The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The unconvinced

Posted on July 27, 2015 by

With David Mundell and Ian Murray both having appeared on today’s “Good Morning Scotland” singing the praises of the wonderful Scotland Bill and how it would deliver all a nation could ever dream of, it seems a good time to publish the results of our recent Panelbase poll on the subject.


The nation, it seems, has rather more ambitious dreams.

Just 26% of Scots currently believe the Scotland Bill makes good on the infamous “Vow” the three Unionist party leaders made to voters on the eve of the referendum.

But perhaps more tellingly, well under half of those who voted No feel it lives up to the change that David Cameron, Ed Whatsisname and That Other One pledged would be “faster, safer and better” than anything independence could offer, with almost a quarter prepared to state that it’s falling short.

(As for the 11% of Yes voters who think it does, we can only assume that their view is on the basis of “We knew it promised sod-all, and it’s lived up to that.”)

We can’t say, of course, whether those 24% of No voters care strongly about the matter. For all we know their reasoning might be the same as that we suggested in the paragraph above, or they might be people who’d never have voted Yes anyway, or even some of the 10% or so who tell pollsters they want Holyrood abolished.

But 24% of No voters is a little more than 13% of the indyref electorate. If half of them switched sides in a future vote, it’d be enough to turn the result around.

It’s all very well for Unionists to say “Well, point to anything in The Vow that wasn’t delivered”, but that’s an academic argument. The Vow was indeed a vague and hollow document that promised nothing concrete, but the point is how people feel, and if they feel you’ve cheated them you’re playing a risky game.


The people of Scotland know what they consider to be “Home Rule”, and currently the Scotland Bill looks like falling a very great distance short of that. If it came to it, we wouldn’t like to be the ones trying to sell “Vote No and we’ll give you hunners more powers, honest” again.

Print Friendly

    3 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 27 07 15 17:41

      The unconvinced | Politics Scotland |

    2. 27 07 15 19:17

      The unconvinced | Speymouth

    3. 04 01 16 00:49

      Questions for Yes Voters in Unionist Parties | A Wilderness of Peace

    224 to “The unconvinced”

    1. blackhack says:

      I think that there’s a lot of people out there who now think “Once Bitten Twice Shy”
      Roll on referendum V2

    2. Stoker says:

      2020 vision – Independence.

    3. Doug Daniel says:

      It shows there are people out there to be won over, but that was true before the referendum, when polls showed support for what essentially amounted to “independence”, until you actually called it that.

      We have to tread carefully here. People are a lot braver in polls than they are in the ballot box, and they have a nasty habit of not living up to their own rhetoric, and instead reverting to type.

      The next one is there to be won, but not if we go at it all gung-ho. Ca’ canny.

    4. G H Graham says:

      When I was young, I used to drive my mother’s Clio. Simultaneously, Renault adverts appeared frequently on the telly, to remind viewers how fashionably good their car was.

      But it was made using brittle, Airfix style plastics & boasted panel gaps similar to the space between seats at the cinema. The engine was as fizzy as flat Lucozade & it had all the presence of a cardboard box at a cardboard box factory.

      It was a rubbish.

      The Scotland Bill is the British Government’s updated version of the Clio.

    5. Brian Powell says:

      I seem to remember a figure of 95% Con voters voted No, so presumably they will make up a good chunk of those who think the Scotland Bill is delivering. Though they won’t escape the effect of it not delivering.

      it would have been interesting to see figures by Party.

    6. Al Dossary says:

      Weird, weird figures. 37 people out of 1002 (4%) state that they did not vote yet the official turnout for the referendum was 84.5%.

      Or is it just that those individuals who did not vote are less likely to respond to a pollster calling ?

      How do they actually pick the people who they question ?

    7. Stoker says:

      Unionist liars proclaim “the Vow is being delivered”.

      Who by, Royal Snail?

    8. Al-Stuart says:

      Stuart, a timely article on the Scotland Bill, or as Gordon Brown promised Home Rule.

      I’m just after asking a question along these lines of a Home Rule Referendum in The National (published 25-7-2015) in order to seek views and debate, prior to asking my local SNP branch if we can progress such a manifesto promise.

      Would it be in order to ask fellow Wings Over Scotland readers and contributors if a ‘Home Rule/Full Devolution Referendum’ is something they would support?

      For the sake of reference, here is a copy of the letter from The National

      “Might I ask fellow readers of The National if they share the undernoted idea for inclusion in the SNP Manifesto which is soon to be prepared?

      That is to guarantee a federal devolution referendum if the SNP win a majority in the Holyrood election on May 5 2016. Plus to have in reserve the option of a full independence referendum if any materially important trigger points are breached – such as England voting to leave the EU and Scotland deciding in favour of remaining in the EU.

      I have an absolute wish for independence. However, pragmatism and a gradualist approach has served Scotland reasonably well. The devolution referendum of 1979 took a little longer to evolve than hoped for, but yielded our Holyrood Parliament of 1999. The gentle persuasion of people – many former Labour voters like myself – resulted in sufficient “lending” of their votes to the SNP in 2007 to enable a Scottish SNP government to be formed.

      The masterstroke of the SNP governing Scotland well, meant people like me became permanent SNP voters, and the barnstorming Holyrood majority of 2011 gave evidence to that. The independence referendum of September 18 2014 was an enigma. The day after, so many Scots were utterly downhearted. Who could possibly have imagined seven months later in May 2015 such reversal of public opinion, with 49.7 percent voting for the SNP and 56 SNP MPs being sent down to Westminster.

      The primary reason I am suggesting an SNP manifesto commitment guaranteeing a federal devolution referendum is to legally sort out The Vow. To give Scots a firm say in what should and will happen. To take The Vow and make it come about in full. As opposed to the recent farce at Westminster when the Tory Raj failed to let us have even one amendment to the incontinently watered down Scotland Bill.

      The secondary reason for a federal devolution referendum is we need to persuade No voters that this is a balanced and measured response to the discredited Vow and the broken promises that cling to it. A number of my friends voted No and are, at this time, not inclined to vote for independence, but would vote for federal devolution. I believe if the SNP manifesto promises a referendum on federal devolution, it would win, and handsomely so.

      The thing is, do readers of The National (& WoS readers) think this is a reasonable way forward?”

    9. Breastplate says:

      We should let them know what we think of The Scotland bill by the SNP having Indy2 in the manifesto.

    10. Calum Craig says:

      One of the big problems is that for many no voters, they lost interest in politics on the 19th September. I met one at a family event a couple of weeks ago – young guy in his 30s – who clearly had no idea what had been going on at Westminster since May. When I talked about every amendment to the Scotland Bill being voted down, he looked at my like I was talking Russian. He even said “you know a lot more about politics than me”. “That’s why I voted Yes!!!” I felt like screaming in his face. I didn’t…

    11. Murray McCallum says:

      Whatever the timing of the next referendum, you have to hope that far more people will not blindly accept that the status quo is a safe and risk free option.

    12. One_Scot says:

      Yeah, given what has happened since the referendum, you would have to be really gullible or spineless to vote ‘No’ next time.

    13. Taranaich says:

      40% of No Voters is still 40% too many for me.

      50% of the electorate voted SNP; if you add New Labour’s promises of Home Rule and the Lib Dem’s dreams of Federalism, that makes 81.8% votes for Devo Max. Yet the Tories, a party with only 14.9% support, voted down every single Scotland Bill amendment. New Labour and the Lib Dems abstained from two amendments which could be read as Devo Max.

      One of the polls in the aftermath of the referendum showed the single biggest reason people voted No was because they thought the risks of independence were too great. Not love of the union, not the belief there’d be new powers, not attachment to the pound or the queen – but because the union was the devil they knew.

      The No voters who were willing to give the union one last chance are smaller in number, but as the poll shows, large enough to turn a No into a Yes. The rest of the No vote are either UK till they die, or still consider the UK, horrendous as it is, to be preferable to the worst case scenario independence.

    14. Grouse Beater says:

      Labour and Tories said the SNP were hoodwinking us about independence guaranteeing us a Garden of Eden, but here they are claiming the Smith Commission has tilled the soil and planted the fruit trees, and we have our garden.

      The Vow even throws in a permanent rainbow.

    15. heedtracker says:

      Of course its fraud, a very British fraud. Or its not.

      Prof Smirky here cooked up Smith Commission con and he says, “ok sweaties, you want leftie stuff, we now give you our permission to hike Scotland region taxes to pay for it all, you may thank me now.”

    16. Angry Weegie says:

      To all those urging caution, please remember the old saying “a week is a long time in politics”.

      At the moment, the SNP are on a high in the polls and look likely to retain their majority at Holyrood, but who knows how long that situation will last, especially with the latest series of cuts coming down the line from WM which will have a significant impact on the Scottish block grant.

      With help from the MSM, the SG could easily pick up some of the blame for the problems that will follow and it wouldn’t take too many to believe what the BBC and the press tell them to reduce the support for Indy below 50%.

      To quote another old saying, “strike while the iron is hot”.

    17. Lesley-Anne says:

      Funnily enough I was in Dumfries on Friday and found a wee *ahem* protest type thingy going on. Needless to say I joined. 😉

      All I wanted to do was to ask the *cough* star turn of the protest, one David Mundell, about his thoughts on the link between foodbanks and austerity.

      My second question to him was to be about exactly this … what on earth does he think about the NON existant Scotland Bill that is written on NON existant paper and delivers NON existant powers.

      My third question to him would have been about why he thinks a bill that provides next to NOTHING to Holyrood can be called in any way shape or form as delivery substanial new powers!

      Needless to say I did not get to speak to my M.P. because true to form the we sniveling coniving snake in the grass excuse of a human being slithered out the BACK door and skeedaddled before I got a chance to speak to him. I don’t have any idea why he would do that although there are rumours going round that he got news that I was in the area, perhaps that’s what scared him off! 😀

    18. galamcennalath says:

      There are quite a few deductions to be made in those figures.

      17% of Yes don’t know while 73% of Didn’t Vote now don’t know. That could be taken as a measure political awareness and engagement. Thus 36% of No shows how relatively ignorant of developments they are. That is GOOD because it highlights that a bit of education might shift their position!

      Similarly, 29% not knowing whether it delivers also shows considerable scope for education and conversion. Of course it doesn’t come anywhere near what was implied in their Vow nor to the generally accepted description of Home Rule. Clearly there are people out there who need to get that message.

      60% of No voters are unhappy or unsure. Again, that is a lot of people to work on!

      Hopefully, by Unionists backtracking on promises, the Union’s days are numbered. These figures certainly suggest most voters know this. The target is to translate that failure into Yes votes.

    19. john king says:

      Calum Craig says
      ““That’s why I voted Yes!!!” I felt like screaming in his face. I didn’t…”

      You should have given him the hair-dryer!

    20. Stoker says:

      Al Stuart wrote:
      “Would it be in order to ask fellow Wings Over Scotland readers and contributors if a ‘Home Rule/Full Devolution Referendum’ is something they would support?”

      I wouldn’t. All or nothing.

      Al also wrote:
      “I have an absolute wish for independence. However, pragmatism and a gradualist approach has served Scotland reasonably well. The devolution referendum of 1979 took a little longer to evolve than hoped for, but yielded our Holyrood Parliament of 1999.”

      20-years and you class that as “a little longer”, jeez loueez, i want to see independence before i die and i’m not prepared to play the Unionist game of Drip Drip Dangle Dirt.

      Sorry, Al, can’t ever support anything other than taking what is rightfully ours – full unconditional Scottish independence.

      The longer we leave it the more chance Westminster will bleed us dry and bankrupt us. We must cut the chains ASAP.

    21. Thepnr says:

      “This is Home Rule”

      You’ll give us all your money and we will give some back and tell you what you can spend it on.

      OK Thanks.

    22. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      @Al Dossary,

      Perhaps 96% did vote but only 84.5% were counted?

      I always wondered why the turn-out was so low in the Yes voting areas?

      Just a thought…

    23. Dr Jim says:

      I don’t care if they offer me the power to fly

      See their power see their Arse

      Scotland Bill? Well, wait a wee while to put it together speedily and safely whatever that means
      Then we’ll debate it, and turn down everything you say
      Then we’ll change it completely to the same thing it was in the first place

      Then we’ll send it to the house of Lords to give them a wee shot at changing it
      Then when we get it back we’ll debate it again and promise to make the changes right that the house of Lords got wrong

      By this time we’ll find that it’s not fit for purpose and we’ll go back to talking about a constitutional convention

      Sigh… and by about then we’ll all so be dead of boredom we’ll give up

      British Politics…. If Carlsberg did politics they would definitely be the best Politics in the world

      I’d rather just be a Caveman thanks

    24. heedtracker says:

      So here’s Prof Tomkins telling SNP to put up or shut up. All that’s really interesting about these blue tory unionist con artists, and there are few, is that they all leave out what economic impact raising paye would have in their Scotland region.

      Funny that.

      Prof Smirky’s cunning plan

      “gives them the power to do something about it. In short, they will be able to put our money where their mouths are. They can fill what they perceive to be gaps in public spending on welfare and social security.

      They can create new benefits. They can top-up, for Scots, even those benefits which continue to be reserved to Westminster. And they have the tax powers to pay for it all. This is why the Prime Minister said yesterday that it is finally time for the SNP to put up or shut up.

      At last, we can move the argument on from nationalists’ bleating that they don’t have sufficient powers to a forensic examination of how they choose to use their powers.”

    25. Robert Kerr says:

      Now’s the time, now’s the hour!

      No half measures. Independence.

      Schottland erwache!

    26. john king says:

      Stoker says
      “Sorry, Al, can’t ever support anything other than taking what is rightfully ours – full unconditional Scottish independence.”

      What Stoker says!

    27. Blair paterson says:

      Surley if the vow is not delivered in full then that should be reason enough to trigger a second referendum on independence ,.? Imean you do not have to sit back and accept all they throw at you tell them in no uncertain terms it is either the vow in full or a second referendum

    28. caz-m says:

      As soon as the Tories won the GE, the move to YES was an easy one for thousands who voted NO in the first Indy Ref.

      That will grow once the Tory cuts start to bite after next Apr.

      If the SNP Government can promise to re-instate the majority of Tory cuts in an Independent Scotland, then you are on a vote winner for many more thousands, because these Tory cuts are going to be very painful.

      Offer people hope and they will back you.

    29. woosie says:

      Prof Tomkins repeating the same inane drivel as cokey Osborne; if you’re not happy with your reduced grant, raise income tax!

      Plain political suicide for SNP, and no sane person would consider it. Every time one of these loonies opens their gubs I’m aghast that the msm isn’t ripping them to shreds….well, maybe not as much as I used to be.

      Ref 2 will come, and Yes Movements must put the plain message out to pensioners about their incomes. Forget currency, most don’t care if it’s pounds or zonks. And explain how “better together” has worked out in a few months to all.

      And most of all, remember; A POSTAL VOTE IS A NO VOTE.

    30. ben madigan says:

      @ Al Stuart who suggested a ‘Home Rule/Full Devolution Referendum’

      I honestly don’t think that’s a good idea Al, because I don’t think such a solution could ever work. The UK as we know it is not amenable to federalism/full devolution arrangements. Trying to set them up would cause enormous difficulties.The post below will give you an idea of what I mean. It was written just after the referendum

    31. Lesley-Anne says:

      Al-Stuart says:

      Would it be in order to ask fellow Wings Over Scotland readers and contributors if a ‘Home Rule/Full Devolution Referendum’ is something they would support?

      Sorry Al, as others have said I have had enough of waiting for Westminster to play by the rules. No more nicey nicey in my view. We TAKE what is rightfully ours and was STOLEN from us in 1707.

    32. Macart says:

      Neatly put Rev. 🙂

      As an end recipient of the product, I strongly beg to differ Jackie Baillie and her partner in crime, Gordo the absent. Feck all has been delivered as yet and most certainly not anything that even resembles my understanding of the term Home Rule. Oh and neither Jackie nor Gordo get to determine what Home Rule entails, that would be for the electorate to decide.

      Now if the electorate’s version of Home Rule isn’t acceptable to Westminster, then Westminster’s establishment should just come out from under their rock, grow a spine and say so. Mind you that would change the narrative they’ve been spinning somewhat, now wouldn’t it? At the moment, what we have are politicians desperately evading, dissembling and misleading in a vain attempt to sell a false bill of goods and avoid taking responsibility for a massive falsehood perpetrated against the electorate in a referendum. Twas ever thus.

      Happily since most of us aren’t politicians and don’t have to abide by the parliamentary rules of politico speak I reckon we’re safe enough when we say that Ms Baillie and Gordo are basically lying their asses off.

      Who knew?

    33. Stoker says:

      BBC Reporting Scotland headlines at 6pm on 27 July 2015:

      Top story – The Glasgow bin lorry disaster (understandable!).
      2nd story – The weather (WTF!)

      Apparently there are no other newsworthy stories affecting Scotland more important than the rain according to the BBC Branch Office.

      And they wonder why we want a divorce.

    34. cearc says:



      Full devolution would never happen. We haven’t even got road signs yet.

    35. T.roz says:

      These figures are encouraging for full Indy. They also back up the real reason why the NO vote sneaked it; a section of voters were conned by the vow. It also exposes the poll done a while back asking why people voted no, many said it was the uncertainty. Rubbish! The no vote was made up of union believers and those swung by the vow.

    36. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

      A good question to ask the 24% of NO voters who don’t think it lives up to the promises, is how would they vote if we had another referendum now?

    37. arthur thomson says:

      I can understand why people try to analyse what is going on with the electorate and what might change minds. I can see a value in it in terms of understanding what is happening. But ultimately independence can only come when a sufficient number of the Scots have sufficient self-belief, self-respect and self-confidence to demand it. We have come a very long way towards achieving that and that is truly remarkable. We must not force the issue.

      I appreciate that there is a fear that circumstances may change but I ask you – would you change your mind on independence if things got difficult? No-one who has reached the conclusion that Scotland should be independent will change that view because the wind direction has changed. It is too fundamental for that.

      Most of all we have to make it clear and public that we are unshakable in our perspective and continue to communicate by all our actions that WE will NEVER go away. We have to challenge the unionist perspective at every turn and that is not going to be comfortable for those who have unquestioningly swallowed the unionist view. We have to understand that they will be very irritated and reluctant to accept that they have been deceived and lied to and will try to avoid facing change. But the rationale for change becomes more and more obvious as the truth about Westminster is exposed and the Scottish Government and MP’s are seen to be better. That is the process we are going through and we have to have the patience and resolve to see it through.

      The big breakthrough will come when a sizeable majority of Scotland’s women decide that the time has come to take the risk and embrace the uncertainty of a new, different and potentially better life for their families.

    38. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Hoss Mackintosh at 5.33

      Good point. I wondered that myself

    39. Chic McGregor says:

      “With David Mundell and Ian Murray both having appeared on today’s “Good Morning Scotland” singing the praises of the wonderful Scotland Bill”

      I know what kind of rap that M&M would be singing and it begins with a ‘C’.

    40. Al-Stuart says:

      Hi John/Stoker,

      Apologies, I wasn’t as clear as hoped.

      The proposed Full-Devolution Referendum is in ADDITION to a vote on Independence.

      The key thing here are as, Stuart Campbell heads his article are The Unconvinced.

      I’ve studied the Panelbase information that Stuart has studiously obtained for us here on WoS, and we know the 45% is reasonably solid. But it is The Undecided that we need to move into the yes columns.

      I am proposing an SNP 2016 Manifesto commitment to guarantee a Referendum on Full-Devolution within 24 months of 5th of May 2016 – should the SNP win Holyrood again AND an Independence Referendum when the SNP Conference in September judge it to be appropriate – likely within 2 or 3 years thereafter.

      To be clear, the Scotland Bill has been a farce. It is time to take these powers from Westminster without further delay. NOT await the crumbs from the Tory table.

      Alex Salmond set the gold standard for referenda in Scotland. Win at Holyrood on the promise of specific referendum. Who says it must just be the one? We can have BOTH of these plebiscites. They are NOT mutually exclusive.

      First: we vote on TAKING the powers that were promised to us via an SNP manifesto promise to have a referendum on Full-Devolution (everything except Foreign Affairs & Defence).

      Next: When the powers that be, along with the 105,000 SNP members decide at conference the best timing for the Independence referendum, then that too will happen.

      I am totally scunnered with the threat of Tories scorching Scottish earth, and their transparent plan to blame the SNP government at Holyrood for imminent Westminster Tory austerity.

      If you study the Panelbase detail that Stuart has collated, The Unconvinced WILL vote for Full-Devolution. But at this time it is STILL TOO CLOSE to call on IndyRef2. That is what The Unconvinced are telling us.

      Much though I want Independence, I can read the stats. We can win Full-Devolution very soon.

      With Full-Devolution powers we can repeat what happened with the 1 seat SNP Holyrood majority in 2007. Persuade The Unconvinced to join in and then WIN an Independence Referendum. I reckon within 5 years.

      Job done.


      john king says: 27 July, 2015 at 5:47 pm Stoker says
      “Sorry, Al, can’t ever support anything other than taking what is rightfully ours – full unconditional Scottish independence. What Stoker says!”

    41. IvMoz says:


      Using the BBC’s complaint procedures, I complained about Ian Murray’s lie reported on BBC News & Reporting Scotland regarding his vote on the Welfare Bill.

      I received a reply from the BBC today.

      “Ian Murray voted twice in relation to the Welfare Bill. There was a vote in the commons on a Labour amendment to the bill, which would have seen it effectively derailed. Ian Murray voted for this amendment which is what he meant when he says he voted against the Welfare Bill. In the second vote he abstained which we clearly stated immediately before the clip.

      Our reported Andrew Kerr said “The Shadow Scottish Secretary voted to abandon the whole thing, but then abstained as there are reforms he supports”.

      This was an accurate report in which we explained exactly how Ian Murray voted.”

      So voting for Labour’s amendment equals voting against the Welfare bill according to the BBC. Except he didn’t vote against it. He abstained.


    42. caz-m says:

      Mundell said this morning that no one offered Devo-Max in the Referendum.

      Well during an Alistair Darling interview, Jackie Burd had a name for these new powers,

      “Let’s just call them Devo-Max.”

    43. heedtracker says:

      arthur thomson, but Smith con is designed to weaken, undermine and destabilise the Scottish economy, thereby harming SNP’s electoral chances.

      So what happens next, wait and see. Its not even a very clever unionist stitch up, more a blunt weapon to make everyone but the rich suffer.

      And who takes the blame?

    44. call me dave says:

      I heard him, as well as Ian Murray this morning, and considered that my duty tuning into BBC radio Scotland was done for the day.

      Both calling foul, as it was a once in a lifetime decision.
      Not for me though!

      Guess who? … Mr monotonous

      Since May, meanwhile, an unholy alliance comprising the Conservatives and SNP has made it crystal clear that there will be no let up.

      New Culture Secretary John Whittingdale wants comprehensive reform while the Scottish Government has renewed its call for devolution (i.e. control) of broadcasting in Scotland.

    45. HandandShrimp says:

      If the Vow was about being bitten on the testicles by a funnel web spider then I guess the Vow is being delivered but I doubt many would confuse that with Home Rule.

      I guess what we haven’t seen is what Mundell will be told to cough up in committee stage by Cameron in order to see if he can get his EVEL way through.

      O/T Old Sewell didn’t mince his words on that video of his “night in with the girls of negotiable affection” 🙂

    46. Nana Smith says:

      Independence nothing less. I’m sick and tired of glass half full measures. Sick and tired of being trodden down and our people treated like second class citizens.

      They have almost bled us dry, took our industries, took our oil and now they are taking lives through bedroom taxes and benefit cuts.

      Enough, from me they get no more chances the bloody dirty rotten chancers.

    47. Tinto Chiel says:


      Sorry, AS, federalism is a dead-end which could never work in such an asymmetrical UK. I WANT control of defence and foreign affairs. Independence is so close, I can almost smell it. We just need to pick our time. Ripeness is all.

      The Liberals have ” supported” federalism for over a hundred years. How did that work out?

    48. michael diamond says:

      Aye hoss, i think we all know a lot of yes votes were dumped/ spirited away / got rid of.

    49. Dan Huil says:

      The “vow” was, and is, an insult. Only fools, the feart and narrow-minded unionists believe it, or something, or other, has been delivered. Thankfully it seems more and more people in Scotland see it for what it is: deceitful.

    50. Blair paterson says:

      Mundell and the bbc are on about a second referendum well I would hold it when the Tory austerity measures hit Scotland and. We will see most of the No voters changing to Yes voters .,this is why mundell and the bbc are so anxious to get an answer now before the cuts bite the right to hold a referendum rests with the people of Scotland not one Tory m.p. Or the bbc

    51. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Al-Stuart at 6.35

      Complicated non starter guaranteed to kick independence into the long grass, perhaps for ever

      Why anybody would think that pulling back from our main aim (which we nearly got last year) and demanding less makes any sense whatsoever is beyond me.

      Lots of similar suggestions beginning to appear all over the place. They think we are all daft

    52. Muscleguy says:

      @Hoss Macintosh

      I suspect having campaigned for a Yes here in Dundee that in part the low turnout was a victim of our success here. No voters were complaining they couldn’t open tbeir mouths without being argued down by all and sundry. So some, not in the habit of voting and despite our urgings that every vote counts thought it in the bag.

    53. heedtracker says:

      O/T Old Sewell didn’t mince his words on that video of his “night in with the girls of negotiable affection”

      Its on C4 news now getting soft soaped. Lords reform just too too difficult. Anyway, who on earth would snort coke with two prostitutes and talk politics? A teamGB lord obviously.

    54. galamcennalath says:

      DevoFitForPurpose ( probably best known as Devo Max ) will never ever happen. But as long as it hangs there as a possibility in some people’s minds, it is a big hurdle to independence.

      Remember, we TAKE independence, we must be GIVEN devolution.

      The way to move forward is for Holyrood 2016 to seek a mandate to demand Scotland be given a clearly defined DevoFitForPurpose package as promised in Indyref1. That would be the final carrot offer to maintain the Union. WM won’t consider such negotiations. The stick which should also be on the table is indyRef2. The stick’s use will be inevitable.

      IndyRef2 with DevoMoreThanNothing clearly dead and buried will be totally different next time.

      Remember. Back in 2013 Unionists wouldn’t even discuss DevoMore. “Vote No then we talk”.

      That didn’t last long! Month after month, as Yes increased support, the scope of DevoMore increased until the Vow.

      IndyRef1 began as a clear status quo versus independence. By Sept 2014 it had changed utterly into Home Rule versus independence,

      IndyRef2 will begin and end with DevoFA versus independence.

      It will then come down to a Hope over Fear contest.

    55. Clootie says:

      An old wound opened 🙁

    56. Grouse Beater says:

      In cahoots with neo-liberal economics the entire Labour party snorts cocaine from the belly button of hookers.

    57. Thepnr says:

      @Nana Smith

      You have got it, and I like it. I hope that there are quite a few No voters as angry as you and I.

      The cobbled together Scotland Bill will be lucky to ever see the light of day and has even less chance of satisfying the Scottish people.

      When the penny drops and only then will it be worthwhile fighting another referendum, pausing in between to argue for FFA after the Scotland Bill passes through parliament is a dead end. Far better in my view to show exactly just how little Westminster will yield in providing more powers and to ridicule this whole “home rule” and “most devolved government”.

      Eventually this nonsense will be exposed to the majority and the other 5% we need to cross over to the good guys will know that all avenues have been exhausted other than full Independence.

      The soft No’s need to become as angry at this democratic deficit as you and I already are before they might budge.

      I’m in no hurry and will wait as long as it takes. Meantime stock up on popcorn. Politics in the UK has recently become very interesting.

    58. caz-m says:

      Nana Smith 6.52pm

      Here Here!.

      The frustration is growing.

      The Bullingdon Boys love to see us beg and grovel for crumbs from the masters table.

      This will be the downfall of the Unionists in Scotland.

    59. Dan Huil says:

      @Blair paterson. You’re right. But I think the more everyone sees the greetin’ faces of Mundell and Murray on the EBC, and the more they read Project Fear’s scaremongering reprinted every day in the unionist press… well… to hell with the bloody union!

    60. Ken Waldron says:

      The “Vow” clearly promised one thing and one thing only: A “permanent” parliament. This they are now refusing to deliver.

    61. schrodingers cat says:

      a conditional offer on an indy ref 2 if
      1. westminster doesnt pass full devo max
      2. cameron takes us out of the eu against scotlands wishes

      problems with this is we could find ourselves going for indyref2 before we are ready?

      i agree with nicola though, something needs to change, not sure what, but 4 weeks ago, i thought it might be the eu referendum but i have seen a change in the left with regards to the eu, so im not sure this is it

      2 weeks ago, it didnt look like the labour party was about to comit suicide either

      a week is a long time in politics, let labour make the next move, it may be the break we need. if mundell is pressing for nicola to announce the snp manifesto for 2016, why should we help mundell? lets see what happens with the labour leader election and the blood bath afterwards. the snp should wait until spring conference before commiting themselves

    62. heedtracker says:

      Rancid The Graun puts the boot in from a different angle this evening. Has Libby Carrell/ SLabour’s daily monstering reached Pacific Quay yet?

      SNP privatising everything like what Crash Gordon did says rancid

      “Jackie Baillie, Scottish Labour’s finance spokeswoman, has urged the spending watchdog Audit Scotland to investigate the financial impact of the changes, which have not yet been explained to the Scottish parliament, and the increases in public sector debt involved. She has also tabled questions at Holyrood, urging ministers to provide more details about the costs and impact of the changes.

      “The utter hypocrisy of the Scottish National party has been exposed,” Baillie said. “The SNP government tell anybody who will listen that only they can protect our public services from the hands of private companies yet here we find they are handing over an increasing share of our public estate to the private sector. Yet again they say one thing in public and another in private.”

    63. john king says:

      Heedtracker says
      ” Anyway, who on earth would snort coke with two prostitutes and talk politics? A team GB lord obviously.”

      Oh God of all the times to choke!
      just wait there, I’ll be back. 🙂

    64. heedtracker says:

      Classic The Graun hatchet job from Severin Carrell on SNP, focuses entirely on Aberdeen new by-pass spiralling costs.

      What bettertogether Severin doesn’t mention is why exactly Aberdeen’s by-pass is 40 years too late and/or why it was held up for at least a decade by rich red and blue tory unionists in Aberdeen blocking it.

      So while the UK pumped Scots oil revenues into building England’s modern road infrastructure for the last 40 years, Aberdeen, Dundee, Inverness etc got nothing. And now its all another UKOK stick to beat Scottish independence with. Clever.

    65. Alan Findlay says:

      Why doesn’t The Rev spell out a Scottish Constitution which opens with the assertion that Scotland belongs to the Scots( bits and pieces can be leased but never owned by individuals). Us here on Wings could then discuss it line by line, then invite the country at large to participate in the debate, thereby hopefully creating a consensus that could be included in the 2016 Manifesto. To move forward we have got to impress the ‘No’ lobby with our vision of the future. The politicians are waiting on our instruction, or so they say.

    66. Paul says:

      I kind of agree with Al, but know that devo-max won’t ever be agreed upon. I also know some no voters (and I’m in Dundee!) who would have, and still would vote for FFA/FFR, call it what you will had it been an option last year. I don’t see what’s wrong though, with campaigning for FFA but adding a specific time limit (the end of the current WM term, perhaps) then adding the caveat that there WILL be another indyref in the final year of said parliamentary term if it looks likely that no new powers will be agreed upon. Again :/
      SNP could always, I suppose, put in that if they win over 50% of the vote next year that they have a mandate to discuss the dissolution of the union with WM….

    67. arthur thomson says:

      Heedtracker, I accept entirely that Smith is a con and always was going to be. My point would be that, despite the msm, 50% of the Scottish electorate voted SNP at the GE and the intentions of Westminster will not be lost on them. They will not blame the SNP. The msm will of course pile whatever blame they think will stick onto the SNP and they will claim that ‘members of the public’ agree with them – just as they have always done. But it won’t cut any ice in my view. It will simply confirm how out of touch they are and how deceitful they are. I also believe that every day sees just a few more people understanding and being angry at being assumed to be thick Scottish idiots. When the penny drops their trust in the union and their msm hacks will be lost permanently and they will support independence. That is what has been happening and will continue to happen. As Margo said, some people are just slow learners.

      I repeat that we must be absolutely resolute and patient.

    68. HandandShrimp says:

      Murray is in danger of becoming Mundell’s cheerleader

      disturbing a picture as that is.

    69. Thepnr says:

      There is no doubt and it is fitting that it will be the Tories who finally end the Union. Deservedly so, keep up the good work Cameron, Osbourne, IDS and Mundell.

      You are truly adored in Scotland! Funny isn’t it that most can’t wait to see the back of you?

    70. Finlay says:

      Nana Smith 18:52

      Well said. Reminds me of the words of one of my favourite people when he decided enough was enough:

      We need to make Scotland a fair society and the only way to do that is to do it ourselves through independence. It will never happen so long as Westminster has any influence over the people of Scotland.

    71. Onwards says:

      @Doug Daniel says:
      27 July, 2015 at 4:45 pm

      It shows there are people out there to be won over, but that was true before the referendum, when polls showed support for what essentially amounted to “independence”, until you actually called it that.

      I sometimes think that the problem could be the word ‘independence’ itself.
      It can sound a bit isolationist to many, when in the modern world many links are retained.

      Perhaps a future referendum should be simply on ‘sovereignty’ or ‘Self-Government for Scotland’.

      Maybe with a genuine home rule/federal solution after negotiations.

    72. Grouse Beater says:

      Despite the Referendum result, I’d like to see a committee of suitable constitutional acumen getting on with drawing up a draft Constitution, then opening it for discussion.

      The more we prepare for independence regained the more assume it’s ‘inevitable.’

    73. Grouse Beater says:

      Onwards: I sometimes think that the problem could be the word ‘independence’ itself. It can sound a bit isolationist to many

      I ran that argument several times during the Referendum debate but to no avail. It allowed our opponents to claim us as separatists, when in fact Salmond’s terms were anything but isolationist.

      I still believe it was and is an unfortunate slogan.

      “Full democracy” is better, or as you say, ‘sovereignty regained’.

    74. heedtracker says:

      HandandShrimp says:
      27 July, 2015 at 8:14 pm
      Murray is in danger of becoming Mundell’s cheerleader

      disturbing a picture as that is.

      It is revolting. But so those SUN pictures of a UKOK Lord, that also had a hand in fcuking Scotland, paying not one but two prostitutes to listen to his views on current affairs.

      Or, who goes to prossies, snorts coke off of them and all he can think about is Alex Salmond, Boris Johnson, Bomber Bliar, and David Cameron?!

      I don’t know, rich degenerates just ain’t what they used to be.

    75. Alison Hardie says:

      Lesley-Anne said –
      “Sorry Al, as others have said I have had enough of waiting for Westminster to play by the rules. No more nicey nicey in my view. We TAKE what is rightfully ours and was STOLEN from us in 1707.”

      Couldn’t agree more

    76. walter Scott says:

      Reverend. There could & should be another referendum but the power to hold one won’t be given to Holyrood by Cameron again, he’s said as much. How this will play out I’ve no idea.One Tory, one labour & one liberal mp is a good enough reason for a plebiscite which, if successful should be presented to Downing St. Re Lord Sewell, it’s not as if he tried to burn down a Hotel full of people. Lord Watson didn’t think he’d done enough wrong to warrant resigning. Sewell is just a Coke head, prostitute using expenses parasite. Gie him a break.

    77. Dr Jim says:

      What country in the history of the world or any other planet had a Postal Vote of over 96% and was completely at odds with walk in voters

      I’ll just leave it at that

      Only saying

    78. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Since the referendum, have around 90,000 people joined the SNP because they want Devo-max?

      I don’t think so…

      The Scottish Parliament must reject any offer of watered-down Smith Commission proposals. It is up to those new SNP members, through their constituency branches, to put forward motions for conference, along the lines of ‘In the manifesto for the 2016 Holyrood elections, there must be a commitment for an independence referendum, at a time when an SNP government deems appropriate.”

      With the subs from all those new members, the SNP (or the Scottish Government, if legally possible) should be putting out at least one leaflet a month, TO EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN SCOTLAND, explaining how ‘project fear’ was all about lies and spin, unreported by the Daily Record (as an example of the MSM).

      The lies about the pensions situation would be my suggestion for the first of them.

      At the Wings get-together in Helensburgh on Saturday, on my return from a ‘comfort break’, one of the locals (Jimmy), noticed my ‘Team YES Bus’ T-shirt and my hat covered in pro-indy badges.

      He was polite and friendly. He asked me, “Why are you still going on with it?” I told him about the lies and spin from better together, particularly the pensions lies, the rise in membership of the SNP, and so on. He told me he regarded himself as Scottish, felt we were better as part of the union, had always, and did still, vote Labour but thought that Scotland would, eventually, be independent, but “now is not the right time”.

      I told him about the couple of former Labour voters we had met after a George Square rally, who told us that, for the first time in their life, at the GE, they had voted SNP, “with a heavy heart”, because Labour had left them, not the other way round.

      Regarding the pensions situation, he said that he hadn’t known the facts. I suggested to him that he shouldn’t depend on the Scottish newspapers for all the truth, because most of them were pro-union and tended to publish that which suited their agenda – and the truth about pensions certainly didn’t go with their agenda.

      We ended up having a 20 minute blether, at the end of which, I gave him an “Aye Right” leaflet and a “Wee Blue Book” leaflet, and we shook hands.

      In other words, OUR party has to start fighting dirty and get the truth out there. I’ve no doubt that the SNP has a strategy for the next couple of years but we have to convert enough waverers to make the next referendum a foregone conclusion, because Scots will have been given the facts.

      When it does come to announcing indyref2, it should be no more than a six month campaign, as I’ve typed before. There’s no point in giving the unionists too much slack to get their game together. I’d guess, looking at the timetable for the Euro referendum, 2017 could see indyref2.

      To finish off…
      Jimmy mentioned a couple of times that the problem he had with the SNP was that they were asking for all these new powers but wouldn’t say what they were gonna do with them.

      I’ll leave the solution to that particular dilemma of public ignorance, for the SNP strategists to come up with.

    79. Graeme says:

      Now listen here chaps

      lets have no more talk of calling for the resignation of old Sewage it’s not terribly British he’s a damn decent chap and and an upstanding pillar of the establishment, a peer of the realm no less

      as you know he chaired the privileges & conduct committee and this video was clearly him demonstrating what’s acceptable and not acceptable behaviour for a lord of the realm (you should see the not acceptable video)

      anyway lets hear no more of this nonsense

      God save the queen

    80. archieologist says:

      Al Stuart,

      Al, in the run up to the referendum, I spoke to No voters who said that they would vote yes for Devo Max. If the next referendum had a 2nd question on devo max I think this would be supported by the majority and would win.

      I can understand what you are saying regarding a gradualist approach, but a two question referendum would likely see independence being ruled out in favour of devo max/ federalism.

      At one time I would have supported devo max, but now feel totally scunnered by the Nos talking Scotland down, having no ambition or vision for the country.The unionists had the opportunity for a second question on the Indy Ref ballot paper, but they blocked it.

      The current situation with three Scottish unionist MPs at Westminster and the tories dictating to the people of Scotland what they will let us have in the Scotland Bill and the future of our nation is not sustainable.

      I want to see Scotland taking its rightful place within the family of nations as an independent country and not within a federal UK where we would be dictated to by England.

      So no to devo max, yes for independence

    81. scottieDog says:

      @Brian Doonthetoon
      Interesting post. Thanks.

      I think we also have to learn from the previous campaign. If we use all the same arguments we will be met with the same retorts.

      It was hard to tell people hand on heart that we had a strong position on currency because we didn’t.

      I spend alot of time telling people what’s wrong with debt-based currencies like the pound and how ruinous it is economically. It’s very hard to be put a positive spin on an independent state being governed by another country’s monetary policy. We can argue until we are blue in the face that it’s ours too, yet it’s not the people of England’s either. It’s run by a cartel of bankers.
      We should be pointing people to things like this…

      We have to start planting the seeds now..

    82. yesindyref2 says:

      From talking to people and observing postings, I’d stick my neck out and say that up to a quarter of YES voters are now undecided, and up to a quarter of NO voters similarly. I think the polls got it very wrong about the undecided just before the Ref, a good many voters made up their mind on the day.

      Bearing in mind that support is very near equal now, to be conservative (excuse the language), 48% YES and 52% NO, if my theory is correct that could mean that up to 25% of the NO voters have already switched to YES, but equalled by say 20% of the YES voters currently switched to NO.

      I daresay my figures are extreme, a quarter of YES currently NO is probably too high a guess, but I think that’s a factor that needs to be considered. The “battle” has been won with some NO voters already, but temporarily lost with some YES voters.

      In that context, the number of YES voters thinking the Scotland Bill is OK would make sense, and shows that efforts – gentle efforts not calling them “trolls” needs to be made to get them back on side. Discrepancy between the didn’t vote reported and the actual ref turnout is probably due to “survey? sorry no time / not interested / get lost”. In particualr if it was a panel based survey, you’d have to be interested in the first place to register for that panel, hence a high participation rate.

      As for the fed-devo referendum, no thanks, it would be an unwelcome distraction. The SNP Government already has a mandate to go for Devo-Max, hence the election result, and the results of several polls mentioning full powers bar defence and foreign policy, and currency.

      The VOW was an unwelcome distraction, it would be a mistake for the YES side to reinforce that distraction.

    83. Clootie says:

      Grouse Beater says:
      27 July, 2015 at 8:42


      The 4th. July will be “Full Democracy Day” from now on.

      All countries are Independent why should we not use the word? If we surrender on the use of plain language recognised and celebrated by every nation in the World then they win.

    84. Tinto Chiel says:

      @BDTT 9.06

      This is what concerns me about a Corbyn win (admittedly uncertain at this stage). Some recent SNP swingers from Labour may be swayed by the false promise of Holy Grail Socialism à la Corbyn which may cost SNP at least in the short term. I suspect the “true” English Left will have the usual default attitude to “nationalism”.

      JC may be a decent man but I have reservations as to what extent he is helpful to independence. I suspect he would be merely a distraction we could do without, were he to be successful.

    85. boris says:

      Remember what happens when the Scot’s get uppity!!! but fail to follow through.

      Thatcher asset stripped Scotland of all heavy industry and turned a growing economy ito a welfare supported basket case.

      This time we have Cameron , an architect of that policy since he was in her core team.

      He has already tuned his guns on the Scotland’s power production removing financial support so that many schemes are to become unviable in the long term. He has allocated savings to Nuclear power production developing capacity in England suffcient to ensure self sufficiency in England in the future. Scottish electricity will need to pay a premium to the English grid otherwise they will not allow any ldownsream linkage. I expect the Norwegian gas supply link to the UK, due for finishing about 2020 will be routed to England, bypassing Scotland so that Scotland will be dependent upon the English Grid for our Gas supply.

      And this is only the start. Financial services will also take a big hit transferring them to London over time.

    86. yesindyref2 says:

      @Brian Doonthetoon
      That sounds like the right approach to me. This is a non-pressure time to open minds, and I find many NO minds open now there’s no “us and them”. Alerting them to the lies, even in general, and the pro-union bias of just about every newspaper seems to get some thoughtful looks, and that’s it for me, job done, retire to a safe distance. They can do the rest for themselves, and will next time, I think.

    87. De Valera says:

      I can see many similarities between those who are opposed to Al Stuarts suggestion to those who felt Alex Salmond was selling out when he supported devolution in the 90s.

      I have voted SNP for over 20 years and remain convinced by the need for independence but gradualism could still be the way to go.

      If Scotland could gain geniuine Home Rule and we had a Parliament comprised of autonomous parties (as in Stormont), we would have conditions more conducive to taking the final step. That is why Westminster won’t give us it.

      But please don’t think I have any more faith in Perfidious Albion than anyone else here.

    88. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi yesindyref2.

      In the words of the most famous instructions of all time…

      “Light blue touchpaper. Retire to a safe distance.”


    89. SquareHaggis says:

      One thing I’m unconvinced about this Sewel powderpro story.

      Read in the National he’d paid for services rendered with a cheque!

      Seriously, who in their right mind pays for black-market services with a cheque?
      Mind you he’s fae Banchory, brassnekked enuff to bounce it if she wasn’t up to spec I suppose.

      Could be wrong but would he not have been one of the speakers delegated the job of deciding whether certain EVEL legislation was English only or not?

      Seems awffy suspicious tae me.

    90. dakk says:

      Grousebeater 7.25

      ‘the entire Labour Party snorts cocaine from the belly button of hookers’

      Since when did you become a recruiting sergeant for the Labour Party. 🙂

    91. call me dave says:

      In the year 2045 if I’m still alive and mankind can survive! 🙁

      Zager and Evans:

    92. call me dave says:

      Kezia said: “We failed to defend those families when we failed to vote against that policy last week. We failed to stand up for our record as well.

      “I’m proud of that record and I was angry when our MPs didn’t vote against it.”

      Macintosh said he would have defied the Labour whips and voted against the Welfare Reform and Work Bill if he had been at Westminster

      But BOTH agreed there is no need for an Independent Scottish labour party.

      Same old! 🙂

    93. Grouse Beater says:

      Clootie: The 4th. July will be “Full Democracy Day” from now on.

      The USA did not have England attached to its border. In any event, and again unlike the USA, it’s independence regained. We sell it as if a new ideal for Scotland.

    94. yesindyref2 says:

      @De Valera
      Not at all. We got Devolution in 1997/8/9, I fully supported it as in 1979, but I personally would go along with a full federal solution even now, if Indy wasn’t up for grabs, or even as a stage to it. But it wouldn’t work very well with England being 85% of the population, either England would be treated unfairly by having equal votes for the 4 nations, or England would rule the roost by 85% to 15%. But apart from that it’s an unneccessary distraction, it had its time – a third question in the Ref, it had its time – the Scotland Act 2015, it won’t happen, even if 100% of Scotland voted for it in a Ref. We do only represent 8.4% of the UK population, and quite rigthly if the other 91.6% of the UK population didn’t want it, then it wouldn’t and shouldn’t happen.

      @BDDT – 🙂

    95. Lesley-Anne says:

      Seems like Cameron has been doing some of that washing powder snorting thingy there CMD. 😀

    96. Tinto Chiel says:

      At De Valera 10.00.

      So if WM won’t give it to us, what’s left? The Declaration of Arbroath and Lord Cooper’s judgment state we, the people, are sovereign. If the SNP stand on a manifesto of asserting our independence when it thinks we can win, we don’t need to wait for permission to hold a referendum. Then we could control the referendum practices and procedures, perhaps outlawing postal votes except for those unable to access polling stations, and having a residential qualification to prevent tourist voters.

      Feasible or not, Wingers?

    97. crazycat says:

      @ SquareHaggis at 10.04

      EVEL only applies to the Commmons, so Sewell would not be responsible for decisions about it.

    98. Joemcg says:

      Cameron has totally ruled out a 2nd vote according to an interview in the guardian.

    99. Lesley-Anne says:

      It is my understanding Tinto that the Declaration of Arbroath is recognised world wide as being the earliest written constitution for a country. As you may already know the DoA was used by the Founding Fathers of the U.S.A. to write their Declaration of Independence.

      In my view, and I apologise for upsetting millions here, I believe our government should declare Scotland as an independent country and use the DoA as the basis of our argument for reclaiming our independence.

      I would also hope that after independence we could have a written constitution as soon as possible incorporating the DoA. I don’t see any problem with using the DoA as our written constitution with a series of ammendments appended to it in the same way as the Americans have come to utilise their original Declaration of Independence.

      Please folks don’t all shout at me at once … I have a headache tonight. 😀

    100. Rock says:

      Just a week or so before the referendum, the polls were putting Yes in the lead, confirming the results of canvassers.

      If that is true, it means that Project Fear, which apparently included Gordon Brown frightening pensioners, had failed.

      The more than 50% planning to vote Yes had not been scared into voting No.

      Then came The Vow, the mother of all lies.

      Either that made 5% of Yes intending voters to vote No.

      Or it didn’t and the result was rigged.

      My belief is that both Project Fear and The Vow failed and the result was rigged.

    101. Rock says:

      If Project Fear had worked they would not have panicked at the last moment and come up with The Vow.

      More than 50% had not been frightened into voting No.

    102. Ian Brotherhood says:

      So, Cameron ‘doesn’t see the need’ for another referendum?

      How many Scots ‘see the need’ for him and his ilk?

    103. John Thomson says:

      Agree declare using Declaration of Arbroath

      you have my vote

    104. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Tinto Chiel at 10.26

      Completely feasible. We can have a referendum whether Cameron says so or not. It was very nice and very convenient that the last referendum and all its running was agreed with Westminster but it wasn’t necessary.
      The United Nations Charter enshrines the inalienable right of self determination to all communities

      The UK is a democracy after all (so they say).

    105. SquareHaggis says:


      But would he not be asked to decide same in the HoL?

    106. Rock says:


      “In my view, and I apologise for upsetting millions here, I believe our government should declare Scotland as an independent country and use the DoA as the basis of our argument for reclaiming our independence.”

      Unlike the American constitution, the DoA gave absolutely no rights to the plebs.

      It did not give any “sovereignty” whatsoever to the plebs.

      If we want to have independence democratically to suit modern times, a majority of plebs and all others have to vote Yes in a referendum.

      That will not be an easy task with certain significant sections of society voting massively No and very unlikely to change.

    107. Tinto Chiel says:


      I feel UDI is a non-starter, if that’s what you’re suggesting, L-A. The people need to be given the chance to vote for it. Otherwise, it will seem to lack legality. But I don’t feel comfortable waiting for “permission” to be given by WM. I don’t think they’ll be that stupid after last time, in any case. Asserting our right in accordance with our history and law is surely correct, but at the proper time.

      Mad is it, I am?

      Whatever happened to Yoda?

    108. Dr Jim says:

      @walter Scott

      Not up to Cameron Walter even though he would try to make you believe it is

      He has no say in the matter except to moan loudly and stamp his feet

      Although if he did try that one on it would guarantee a Yes vote don’t you think

    109. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Grouse Beater at 8.34

      We should be asking our people for their ideas of what an independent Scotland should do and what improvements we should make

    110. Stoker says:

      call me dave says – Kezia said: “We failed to defend those families when we failed to vote against that policy last week.”

      Any chance of telling us who you want as your new boss Kezzy?
      Or are you just going to hang fire until he/she is announced?

      Please forgive my cynicism Kezzy but i’m becoming a tad bored
      with London lackies like you feeding our people a diet of shite.

      Now bark, Dippy Dug, bark!

    111. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Rock.

      You have ignored my reply to your question,
      “What “sovereignty” powers did the declaration of Arbroath give to the plebs?”

      which I typed a number of days ago, at,

      You should read what the Declaration of Arbroath actually was.

      Lesley-Anne, see my post here:-

      We, the people of Scotland, do not require the permission of the UK government to hold an independence referendum.

      If the people want it, we can have it.

    112. Brian Powell says:

      Dugdale previously said she only wants one Labour Party, not an independent Scottish Labour party, so talking about being disappointed in their votes in Westminster becomes utterly meaningless.

    113. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Rock (11.16) –

      What is your definition of a ‘pleb’?

    114. Dal Riata says:

      The UK’s MSM, or, to be more clear, the English MSM and BBC Scotland, will find anything, anything at all within whatever Alex Salmond says to create a squirrel story. One of them will do very nicely, thank you, to avoid the necessity of reporting anything positive about the SNP in Scotland or Westminster or the abuses perpetrated by Westminster on the Scottish people.

      He, Alex Salmond, or, as he was not so long ago, Alicsammin, is still viewed, possibly deliberately, but perhaps in their ignorance not so, as the bête noire who ’caused’ the referendum to happen (the bastard!) and not actually, you know, the people who live in Scotland who voted in the SNP – the SNP who happened to have a Scottish referendum in its manifesto – to lead the Scottish government. The SNP, who then had the audacity to say they would stick to their manifesto promise to hold a referendum – and then did (the bastards!)!

      But it wouldn’t do to drop the ‘Alicsammin did it!’ meme. It keeps the bogey-man story going and that you and I were brainwashed into doing something weird and almost voting for independence.

      There is also the deliberate intention to maintain the lie that Alicsammin is still the real power on the throne (so to speak!), and not Nicola Sturgeon.

      The UK’s MSM is becoming more transparent by the day.

    115. caz-m says:

      Ian Brotherhood,

      Regarding Cameron telling us whether we can have a referendum or not,

      Well, as Nicola Sturgeon has already said,

      “The people of Scotland will decide when we have another Referendum”

    116. Mealer says:

      We won’t get independence til it’s the settled will of the people.Currently the will of the Scottish people is unsettled,with some wanting Home Rule,some wanting the status quo and some wanting independence….but no majority for any of these.That will change as people come to realise that home rule isn’t going to be a possibility.

    117. Thepnr says:


      Both MacIntosh and Dugdale failed to inspire in the so called hustings on Scotland 2015. It was totally uninspiring.

      You can tell that they are being left behind by the events happening in England with the REAL leadership contest and don’t know which way to turn.

      All you were sure of was eh maybe eh maybe no ah but ah but.

      For those a bit concerned that a “revitalised” left of centre Labour party will persuade those that have jumped ship to support the SNP. I would say relax. On that showing, you have little to be worried about.

      Labour are but a ghost ship looking for a crew, no takers, so round and round they go seeking direction. They are lost.

    118. caz-m says:

      Re: The Scottish labour leadership debate on Scotland 2015,

      It’s half an hour of your life you won’t get back, utter dross.

      It’s hard to decide who was the least interesting , Smith the presenter, MacKintosh or Dugdale.

      Ken wants to build hunners of hooses and Kez wants to re-educate the Nation. Full of half answered questions.


    119. Dal Riata says:

      So, a Tory Prime Minister with one MP in Scotland believes that, as far as Scotland and its aspirations is concerned, it’s his way or the highway, does he…?

      From the biggest hypocrites of all of the UK’s MSM, the Guardian:

      David Cameron has rejected suggestions that the Scottish nationalists should be entitled to hold a second independence referendum during this parliament.

      Referring to the 2014 referendum, he said: “I think it is important that a referendum is legal and properly constituted and that is what we had, and it was decisive, so I do not see the need for another one.”

      Under current UK law, the Scottish National party would need the permission of the UK parliament to stage a referendum and for it to be binding.

      “… so I do not see the need for another one” Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Right, ye are Dave! Well, we’ll see about that…

      This one could run and run… at least until ref2 anyway!

    120. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Glad I missed it then…

    121. crazycat says:

      @ SquareHaggis

      It seems not.
      “A further interesting contrast with ‘proper’ federal systems is that the House of Lords will be untouched by EVEL, on the grounds that there are only UK peers. ”

      So “Scottish” peers, like Forsyth and Foulkes, would be able to vote on legislation their parties’ members in the Commons could not – yet another reason why it’s daft and unworkable.

    122. Tinto Chiel says:

      @ Rock.

      You said the DoA does not given sovereignty to “the plebs”.

      I quote from Sir James Fergusson’s translation, 1970, speaking of King Robert : “To him…we are bound both by law and his merits that our freedom may be still maintained, and by him, come what may, we mean to stand.

      “Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King….”

      True, the “plebs” did not append their names to the document, but their representatives did. The DoA states the king is not sovereign. He must act in the interests of “us”. “We” are the Scots.

      And Lord Cooper seems quite clear on this matter also.

      We can assert this notion of sovereignty by a vote after a manifesto commitment, surely?

    123. Grouse Beater says:

      We should be asking our people for their ideas of what an independent Scotland should do

      Quite. I’m one of those people, and I propose we discuss and formulate a Constitution.

    124. Tam Jardine says:

      Further devolution is not going to happen in anything other than a piecemeal and incoherent form designed to weaken the Scottish Government rather than actually improve our country’s lot.

      If the SNP securing 56 seats at Westminster has had zero material impact on further devolution then I don’t see what a further referendum would get us… even if to a man we voted for devo max.

      We’ve all been banging on about the vow and the great betrayal for the last 9 months, 10 months and before the vote.

      They will give us nothing. We have to take it from them. To do that we need to start changing it up and stop playing the game. I’d like to see the SNP disrupt Westminster. I’d like to see the PM being put under pressure to agree that Scotland’s right to self determination is not in his gift to give. I’d like to see a much more combative approach to standing up for the folk of this country and for the SNP to draw the country together in common cause- whether it be feeding the poor or creating an ethical national bank or some vast public works we can get behind with public, private and voluntary funding.

      We need to start behaving like we are getting ready to launch rather than waiting for people to twig they’ve been fucked over.

      The pressure is on the SNP to be creative and imaginative with what they have. We win independence by improving folk’s lives and opening their eyes at the same time.

      Al makes a fair case but I can’t see any point in treating further devolution as anything other than the insult to our collective intelligence it has become.

      If we wait for powers to flow down from above we’d be as well just giving up our political aims entirely and getting really into cribbage or something.

    125. caz-m says:

      I see Cameron telling the foreign press that he does not need Westminster’s permission to bomb IS in Syria.

      He told them that if he suspects that IS are plotting to cause harm to UK citizens, then he is legally bound to bomb them.

      What is Cameron on about? How the hell is he going to tell whether IS are plotting to bomb the UK or not and who or where do you bomb in Syria?

      The guy is a fruitcake.

      But with statements like that, think of all the YES voters he is recruiting for us. Keep it up Dave.

    126. Tam Jardine says:

      Grouse Beater

      I propose we discuss and formulate a Constitution.

      Seconded. And that document should form the bedrock of the next referendum.

    127. Papaox says:

      The herald: “Cameron has suggested that the referendum issue is settled for the next 30 years”

      Gon yersel davey! You and that Bawbag fluffy should think before you open your mouth, or at least take your foot out first.

      Davey don’t use our one or two working planes to drop American bombs on Libya (again) and our new deadly enemy Syria. That should cover up HOL, HOC, CHILD ABUSE, CHILCOTT etc. to our feartie NO voters is that the standards you appreciate, enough said?


    128. Dal Riata says:

      From the same Guardian article:

      But there have been suggestions the SNP will seek a mandate for a second referendum in next year’s elections for the Scottish parliament, and then demand Cameron respect the will of the Scottish people.

      It has also been suggested that Scotland’s government could stage a referendum in defiance of London and demand secession. Catalonian nationalists in Spain had planned such an indicative referendum but backed down.

      A couple of “suggestions” there from the unionist media. But who is responsible for those “suggestions”…?

      The SNP may/might/could… Like in a mibeeze aye, mibeeze naw kind of way, is it?

      Christ, this Alicsammin, Look, squirrel! story is getting the full-fat Project Fear, The Director’s Cut treatment from the usual masters of the dark arts. Expect BBC Scotland to go apoplectic tomorrow.

      They just can’t get their wee heeds around the fact that the Scottish people are sovereign and not subjects. LOL!

    129. Tinto Chiel says:

      Thepnr said, “For those a bit concerned that a “revitalised” left of centre Labour party will persuade those that have jumped ship to support the SNP. I would say relax. On that showing, you have little to be worried about.”

      I hope so, mon vieux. Getting a bit twitchy about him making all the right noises to entrance the Holy Grailers who held their noses and voted SNP.

      Taking two aspirin and going up wood hill to Bedfordshire.

    130. Rock says:

      Dave McEwan Hill,

      “The United Nations Charter enshrines the inalienable right of self determination to all communities”

      What about the rights of the Kurds, spread over four countries but not having self determination and a state of their own despite decades of struggle?

      Blair and Westminster didn’t give a damn about the UN when taking the UK into an illegal war.

      Has Blair been sanctioned by the UN?

      Where were the UN and The Council of Europe when the unionists denied us self determination by breaking all the rules of a free and fair referendum?

      The only ally Scotland has in the fight for independence is Iceland.

      We do not have any other allies, until independence.

      No point in relying on imaginary allies. We are kidding ourselves.

    131. Ian Brotherhood says:

      @Rock –

      I ask again for your definition of ‘pleb’.

    132. Rock says:

      Brian Doonthetoon,

      “We, the people of Scotland, do not require the permission of the UK government to hold an independence referendum.

      If the people want it, we can have it.”

      In which case why on earth did we have Cameron coming here to sign the Edinburgh Agreement?

      What does “power devolved is power retained” mean.

      We can only do what Westminster “allows” us to do.

      If not, what on earth are we waiting for?

      Let us start doing what we want, whether Westminster likes it or not.

    133. Rob James says:

      I can’t agree with anything other than Independence. If we go the Devo max/ Home rule route, every step forward will be two steps back. What have we been offered (and at this point in time it is only an offer) that allows us any input into the economic growth of our own country? Absolutely nothing, nada, zilch.

      Precious money is being used to mitigate Tory cuts to date, with worse to come. Meanwhile they plunder our resources to finance their own energy projects whilst charging us rediculous grid connection charges to supply them with electricity, and then subsidising their own producers into the bargain.

      And as for defence and foreign affairs, how much money will they screw out of us to furnish their vanity and chest thumping projects, using our soldiers to do their dirty work. I see they are sending Scottish troops back into Afghanistan. With them out of the way, I wonder how long it will be before the army become involved in dealing with protests on our streets. (It has been mooted).

      They have given us nothing. They will not give us anything. The British establishment has a history of exploitation. They take,take and take and give nothing back.

      If we want anything we must take it. Independence is the only way.

    134. Rock says:

      Ian Brotherhood,

      What is your definition of a ‘pleb’?

      Those who have no jobs and live in poverty.

      Those who have slavery type jobs which they are forced to do as they have no alternative.

      Those who are incapable of working but are either forced to or to live in poverty.

      Basically anyone who doesn’t have a living wage or equivalent welfare if unable to work.

      I believe that “plebs” make up more than 50% of our population and electorate.

      It is our task to convince them all to vote Yes in 2017 or 2018.

    135. yesindyref2 says:

      @Dave McEwan Hill
      Yes, just ask people what they’d like to see in an Independent Scotland. Just to get them to think about it, and as grouse beater says, move towards the conclusion that it’s inevitable. So they might as well vote for it!

    136. Thepnr says:

      Definition of “pleb”:

      One who continually puts himself down and his fellow countryman.

      He is subservient and believes that everyone should be like him too.

      Plebs believe that there is “No point in relying on imaginary allies. We are kidding ourselves.”

    137. ArtyHetty says:

      Re: Tam Jardine@ 12.08am

      I agree with much of what you say Tam. I hear so many people blaming the SNP for the cuts to services, as they see it, not Westmonster.

      There was a lot of coverage given to the ‘Green Bank’ investment so called, being headquartered in Edinburgh, set up by ukok. Of course that was back in the good ole days just a bit pre Indy Ref.
      In June this year, it is being partly privatised by said ukok, though it is meant to be a people’s bank.

      Do people really understand just what devolution light which is what we have, actually means?
      If you tell folks that ukok could scrap our parliament tomorrow, they just do not believe it.

      What they do not know, that’s what we need them to know. I talked to a lovely woman today who said the Scottish government are intending to scrap the disabled bus pass…msm project fear still alive and kicking.

    138. ArtyHetty says:

      I thought ‘pleb’ came from Plebiscite, hmmm.

      Rob James, absolutely agree. Ukok play dirty and will do anytgjng to keep what they want, our land, resources and cannon fodder.

      We need to up our game somehow.

    139. yesindyref2 says:

      The SNP have a draft Constitution, but for me it’s got policies in, like no nuclear weapons, free education, whereas it should be about us, the People, our rights over our appointed or elected representatives who serve us not vice versa. So yes, a draft Constitution prepared by the People rather than any political party with its political ideology sounds good to me, it should be about us, not party politics, and should be acceptable to all of us – even the most rightmost Tory or the most leftmost Socialist.

      I remember reading a few times that Iceland prepared its Constitution online, with all able to contribute. Sounds like a good model to copy, even in there are only about 35,000 people in Iceland!

    140. Rock says:

      Tinto Chiel,

      “True, the “plebs” did not append their names to the document, but their representatives did.”

      Their representatives? Their masters you mean.

      And you think the masters asked the plebs about their views?

      “The DoA states the king is not sovereign. He must act in the interests of “us”. “We” are the Scots.

      And Lord Cooper seems quite clear on this matter also.”

      In reality, “We” doesn’t include the plebs. Once MPs are elected, they follow the party and elite line, no what the plebs want.

      “We can assert this notion of sovereignty by a vote after a manifesto commitment, surely?”

      In theory we can, but there is no law which obliges a political party to make good their manifesto promises.

      We are very fortunate in having the SNP, a genuine party which looks after the best interests of the nation and listens to all people.

      But if any of the other parties were re-elected, the plebs would have no powers or sovereignty whatsoever.

      Remember what Labour got away with for decades.

      And the rotten to the core justice system is a tool of the establishment. Wait for it to clear Carmichael in September.

      Until we have a written constitution which makes all citizens equal and a completely overhauled justice system, I as a pleb have no sovereignty whatsoever.

      I am at the mercy of my imperial masters and a subject of the purring queen.

    141. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      So, basically, ‘plebs’ are the majority of Scots and have to be educated into voting YES, because they are
      “Those who have no jobs and live in poverty.

      Those who have slavery type jobs which they are forced to do as they have no alternative.

      Those who are incapable of working but are either forced to or to live in poverty.

      Basically anyone who doesn’t have a living wage or equivalent welfare if unable to work.”

      I’m working, keeping my head above water, can’t afford holidays abroad, but proud to be a ‘pleb’, in the original sense of the word.

      pleb |pleb|
      noun (usu. plebs) derogatory
      an ordinary person, esp. one from the lower social classes.

      What’s your take on the meaning of ‘pleb”, Rock? Do you really believe the $h!t you typed above?

      Looks like we’re gonna have to do a ‘Proud Pleb’ badge to go with the ‘Proud Pedant’ badge.

    142. Paula Rose says:

      So – re constitution, does such a site already exist?

    143. Thepnr says:

      Hey Rock!

      I really cant tell if you are the Mk2 version or the Mk3?

      No matter you are good for a laugh, during the handover you should have got a better idea of your “persona”.

      You useful idiot.

    144. Paula Rose says:

      It may be an idea to reclaim the derogatory word “pleb”, nigger and queer are similar names that have been reclaimed by those that suffered mocking and abuse. I am not convinced that it describes our new Scotland – that will be built by everybody.

      Not all of them would recognise themselves as such – defined as a member of a despised social class, a commoner, a member of the plebs of ancient Rome. Also low-born, undistinguished and vulgar.

      Other words with similar meaning: Scrut, Townie, Kappa-Slapper, Rude-Boi, Scum, Greb, Teuchter, Chav, etc.

    145. Rock says:


      “I remember reading a few times that Iceland prepared its Constitution online, with all able to contribute. Sounds like a good model to copy, even in there are only about 35,000 people in Iceland!”

      About 250,000 I think.

      Enjoys the status of most peaceful nation on earth.

      Jailed some bankers and got its economy running again.

    146. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Thepnr.

      Rock is quite good at what he does.

      If you look at all his input to the site, you find yourself thinking, in 25% of cases, “That makes sense.” But, in the case of the other 75%, he blows it, it one way or another, usually by not reading links, and drawing conclusions from non-existent “facts”.

      But, as Paula Rose told me on Saturday evening at Helensburgh, he’s quite endearing, like a 3 month old puppy.

    147. Rock says:

      Brian Doonthetoon,

      “and have to be educated into voting YES”

      I thought only the unionists twisted words.

      “convincing” and “educating” have quite different meanings.

      an ordinary person, esp. one from the lower social classes.”

      Exactly how our imperial masters regard us in practice.

      “Looks like we’re gonna have to do a ‘Proud Pleb’ badge”

      Did I ever say there was anything “wrong” about “plebs”?

      The only thing I am emphasising is your “sovereignty” nonsense.

      In reality, the imperial masters and judges are sovereign, not the people.

    148. Rock says:

      David Mitchell called the police “plebs” or something similar.

      If they can use such deragotary terms against the police, just think what our imperial masters think of the rest of the population?

      They sneer at ordinary people and still regard them as “plebs”.

      They wouldn’t if we were in fact “sovereign” and could throw them out when we wanted to.

      Like Carmichael for example.

      The aristocrats (currently the establishment) took the sovereignty from the royals but it has never really been passed on to us.

      The rotten to the core system decides what powers we have and what we don’t.

      Remember how the press was gagged to prevent any mention of the Australian documentary on child abuse.

      What happened to freedom of information then?

    149. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Rock.


    150. Paula Rose says:

      (pleb used by Andrew Mitchell)

    151. Rock says:

      Brian Doonthetoon,

      “But, as Paula Rose told me on Saturday evening at Helensburgh, he’s quite endearing, like a 3 month old puppy.”

      To put on record, the current members of your sycophancy alliance:

      Paula Rose

      Brian Doonthetoon


      Ian Brotherhood (maybe partly paid up)

      Apparently you agree among yourselves 100% on every single post anyone of you makes.

      David Mitchell calling the police “plebs” or something similar.

      Sycophancy Alliance members comparing a WoS Yes poster to a 3 month old puppy.

      I wonder which one is more deragotary by your definition.

      As always, personal attacks when you have lost the argument.

      Not that I care.

    152. Thepnr says:

      The British army is creating a special force of Facebook warriors, skilled in psychological operations and use of social media to engage in unconventional warfare in the information age.

      The 77th Brigade, to be based in Hermitage, near Newbury, in Berkshire, will be about 1,500-strong and formed of units drawn from across the army. It will formally come into being in April.

      If anybody believes that there are not “people” regularly posting on this site that do not share the same goal as us who support Independence. Then I think you might want to reconsider that viewpoint.

      There is no harm in keeping in mind that the view of another poster may be not all that it seems.

    153. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      Hi Thepnr.

      I’ve got it now, and it’s all thanks to Rock!

      You bide under the bridge with Paula Rose, Ian B, Ronnie A and, probably, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all.

      Can I have one of your “Proud Troll” badges?

    154. Frann Leach says:

      One_Scot said “given what has happened since the referendum, you would have to be really gullible or spineless to vote ‘No’ next time” Heads-up: There’s always far more people like this than you’d expect

    155. Petra says:

      Thepnr at 2:00

      They’re here and can be spotted a mile off if you know what you’re looking for.

    156. yesindyref2 says:

      Rock is partly right about the DoA, it’s similar to the Magna Carta. Both were done to protect the barons, chiefs, high heidjins basically, against the King, English king or any other. Get your hands off my land!

      But like language they have evolved into being symbols of the Rights of People, plebs by any other name, and that’s their modern force and affect. In other words, both sides of that argument are kind of correct, one historically, and one today.

      As far as trolls are concerned, who knows? People can be very clever at hiding themselves away under bridges, doesn’t stop them being useful sometimes, or even presenting an interesting point of view. Trolls can be subverted to the Cause 😉

    157. Brian Doonthetoon says:

      And what does Billy Goat Gruff think?

    158. Petra says:

      Plebeian, or pleb for short, means the common man (ordinary person) in comparison to an ‘elite’ personage. Nothing more and nothing less that is unless one is ignorant enough to think it may be used as a vulgar term. Worse still to overtly use it in a way that is seen to be vulgar.

      Many people see Scots as being serfs, still, rather than plebs and that makes more sense IMO.

    159. yesindyref2 says:

      Tried to post this on the Herald but either their new forum is now totally broken or they’ve taken it offline perhaps to revert to disqus. Another article on Mundell, seems to me perhaps the Herald have had a secret meeting and decided to support Independence and are doing it by devious ways. Anyway, here’s the post.

      Mundell says the SNP MPs – Scottish MPs – are only interested in English affairs for their own arcane purposes. The corollary of that would be that English MPs are only interested in Scottish affairs for their own arcane purposes.

      Mundell should look therefore at the composition of the Scottish Affairs Committee with 4 Scottish MPs and 8 English MPs, and ponder at his implicit insult to those English MPs, the folly of his own words, and the inability he shows to follow through the consequences of his sacrificing logic and democracy, UK style, in his continual pursuit of his obsession with the SNP and Independence, and his apparent desire to push the People of Scotland into a second Independence Referendum.

      I believe Mundell will be earning about £160,000 pa. He’s worth every penny of that – to Independence supporters.

    160. Sinky says:

      Quelle surprise…. this morning’s I newspaper says Labour’s vote has totally collapsed since May’s General Election and most of all in Scotland and East of England.

    161. Capella says:

      The UK is the most unequal country in Europe. It is worse even than the US. It is an outlier in Europe bringing down the score.
      David Cameron’s boasted “recovery” is based on low paid jobs.

      “Following the financial crisis of 2007-08 the UK became an outlier in the EU, as income equality began growing “very rapidly.”

      The overall increase in EU inequality since 2008 was “to a large extent driven by developments in the UK,” the report said. “Without which the overall EU within-country component of inequality remained more or less stable as a result of rather diverse developments at the country level.”

      A Yougov poll shows most voters think bringing down inequality is the priority over faster economic growth.

    162. john king says:

      Heedtracker says
      “Or, who goes to prossies, snorts coke off of them and all he can think about is Alex Salmond, Boris Johnson, Bomber Bliar, and David Cameron?!”

      I’ll bet those two ladies are sitting on the edge of their beds waiting for him to call!

      Lets talk politics John (Sewel no me…ken?), you know what it does to me (giggle).
      Greame @9.23pm

      Jolly good Greame old chap,
      that little pep talk was fwightfully good,
      keep it up there’s a good chap.

      Oh God save the Queen and all that eh?
      much more civilised than zeig heil dontcha think?
      Boris @9.58
      I was about to say way to go Boris giving them ideas, then I realised there is NOTHING we can imagine that they haven’t already thought of/done,
      The cancellation by Thatcher of the gas pipeline losing billions

      We are under occupation by an unfriendly power, there is nothing they will not do to better their own future no matter how destructive it is to ours!

      The cancellation of the gas pipeline from the oil fields by Thatcher was done in spite of the loss of billions of pounds of revenue from gas needlessly burned off at source was in my view an extremely cynical act of deliberate destruction, and the reason?
      Simple what more obvious sign of the wealth being pulled from the North sea than a gas plant at Peterhead, it would have increased the demand for independence, we cant have the sweaties getting above themselves can we? no no no its better to sacrifice some of the wealth to hide its true value than to lose it all to an indefuckingpendent Scotland!
      Lesley-Anne @10.52
      “Please folks don’t all shout at me at once … I have a headache tonight. 😀

      I dont hear anyone shouting. 🙂
      Stop! listen whats that sound everybody look whats going down

      Its my favourite protest song,
      @ ME 🙂
      I’ve just had a terrible realisation,
      either that or real music really DID die in 1972. 🙁
      Dave Mcewan-Hill @11.08
      However Dave all Westminster needs to do is call the referendum null and encourage no voters not to participate, then what?
      serious question for all.
      Tinto Chiel says
      “Whatever happened to Yoda?”

      Voted out by the Labour party he was
      too democratic said they! 🙂
      Dal Raita @
      “The UK’s MSM is becoming more transparent by the day.”
      like this you mean?
      caz-m says
      “The guy is a fruitcake.

      But with statements like that, think of all the YES voters he is recruiting for us. Keep it up Dave.”

      I totally unequivocally, 100%, without reservation,concur with your assesment
      and so does Lord Sewel! 🙂

      Rock says
      “In reality, the imperial masters and judges are sovereign, not the people.”

      Were Rock WERE
      Your right in the sense that when the DoA was written that it represented only the people who were entitled and landowners who were the only people who had a vote but that was then this is now, and the declaration doesn’t make stipulations as to whom it(and who it doesn’t)refer, universal suffrage saw to that Rock so we ARE the people to whom the declaration refers
      I’ve been dying to write this WE ARRA PEEPEL! 🙂

    163. heedtracker says:

      Its a long read so am not reading it now but what have I changed in this headline?

      What’s behind England’s drive to control their Scotland region?

      China’s startling attempt to assert control over vast waters has blah blah blah, vote teamGB…

    164. michael diamond says:

      One-scot 27th 5.15. When you said people would have to be either really gullible or spineless to vote no, i think a third factor also, is ‘white settler’.

    165. Stoker says:

      I was about to catch up on the overnight comments and then watch last nights Scotland 2015 on the iplayer but thanks to comments made by Thepnr and caz-m i’ll save myself from that particular ordeal.

      Tune fae The Great Escape now swirlin roon ma heed.

    166. galamcennalath says:

      michael diamond says:
      “One-scot 27th 5.15. When you said people would have to be either really gullible or spineless to vote no, i think a third factor also, is ‘white settler’.”

      Yes and No (pun intended). While white settlers did tend to vote No a sizeable minority voted Yes. So you can’t directly equate white settler as a class of No voter.

      A better description is BritNat – many white settlers are BNs. Many Scots are also Britnats and they cross the social spectrum from posh Anglicised Tory voters to working class OO.

      Pigeon holing No voters is useful. BritNats are probably beyond conversion. Gullible and spineless are, each in their own way, probably open to education and persuasion.

    167. john king says:

      Stoker says
      “I was about to catch up on the overnight comments and then watch last nights Scotland 2015 on the iplayer but thanks to comments made by Thepnr and caz-m i’ll save myself from that particular ordeal.”

      Aw hey haw fit aboot me? 🙁

    168. heedtracker says:

      Lord Sewel quits House of Lords over sex and drugs claims, but really for being stupid enough to get caught. Alistair Carmichael also kicking himself for being truly revolting on camera.

      In other news, here in England, BBC Breakfast story on saving rare British ducks, very nice duck, quack quack, somewhere in Scottish Highlands and that’s it, for their UKOK Scotland region today.

    169. JaceF says:

      There is one big massive difference if there should be another indyref in the next five years. There are no Scottish MPs for the unionists to call upon, there are only branch office MSPs and after next year there may not be so many of them either. We would face project fear 2 possibly only being run by the English Tory party and UKIP.

    170. One_Scot says:

      ‘What country in the history of the world or any other planet had a Postal Vote of over 96% and was completely at odds with walk in voters’

      Dr Jim, I find that very interesting. Would you, or does anyone have the number of votes cast and the percentages of YES/NO votes for ballot votes and postal votes. Thanks.

    171. caz-m says:

      Stoker 8.04am
      “Tune fae The Great Escape now swirlin roon ma heed.”

      “The Great Escape”, could the IndyRef2 YES Campaign use this for their posters? lol

    172. galamcennalath says:

      Papaox says:
      at 12:13 am
      The herald: “Cameron has suggested that the referendum issue is settled for the next 30 years”

      In his dreams! Anyway, his opinion isn’t particularly relevant. IndyRef2 is unlikely to have an Edinburgh Agreement status, so he will have no input. He will make noise, of course, but that’s just as likely to be to Yes benefit!

      If Cameron and the BT stooges hadn’t messed up IndyRef1 there wouldn’t be the need for another.

      It began with discussions of more Devo completely off the table. By Sept 2014 it had changed totally into Home Rule versus Independence. Perhaps fair enough, if Cameron had ensured Home Rule was delivered. He hasn’t so far and if he doesn’t, IndyRef1 as it finally took place, will become null and void. It will be reduced to the settled will of no one.

      Cameron should perhaps accept the constitutional mess we are in is of his making!

    173. Graeme says:

      I am a Scot by birth my parents and grand parents are Scottish and so on

      when our national football or rugby team is beaten especially by England ( I admit it) I feel the pain only a Scot can feel, when I hear politicians slag off my country especially Scottish politicians ie Dugdale, Brown etc etc etc I feel the anger only a Scot can feel

      now if I moved to another country for whatever reason I would still consider myself a Scot first and foremost and if I found myself included in a constitutional election in my adopted country that I thought in any way affected Scotland or Scottish prestige the fact I am Scottish would have a bearing effect on my vote and even though I know it shouldn’t I wouldn’t be able to help myself.

      It leaves me wondering how many non native Scots voted in last years referendum cast their vote from a non Scot perspective or in the interests of their own native country and what the result might have been if the vote was only open to native born and bred Scots
      I know and understand this is a thorny subject and I’m not trying to start a flame war but I think it’s an important point to consider

      Does anyone know the answer ?


    174. Macart says:

      @John King

      Mornin’ John. Yeah, you nailed the sovereignty issue pretty well, which has the support of the, as yet, independent Scots law. Its why Davy Boy couldn’t prevent a referendum the first time round and why he can’t stop one happening a second time either.

      ‘Course if Westminster wants to head one off at the pass they only have to do one very simple thing and they’ll get maybe another thirty years out of their piggy bank deal.

      All they have to do is keep their word. Home Rule, devo to the max, powerhouse parliament, oh and lest we forget the one thing all the UKs then party leaders did sign up to, enshrine the permanence of the Holyrood parliament under law into the constitution of the UK.

      So lessee how much of that has come to pass… why none of it!

      Whoda thunk?

      So having been sold a false bill of goods, Scotland’s electorate should sit down and shut up why precisely?

      Somebody sells you on a bad deal, you take the product back to the seller and demand your money back. This is no different.

      Scots were sold on a dream of better togetherness where their parliament was guaranteed new freedoms and powers. A land where their NHS (yeah, I know, different NHS, but that didn’t stop their propaganda machine) was protected, their pensions were safe and all troubles would be shouldered equally. Not really worked out that way so far has it? I mean absolutely none of those thing have been delivered as specified, as ‘guaranteed’ by Gordo the absent, divin’ Dave, Ed or the other fella, wossiname.

      Didn’t seem such a big deal to keep the oldest, most wonderfullest, sexiest union in the history of unions together. KEEP YOUR WORD

      You don’t suppose they made promises knowing before hand they couldn’t possibly deliver them do you? 😀

    175. JaceF says:

      With the wipe-out of native Scottish Unionist MPs and the rise of Cameron stoking the EVEL fires there is a real opportunity to fight the next Indyref on a completely different footing if we are careful about how we prepare the ground.
      First we have to support an English equivalent of the SNP with an English parliament. We need to frame the unionist scares as BritNat and we have to be promoting that this is equivalent to the BNP, EDL, UKIP and the worst of native sectarianism. We make it clear that there is a distinction so that it becomes a clear distinction in the minds of voters here and down South.
      Next we have to deal with project fear so that when a bank or supermarket or whatever issue a fear story we respond by talking about a British Territory. So a bank says it’s leaving Scotland we respond by showing that this is the first indication of Brexit as they are leaving a British Territory, turn the scare around to frighten the rest of the UK.

    176. caz-m says:

      John King

      You seem up to speed with this House of Lords stuff john.

      A wee question for you, is it compulsory to wear the pink bra and suspenders under the Ermine coat?

      We need to know.

    177. galamcennalath says:

      Rock says:
      at 11:05 pm
      “If Project Fear had worked they would not have panicked at the last moment and come up with The Vow. More than 50% had not been frightened into voting No.”

      I tend to agree. I has mixed views about Project Fear’s effects. I suspect for every pensioner scared into No voting there was someone else offended into Yes voting.

      I have read that a step increase in Yes support came from Osborne’s initial pound threats.

      We had months of Project Fear and months of Yes growth.

      The Vow itself was a one off ‘big bang’ in the final weeks, but it came at the end of steadily growing offers of more powers. As I stated above it all kicked off with no powers but as Yes increased, power offers also increased.

      There isn’t a great deal of evidence, but my personal believe is that BT knew Project Fear was running out of steam. They also knew that offering more and more powers was working. Weekend of 6-7th Sept they panicked. Starting from Broon’s TV appearances on the 8th they went in to overdrive with offers, and The Vow.

      Why? Because they knew all that talk of more and more powers was effective.

      I believe it was effective enough to stop Yes and swing things for No. Not specifically the Vow, but all that went with it too.

    178. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      The unionists must be very happy that quite a lot of people are taken in by the big union bluff.

      We can have a referendum as often as we like and we need nobody else’s permission to decide how we rule ourselves. It is called democracy.

      I do hope Cameron continues his panicked suggestions to the contrary. Nothing is more likely to harden support for referendum 2 than silly unionist talk about denying us one.

      He should be saying that he supports democracy and that the Scottish people are of course free to decide their own future.

      They are shitting themselves.

    179. Stoker says:

      @ caz-m: Now there’s an idea, lol.

      @ JK: Ah kentit, as soon as ah re-read ma ain post ah thoat, jeez,
      that lucks as tho ah’m deriding everyones comments. I should have been clearer, i read all the comments, including yours John, but saved myself the ordeal of watching Smith & Co.

    180. Socrates MacSporran says:

      I was reading the Herald’s piece about Wee Fluffy’s latest anti-SNP rant this morning, when the total absurdity of the man suddenly struck me.

      Fluffy is a Scottish MP, therefore, under the terms of his party’s EVEL proposals, he will be barred from voting on English matters.

      However, as a Cabinet Minister, he will be able to vote on implementation of English-only bills around the Cabinet Room table.

      He will be bound by the Cabinet’s rules on collective responsibility and, should a contentious English-only bill come before the House, and the Tory party impose a three-line whip, he will be expected to toe the party line – or resign from the Cabinet.

      His position is unsustainable, within a UK Parliament which, less than a year ago, he and his fellow travellers in the Tory Party and Better Together were so-keen for his fellow Scots to remain a part of.

      Two-faced, or what.

    181. heedtracker says:

      Rancid The Graun running around like headless UKOK chicken this morning trying to stop Ref 2, also Sewell thing is really gross/funny

      “D’Souza, who described Sewel’s behaviour on Sunday as “shocking and unacceptable”, suggested he may have breached the House of Lords code of conduct, which obliges peers to abide by the seven principles laid down by the committee on standards in public life. These include the requirement to act with integrity,” and above all, not getting caught.

      “Lady Boothroyd described him as a “bad apple” who had brought the upper house into disrepute. The crossbench peer had resigned as deputy speaker on Sunday and had resigned from his post overseeing standards and privileges in the upper house as chairman of committees.”

      Imagine rancid’s headlines if it was a “foul mouthed slut” SNP MP.

      Good olde teamGB.

    182. Joemcg says:

      Dave-the question is why are they shitting themselves? That’s the brass tacks. They cannot afford to lose us. If only the alleged 55 could see that Indy 2 would be a skoosh.

    183. Jim says:

      Pam Ayres

      All hypocrites should take due care,
      When snorting coke in Dolphin Square,
      An orange bra is not so cute,
      And best left on the prostitute.
      Written in the style of Buffalo Bill from silence of the lambs.

      “It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again”.

    184. galamcennalath says:

      Macart says:

      “You don’t suppose they made promises knowing before hand they couldn’t possibly deliver them do you? ”

      You suggesting the WM machine always intended to renege?

      Whoda thunk? 😉

      What does surprise me, though, is that they thought they would get away with it! Perhaps they thought after a No win the SNP and any Yes force would evaporate and therefore no one would hold them to account. That hasn’t worked out.

      I suspect they were thinking very short term as usual. Win the referendum. Not worry about events beyond that.

    185. Joemcg says:

      Cameron says another vote “would not be legitimate” thought we were equal and a family of nations? Sounds like it.

    186. Jim says:

      “Lord Sewel resigns from House of Lords after drug claims.”
      Drug claims?

      It is pretty clear that wasn’t talcum powder he was vacuuming up his hooter, off the hooters!

    187. Robert Kerr says:

      If the tories take the view that the iREF2 is not legitimate how can they then campaign against it?

      More popcorn ordered.

    188. Sinky says:

      Socrates MacSporran says at 9.17:

      On EVEL, same principle applies to Ian Murray, if that’s not an oxymoron, which is why he abstained on opposing Tory welfare cuts.

    189. Graham MacLure says:

      O/T There is a photo on pages 18/ 19 in The National today and as far as I can see it has no caption. Being a total philistine am I correct in thinking it is that McDougal fellow busking somewhere?

    190. Les wilson says:

      Ref the VOW, how is it no one, no media outlet has ever interviewed “Lord ” Smith, on his views of how the government are abusing his meagre findings.

      Does he not actually possess the high principles, he was supposed to have, exposed by his silence.
      So where is he, what is his view of the manipulation of the Vow, to further subjugate fellow Scots.

      Perhaps not as “proud” a Scot as he exuded, he should be speaking out in support of Scotland, not hiding out of the limelight in collusion with the Tories.

    191. call me dave says:

      In a statement released last night, Lord Sewel, the former vice-chancellor of Aberdeen University, had appeared to suggest that he hoped to continue working as a peer.

      He wrote: “I wish to take leave of absence from the House as soon as it can be arranged.

      “I also wish to make clear that in doing so I have no intention of returning to the House in any way until the current investigations have been completed, when in the light of their outcome I will review my long-term position.

      “I believe this is compatible with due process.”
      But! …But the headline and the BBC says he’s going. Musht be shome mishtake!

    192. Nana Smith says:

      Ah wee Davey flexing his muscle. Davey lad when we the Scottish people say “it’s time for indy2” then that is what will happen. You can have your wee tantrums till your face turns blue.

      But for the moment have’nt you got a CSA enquiry to whitewash? I believe there’s a paint sale in B&Q.

    193. Jim says:

      To be fair to “Lord” Sewel; taking drugs and having sex with adult hookers isn’t the worst thing a Lord has done in Dolphin Square.

      Maybe morally wrong for paying prostitutes and taking drugs but he must be gutted that he is the one they chose to setup and the pedophile child rapists are allowed to either have gotten away with their heinous crimes or carry on with impunity under the full protection of the authorities.

    194. Les wilson says:

      Ref what Cameron was supposed to have said, BBCS this morning said that Cameron said that ” he did not see the need for Indy2, last years ref was fair”

      So if true, he did not precisely rule it out at all.
      Unless BBC was wrong, maybe others here can exhibit some evidence.

      It may be in hindsight, that he knows to do so would have a big backlash that would help our cause. The media put their own spin on it.

    195. Jim says:

      In the Scotsman:

      I favour a much more autonomous Scottish Labour Party, I’d like to see us set our own policy here but I don’t support an independent party, I think that’s wrong.

      BBC web news:

      We don’t need autonomy to stand up for what we believe is right here in Scotland.”

      But she said she would not be dictated to by the UK party.


      For fuck sakes Kezia, your split personalities cannot even agree with themselves so why should anyone else trust you?

    196. cearc says:

      Well they do seem to be rather upset about Sewell, don’t they?

      Cavorting with consenting adults and paying them! In Dolphin Sq. no less.

      That’s clearly outrageous. Not in the Westminster tradition at all.

    197. Alan Mackintosh says:

      Onescot, you may find this interesting, report from Dunoon regarding Argyll and Bute postal vote.

      I would think it might be very illuminating if this were to be repeated over the country. I presume the registers are still retained and not destroyed so soon.

      Something else which has ocurred to me is whether a comparison of the old register(which was used for the indyref and the GE)and the new register which is cross referenced with NI numbers would indictate any anomalies eg, holiday homes being used for postal votes etc, or spurious names disappearing.

    198. Macart says:


      I suspect they were still pretty convinced they were in for bigger win than they actually achieved. They were hoping that the question would be ended decisively with the losers crawling into a hole. They would have made any promise knowing that with an onside media they could feed the public chuck mince and call it steak tartare. The vow was intended as a nail in the coffin. A means of swaying a precious few percent undecided, soft yes/nos, providing some simply with an excuse to grant central government that one last chance.

      In their eyes the aftermath of the referendum was going to be played out entirely differently, hence the introduction to the public of the plans for EVEL in Cameron’s ‘victory’ speech. Except the win wasn’t as promised and the aftermath didn’t go as planned. Time for plan B! Demonise the Scots and Scottish government, secure that GE win and bull through as many ideologically driven policies as possible. Fob off the Scottish government and representation with the aid of the press and a pro union Commons chamber numerical superiority for as long as possible.

      Hope against hope that time and events quiet the rowdy neighbours basically. He needs time and frustration by the electorate to work in his favour. He’s hoping other events will overtake and overcome the Scottish electorate’s current engagement with the political process. Again, what he didn’t bargain on was the strength of reaction by the Scottish public to the events of the past ten months and his personal participation in their demonisation over the space of the GE.

      Hence the return of project fear and a replay of the get SNP agenda. We’ve kinda moved on from that though. We can fully separate constitutional from party politics and while we as an electorate have to follow the rules of our democracy and bide our time to await the periods where we can influence our government for an upcoming plebiscite, we know that our particular devolved government will listen to popular demand and basically do as they’re bid on constitutional issues.

      Dave’s in a pickle and he’s simply hitting the rewind button on project fear because he’s got nothing else to fall back on other than SNP baaaad.

      So terribly last year. 😀

    199. galamcennalath says:

      Ponsonby on

      “But will the SNP hold a second referendum within the term of the next Holyrood Parliament? I think it will. The SNP cannot hold onto its current level of support for ever and Sturgeon will eventually succumb to the mounting attacks on her integrity – Labour will eventually regroup in Scotland and the media will mount attacks on Scotland’s popular First Minister.

      So another independence referendum is on the cards. My guess is probably September 2019, four months after the next European Parliament elections – if we are still in. By that time Cameron’s government will have been in power for over four years and the UK general election will be nine months away. Labour will most probably be trailing in UK polls and Scotland will be looking at five more years of Conservative Government.”

      …. sounds plausible to me! Although, I would guess an earlier vote. Perhaps related to Vow failure and/or EU.

    200. Joemcg says:

      Les-he was quoted as saying “these things must be legitimate, that’s my view” that’s politician speak that he’s ruling it out. He’s the boss!

    201. heedtracker says:

      Cavorting with consenting adults and paying them! In Dolphin Sq. no less.

      Less cavorting more slumped in front of prossies moaning about Alex Salmond off your face, in a fetching bra and biker jacket. Oh baby.

      Other news

      Rancid the Graun Sturgeon coverage this month culminates in

      Sturgeon’s in here somewhere. Don’t think progressive liberal feminist rancid Graun think very much of Sturgeon really.

    202. Ian Brotherhood says:

      At 9.55, a caller to Kaye’s show (named ‘Charles’) tried to point out that Dolphin Square is also the place where –


      Kaye brought down the portcullis faster than you could say ‘Here’s the weather’.

    203. Jim says:

      cearc says:
      28 July, 2015 at 10:09 am

      Well they do seem to be rather upset about Sewell, don’t they?

      Cavorting with consenting adults and paying them! In Dolphin Sq. no less.

      That’s clearly outrageous. Not in the Westminster tradition at all.

      I wonder has this clown been willingly named and shamed, i.e, taken one for the team to deflect attention from a certain Australian 60 mins program?

      Dolphin square is, at this moment in time, now associated with Lord Sewel and his penchant for cocaine and hookers.

      Oh look, a squirrel!

    204. Bill McLean says:

      In my opinion we waste a lot of time and energy here discussing further devolution, FFA and Devo-Max – surely people must realize by now that, despite the promises and the VOW, we will get nothing meaningful from our masters in London. We joined the union – surely we can unjoin. I understand our own politicians desire to do everything reasonably and “legitimately” and with the support of the majority of the people, but have we not been treated less than “reasonably” or “legitimately”, lied to, bullied and possibly cheated out of our right to be a sovereign, independent nation. When the time is right I would like our Scottish Government to simply declare, that due to the foul undemocratic treatment, dished out to us by the UK Government and it’s mouthpieces in the media, Scotland will leave this foul union and withdraw all representatives from it’s deeply flawed institutions!

    205. One_Scot says:

      Thanks for the link Alan.

      It sort of confirms what I have always thought, even before the referendum – until postal votes are limited to medical reasons, then we will always be stuffed.

    206. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Alan Mackintosh at 10.12

      The postal voting system we have is a recipe for easy fraud and such has been proved several times in law courts.

      I suspect also that the local authorities were completely swamped by postal voting applications and virtually no checking was done of appropriate qualification to have one.

      I heard of one house in the Cowal area which had five postal votes in a family, three of whom hadn’t lived in Scotland for over twenty years. They were Nos. They could as easily have been yesses of course. I’m sure this was not the only case.

      The fact that postal vote records sat on council computers for up to six weeks represented a huge opportunity for manipulation

    207. sensibledave says:

      Graeme 8:55 am

      You wrote: “Does anyone know the answer ?

      The short answer is no. No one has yet come up with a way of analysing the individual thoughts of an individual voter – by examining the cross they put on a piece of paper.

      However, that wont stop lots of people pretending they know.

    208. DerekM says:

      i havnt really been reading into this Sewell character but surly he has broken the law on two counts a) the possession and possibly the intent to supply a class A narcotic b)paying for sex from a prostitute, both are criminal offences.

      So why have the drug squad or vice squad or whatever they call themselves not kicked in his front door and taken him away in handcuffs to be questioned about his connections to both these illegal practices and to find out who gave/sold him the drugs and prostitute.

      Or have they ? like i said i havnt been following it.

    209. Rob James says:

      Lots of analysis on why we lost the referendum. It was rigged. I wasn’t surprised by the size of the SNP victory at the GE. I always felt we were well ahead of what the polls suggested. My only doubt was about interference in the election itself. Ashcroft’s polls were slightly more accurate than others, because of the on the ground methodology, but still didn’t reach into the housing estates. The polls were also weighted, based on 2010 election. To me there was no comparison. The exit poll shocked a few people, but it was spot on. Why wasn’t there an exit poll at the Referendum vote?

      Likewise with polls just now. They are not asking the right people. I think support for independence is above the 50% mark at the moment, perhaps even as high as 55%. Many people from the poorer backgrounds are on our side. We need to keep them interested and get them into the habit of voting for their future. We need to show them that voting can make a difference for them, but the longer we remain tied to WM, the more difficult that will become, and we may lose that interest. We don’t want to go back to the days of electorate disengagement. The Tories are well aware that the longer they can delay, the ‘restless natives’ will turn on their elected representatives, (urged on by the MSM), or disengage entirely.

      Timing is of the essence, but the clock is ticking down.

    210. Grouse Beater says:

      Dippydave: that wont stop lots of people pretending they know

      A meaningless phrase.

      What people, why, how many is ‘lots’?

    211. Nana Smith says:

      O/t re foodbank opening

      Mundell broke HoC rules

    212. Bill McLean says:

      In today’s National Gordon Wilson writes that support for Independence has “sunk to 43%” – where did that figure come from?

    213. Robert Kerr says:

      Who is Gordon Wilson now?

    214. sensibledave says:

      Grouse Beater 12:00 pm

      You grumped “A meaningless phrase. What people, why, how many is ‘lots’?

      … which part of “that wont stop lots of people pretending they know” didn’t you understand Grousey?

      If you visit certain sites, and read certain articles, you will see all sorts of analysis that suggests that the author knows such things. Apparently, with one cross it is possible to vote for the party that you wanted, vote against a party you didn’t want, be a “shy” something, make a tactical vote, make a protest vote, maybe be anti-scottish vote, be afraid of something, not like the party but like the leader, or not like the leader but like the party, etc, etc – all easily identifiable by the way you made your cross.

    215. Effijy says:

      SLAB new leader debate, both Dipity Dug, and the stooge both proclaimed that they would not be controlled by Westminster Labour??

      I can recall Joanne Lamont saying that, up until they stabbed her in the back, when she confirmed that all Scottish Branch Strings were controlled by Westminster.

      Then of course Dim Jim assured us that he would lead without direction from Westminster, but unfortunately whenever he announced anything from his own dim mind, the bosses at Westminster shot his ideas down in flames.

      So refreshing to hear these two parrots using the same
      statements after all credibility has gone from any chance of that being a reality.

      Labour Westminster should really send them an idea that they might claim to be their own. Who would know they are incapable of doing anything for themselves?

    216. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      @Bill McLean,

      I think Gordon Wilson is being a bit disingenuous with his figures to suit his agenda. Yes vote post referendum has been swinging around 48% +/- the expected 3% variation. This 43% figure must come from one of the polls WITH the don’t knows still included.

      James Kelly on Scot goes Pop does a regular analysis and last panelbase poll was around that area in general agreement with his poll of polls. So support for Indy has gone up since the referendum not down.

      There is also a useful summary at the end of this wiki page – No vote most likely still in the lead but the gap on average is closing…

    217. Rock says:

      Paula Rose,

      “(pleb used by Andrew Mitchell)”

      Thanks for the correction.

    218. Rock says:


      “But like language they have evolved into being symbols of the Rights of People, plebs by any other name, and that’s their modern force and affect. In other words, both sides of that argument are kind of correct, one historically, and one today.”

      john king,

      “Were Rock WERE
      Your right in the sense that when the DoA was written that it represented only the people who were entitled and landowners who were the only people who had a vote but that was then this is now, and the declaration doesn’t make stipulations as to whom it(and who it doesn’t)refer, universal suffrage saw to that Rock so we ARE the people to whom the declaration refers”

      Today’s rights have nothing to do with the DoA and it is therefore nonsense to refer to is as giving us “plebs” “sovereignty” or “absolute” rights. That is my point.

      The DoA is not our constitution.

      The rights we have got now are in REALITY very little and meant to keep us under control.

      They have come from laws passed by Westminster since the union. Says it all.

      We have seen that right to vote under FPTP doesn’t give us much choice.

      The judicial system is rotten to the core and is there to protect the system from the “plebs”.

      The Megrahi appeal has just been dismissed and Carmichael will soon be found innocent despite 71% of the people wanting him to resign.

      The only rights that have come our way have been when the SNP unexpectadly broke the system by winning a majority under PR.

      And then again by unexpectedly overturning massive Labour majorities under FPTP.

      What I am saying is that whatever “rights” we plebs have got recently have come by accident.

      The system has never given us any meaningful rights.

      Otherwise Scotland would not still be a colony ruled by a Tory Viceroy after 308 years.

    219. Rock says:


      “Why? Because they knew all that talk of more and more powers was effective.

      I believe it was effective enough to stop Yes and swing things for No. Not specifically the Vow, but all that went with it too.”

      Those voting Yes had been convinced gradually by the argument, many not from No but from undecided, and were voting Yes enthusiastically.

      Either 5% went from that to No at the last minute, or the result was rigged.

    220. PJD says:

      Interestingly, No voters were twice almost twice as likely to respond “Don’t know” compared to Yes voters.

      This confirms my general observations that the average No voter was less informed, and voted the way they were told to rather than do any proper research.

    221. J Williams says:

      Doug Daniel, I agree with you.

      If you look at the last referendum, my impression is that the uncertainty over EU membership, currency, resource splitting, and even pensions had an effect. If ref 2 is to get past that then the Yes side will have to work hard behind the scenes to try to make those jumps seem smaller. People are ill-disposed to change unless they can visibly see no detriment. Any uncertainty at all can make them play safe.

      Personally I’m all for independence. The potential gains far outweighs any future uncertainty as far as I’m concerned. I’m not the person that needs to be swayed though to try to turn that 45% into a majority.

      Unfortunately the No side is the one in power so will put whatever hurdles they can in the way. If ref 2 is to be Yes then the Yes side must learn from the first one and every issue that was questioned last time around will need to spelled out in detail.

    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