert I was being mischievous with the post. I’m getting a bit fed up with the idea held by some that only Scotland benefits from this. I bet there are many who have no idea how it works and to be honest I only have a basic knowledge of it. Just ignore me, I’m getting anxious and wishing it was next Thursday/Friday.

      Jim was his usual pushy self tonight. It’s as if the more he talks someone/anyone? will listen and not realise it’s all guff. I thought Bernard was a bit soft allowing him to rattle on and ignore the questions asked. He was answering questions that hadn’t been asked.

      Must be where K Dugdale picked up the habit

    152. Edulis says:

      I see that the Irish economy grew by 4.8% last year and is forecast to increase this in 2015/16, compared to the ‘fastest growing economy’ in the G7 which could only manage 0.3% in the first quarter of this year. Osborne must be burying his head in a towel while Smurph has gone strangely silent.

    153. dakk says:

      The backing of the Sun could be useful in reinforcing some ex Slab waverers towards SNP or even converting some soft Labour laggards.

      Most people like to feel at least a wee bit main stream orthodox sometimes.

      Viva La MSM 🙂

    154. GrahamB says:

      Well, I thought Bernard was getting pretty pissed off with Murphy tonight and after listening this morning, against my usual judgement, to Kaye with an ‘e’ when she was not giving him the usual cooshy time I suspect they have fallen out with Jim.

      The Labour-leaning interviwers must be starting to blame him, correctly in my opinion, for Labour’s dismal decline and they’re not waiting until May 8th to start the post-mortem.

      Tonight’s performance must have pushed his personal and party ratings even further down.

    155. Grouse Beater says:

      Caesar!mac: Some of you may have read my earlier comments on Ian Smart’s tweets.

      You have my admiration. 🙂

      Watch out for police taking the lazy route out. The local Bobby is often wrong as right in interpretation of the law as it affects incitement to racism.

    156. Bob Sinclair says:

      For all those expecting Mutphy to pull a rabbit out a hat, he couldn’t even pull a hair out his arse.

    157. Robert Peffers says:

      @Dr Jim says: 29 April, 2015 at 9:05 pm:

      “They think the Barnet formula is some sort of English Piggy Bank they dole out money from.”

      What’s even more laughable, Dr Jim, is that there is actually no such thing as actual English Funding nor English Revenue. Both are just accounting functions. We all pay the exact same tax, according to the same tax rules, to the same Treasury. It is thus United Kingdom Tax and United Kingdom funds.

      That is why Barnett’s Formula must be in place. What they used the Formula for to begin with was to rebalance the funds as the various Secretaries of State, Scotland, Wales and N.I. used to argue in Cabinet for funding. Best arguer got more.

      Then after devolution actually began the formula began to do its real job and by then there was no English funding for England got funded as the United Kingdom, (I’m over simplifying here for example the English Local authorities get their main funding towards running English councils directly from the Treasury. In the devolved countries the main funding for councils comes, not from council tax, but from the devolved administrations.

      This is the basis for the average UK per capita funding. Then the rest of the average English per capita funding comes directly in services provided by the UK ministries and the Barnett Formula calculates the devolved countries per capita funding according to the value the English get in services from UK ministries.

      So never mind that there is no such thing as actual English tax and no such thing as actual English funding how can you expect these numpties to understand what’s actually happening when the whole bloody clampamphrie o them cannot distinguish between country and kingdom or Britain, Great Britain, UK or England,

      Listen to the last UK prime minister and he is totally confused by those terms and uses then interchangeably one for the other.

    158. Kevin Evans says:

      Where do you stay albamac – I’ll give ya a lift in my car if it helps

    159. Charles Edward says:

      “The Englishman is a rabid nationalist. They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world … When you hear the English talk of this war you sometimes almost want them to lose it to show them how things are. They have the greatest contempt for the continent in general and for the French in particular. They didn’t like the French before the defeat … Since the defeat, they have the greatest contempt for the French Army … England first. This slogan is taken for granted by the English people as a whole. To lose their empire would be the worst possible humiliation.”

      These words belong to a refugee who came to London in 1940.
      He helped his Dad salvage furniture from blitzed buildings and found the opportunity to eventually educate himself to a level where he had books published. He’s buried in Highgate cemetery not far from a guy that wrote about ‘poverty in the midst of plenty’.
      He had deep socialist beliefs which led him to abandon the Labour party in the 1960s.

      Labour wishes today it could be that viable alternative.
      Good luck to them down South, but here in Scotland we are tired of the phony double talk.
      I believe we have found our viable alternative in the SNP.
      This wake up call is for everyone to Lands end.
      Who’s representing you?

      The young man quoted above was Ralph Miliband.
      There is no wish in this post to stir foul sentiment, but the identity of the confused UK needs ironing out. Our Leaders should be leading the way.
      Great article on Bella about this jingo jangling and the messy fallout. We need progressive change here.

      I’d start with compulsory Shinty in all Scottish schools. Too far?

    160. thedogphilosopher says:

      @ Robert Peffers

      Good post on who actually runs the country. I’m not a political geek as you say, but I do remember watching Yes, Minister back in ye olden thymes.

      Also tonight, loved Murphy’s Care Home dance routine and Ruthie with that big gun between her legs. You couldn’t make this shit up.

    161. chris kilby says:

      What. The. FUCK!?!

    162. dakk says:

      Caesar!mac 11.31

      Did’nt see your earlier posts,but I offer my thanks for your efforts in pursuing the Smart issue.

      Most people,myself included tend to take the path of least resistance and leave it to others like yourself to do the dirty work.


    163. stephen says:

      Ponsonby didn’t really have to do anything on Scotland tonight,murphy digging his own grave.he is drowning in a sea of his own pish,and no one will throw him a life belt.

    164. Robert Peffers says:

      @Rock says: 29 April, 2015 at 9:35 pm:

      “Where does South Britain get the money to subsidise us?

      I thought it had a massive debt

      And thereby hangs another fine tale/tail.

      Who holds the debt? Well for starters the Government issues Government Bonds, (Gilts), (or is that, cough! Guilts). The main buyer of these gilts is the Bank of England. Then the BofE does Quantitative Easing. In effect it prints money to the value of the gilts and gives it to the Treasury. What a cunning stunt.

      Of course the holder of the gilts gets interest on them or a fixed sum when the holder redeems them. Oh! Wait! Didn’t the BofE, (wholly owned by the UK taxpayer), give the gilts back to the Treasury? Ooh! A real cunning stunt.

      So who loses out? Err! The poor, (and I do mean poor), buggers who see the value of their actual income suffer inflation as the rich get ever richer and the poor keep getting poorer. Sawricht, but! For there’s always the food banks.


    165. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      Sorry folk, I just cannot watch or listen to Jim Murphy anymore – one of the benefits I suppose of having no TV licence.

      Here is a real politician who is worth listening to…

      Posted before but worth listening to again in case you have not seen it.

      If you have watch it again – it will stop you having Murphy nightmares.

      Nite nite.

    166. Rubbertoe says:

      Dear dear, ‘rats’ and ‘sinking ship’ come to mind here. Wasn’t it not that long ago Labour were a party for the Scottish people? Now they are ready to set Scotland adrift. How many people ‘Darn Sarf’ actually understand how Barnett works?
      Not many, I’ll guess.

    167. Capella says:

      @ Caesar!mac
      Good luck with your effort to get redress for the Ian Smart farago. At least the police have turned out and shown willing. More power to your elbow.
      @ Charles Edward
      Good quote from Ralph Miliband. The English chattering classes seem to have no awareness of their own nationalism. In fact I have heard them on radio chat congratulating themselves for being completely free of it (unlike other races!) Bizarre.

      I don’t know about making anything compulsory but we do need to nurture our own cultural heritage. Sadly, Rikki Ross has been sidelined to a Tuesday night on Radio Scotland and whatever happened to Mary Ann Kennedy’s Celtic Connections on radio 3? Oh for a decent broadcaster in this country. Are we uniquely deprived on that score?

    168. Malcontent says:

      Please do it, Ed!!!
      FFA is all about being a grown up Country. Like every other nation on the globe (especially the UK) bad years mean increased borrowings, good years mean defecit reduction.
      Over the last 30 years Scotland has been a significant net contributor to the UK.
      Oil will rise and there is still lots of it. And oil is a bonus, remember.
      The “Too wee” argument is dead. FFA would kill the “Too Poor”.
      The third “Too” doesnt merit a mention.

    169. Dr Jim says:

      Maybe that startup £1600 pound for every kid leaving school that Murphy promised is their own wee personal share of Barnett money and then it runs out when they grow up and we’re all square (Aw c’mon it’s every bit as sensible as anybody else’s drivel)

      I’m getting quite old and don’t have much money so I wonder if I can have some Barnett for a new car
      Does this mean if they don’t give any Barnett to Northern Ireland they won’t have any money to buy any bombs to threaten to blow people up with if they don’t get any Barnett money

      Where do they keep it we could send in the guys who did that big Heist of the safety deposit boxes and just nick it

      Is there anybody out there who still can’t figure it out
      can I just recommend “Peffers” Marvel Man of explanations
      who has Splained this a million times Lucy

    170. Albamac says:

      @ Kevin Evans

      I’m in Helensburgh, Kevin. Thanks for your kind offer, but it’s easy enough to phone a taxi.

    171. Albamac says:

      @ dakk

      Most people,myself included tend to take the path of least resistance

      Don’t think I didn’t consider that option. 😉

    172. Albamac says:

      @ Capella

      At least the police have turned out and shown willing

      That’s how I look at it. I think that we have to allow everyone a measure of trust, initially. We can withdraw it if they let us down. If it were otherwise, how would we ever build any mutual respect, rapport or relationship with anyone?

    173. Albamac says:

      @ Grouse Beater

      You have my admiration

      Don’t overdo it, mate! 🙂

      As to the rest, I tend to think the best of people, at first, so I never prejudge. In my experience, jumping to conclusions puts you at a disadvantage.

    174. crazycat says:

      @Mealer at 9.28

      I don’t know about Labour branches that exist on paper but lack office bearers, but I was told last year that the branch in my village had been dissolved by constituency headquarters, without consultation, because it had too few members to be viable.

      This of course means that they can’t send delegates to conference or district meetings, or get any other perks, so they were thoroughly unimpressed; I assume they are now a branch that doesn’t exist on paper, but they were pointedly told that the party still wanted their membership subscriptions.

    175. thoughtsofascot says:

      @ mogabee
      Would scrapping Barnett be a “material change”? Hmm.:D

      If it wasn’t replaced with FFA, then yes it probably would.

    176. donald anderson says:

      Robert Peffers. And don’t forget the City of London and their offshore banker chums who also run the country.

    177. T222Deracha says:

      The article talks about a”Scottish insurgency”. The tone is one of being in a war scenario. They will use this to justify the removal of Scottish democracy, they appear to be losing the plot!.

    178. Dorothy Devine says:

      T222Deracha, is that no why we had wee tubby Ruth looking “Thatcherlike” sitting astride one of HRH’s tanks emblazoned with the union flag ?

      She just looked very silly. Photo op fail I think!

      And ” Dancing with Oldies Murphy” looked pretty silly too!

    179. donald anderson says:

      Dorothy Devine says:
      30 April, 2015 at 8:22 am
      T222Deracha, is that no why we had wee tubby Ruth looking “Thatcherlike” sitting astride one of HRH’s tanks emblazoned with the union flag ?
      She just looked very silly. Photo op fail I think!
      And ” Dancing with Oldies Murphy” looked pretty silly too!

      Fat Basturt Admits she is a Tory.

      Skelator Tory Basturt in denial.

    180. Jim McIntosh says:

      @Dave McEwan Hill

      “FFA/Devo max would be a disaster for Scotland. It certainly would. It would take years to work out and then it would put independence back for a decade or two – or forever”

      I wish you would stop presenting your opinions as facts.

    181. BIll McLean says:

      Dorothy Devine – am I wrong or was the tank also bearing a “Better Together” logo? If so that was way out of order!

    182. tartanarse says:

      Unfortunately, I actually visited this site instead of the archive in order to post my opinion on the subject and am currently awaiting moderation.

      Perhaps it’s the moniker, but it gets on everything else fine. There were no swearwords or insulting messages.

      Odd considering one of the comments was

      “If the Jocks won’t Labour, fuck em”.

      So that’s SNP and Labour out of the window.

    183. tartanarse says:

      Bill, only Better Together soldiers get armour. SNP voting soldiers get issued pea shooters and shorts/flip flops.

      Perhaps a message. BT have all the armed forces at their disposal.

      There are nukes in Scotland though, I suppose they trump tanks, if only we could befriend the Yanks to switch them on for us.

    184. Wilty says:

      @Chris says: 29 April, 2015 at 8:57 pm:
      “I know it’s been said many, many times, but I just cannot understand why, if Scotland is seen as such a drain on rUK, Scottish Independence must be prevented at all costs.”

      I wonder what they would do without oil revenue? I’m not an economist, but I suspect they are currently using it to stave off bankruptcy.

      It would explain the level of dirty tricks brought out to keep us compliant, and in the union.

    185. David says:

      Blimey, the author of the “Uncut” article doesn’t know their Formula from their Reciprocals, do they?

      It is heartening to note, however, that only 2 of the 12 comments totally agree with the article. Others point out flaws regarding the author’s understanding of the NHS, and some point out that London, not Scotland, is the biggest winner under Barnett. Good to know that not all Labour supporters are McTernans.

    186. Angus says:

      The 3 British parties in Scotland look only at one side of the balance sheet, the money going out, but never the money coming in.
      The IFS is very much like the BBC, an institution used to fight Scottish Independence.

    187. Suspect a last ditch attempt at Fear over Hope to rattle the uninformed they can’t be that stupid can they.

    188. William Wallace says:

      Thanks, Rev, for reminding me to feed the hounds. I wouldn’t want them to be completely starved when I let them loose on the next unfortunate Labour canvasser. I would hate it if they didn’t leave enough bits left to send back to Jim Smurphy in a crisp packet…

    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