The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Throwing mud in glass houses

Posted on September 24, 2013 by

There’s been a certain amount of hoo-haa within the independence camp this morning about a Telegraph piece reporting comments by Labour’s shadow Scottish Secretary Margaret Curran in which she appears to cast doubt on whether devolution has been a good thing for Scotland at all.


We’re not sure why, because they’re nothing we weren’t telling you almost a year ago.

The comments themselves are pretty weird:

“We need to ask ourselves some questions about (devolution). Has it made health better in Easterhouse? Has it made education better in Easterhouse? And there are a lot of questions marks [sic] over that.”

Education and health have of course ALWAYS been independent in Scotland, since long before devolution, so it’s not absolutely clear why Curran thinks it should have brought about major changes in those particular two fields. But even by her own odd terms, it’s hard to dispute the improvements.

Since devolution Scottish students enjoy free tuition while Scottish NHS users enjoy free prescriptions, free personal care for the elderly and even free car parking at most hospitals. Scotland pioneered the smoking ban – which has had dramatic effects already – and the devolved Scottish Government is also leading the way in tackling Scotland’s alcohol problem.

The credit for these advances is shared by many parties in Scotland. The SNP, Labour and the Lib Dems all implemented various of the measures listed above, and if we throw in health improvements through reduction in violent crime even the Tories get a share of the praise, by helping the SNP put 1000 more police officers on the streets. They seem unarguable evidence for the merits of devolution, because almost none of them could have happened without it.

So what’s Margaret Curran on about?

The simple answer is that she’s continuing to prepare the ground for what Labour hope will be a No vote in 2014, after which the Scottish Parliament will have its wings well and truly clipped.

We’ve spoken at length on this site about how all three Westminster parties are, in the guise of “more powers”, actually proposing to burden Holyrood with extra responsibilities instead, but nothing in return for them. Scotland will be expected to collect its own taxes (requiring a vast, totally pointless expansion in bureaucracy), but will have no more say in how they’re spent. Unpopular welfare policy will still be decided and imposed by London, and Scots will still have to fork out hundreds of millions of pounds a year on Trident.

That’s the Tory plan for the aftermath of a No vote, but Labour have an extra twist in mind. They want to see Holyrood – where the polls suggest that after six years in opposition they still have no hope of winning power – sidelined, and more control handed to local councils, where Labour is still relatively strong.

(The Tories and Lib Dems are happy to go along with this, because they at least still have areas of localised strength, whereas with an SNP majority at Holyrood they have no influence there at all.)

The problem is that the Scottish Parliament is still comparatively popular with voters, with MSPs far more trusted than Westminster Scottish MPs. So first its reputation has to be sullied, because Labour simply aren’t going to be able to get away with not putting their post-No proposals in front of the electorate before the referendum, and people are unlikely to welcome the idea of a Parliament they broadly like being shunted aside in favour of largely inept – and often horrendously corrupt, especially in the Labour heartlands – councils.

(After all, talent rises – many, though not all, councillors are only councillors because they weren’t good enough to get nominated or elected as an MP or MSP.)

As we pointed out last October, Labour have been pursuing this plan quietly for some time. It’s a tricky one to push, because much of the “Better Together” campaign is centred around claiming devolution is a good thing. (Hence the bizarre “independence will mean the end of devolution” line they deploy now and again.) But sooner or later the circle has to be squared.

Or perhaps we’re being unfair. Perhaps Labour are being, in a slightly roundabout way, truthful when they promise “more devolution”. Except that what they mean by the phrase isn’t more powers being devolved (the thing the Scottish people actually want), but the powers we have being devolved further, meaning away from Holyrood.

Many people, across No and Yes and Don’t Know camps, instinctively support the idea of power being brought ever-closer to the people it affects. And quite rightly so, because it’s a sound principle. But it can only do any good if (a) those wielding the power are competent and honest, and (b) the powers being wielded are the ones that make a real difference to people’s lives. (Which means, above all, welfare.)

Labour struggle to offer the first of those criteria – decades of experience show that all the Scottish party wants from power is to get their faces, and those of their friends, into the trough – but much more importantly they have no interest in even trying to offer the second. Labour doesn’t want to increase the size of Scotland’s pie (indeed, we already know that it wants to steal some of it and send it to England to buy votes), it just wants to shove more of what there is into its own pie-hole.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 25 09 13 10:29

    The affordability of staying in the Union – part 2 | The Science of Independence

  2. 16 03 15 22:33

    The Devo Files: Margaret Curran (Glasgow East) | A Wilderness of Peace

112 to “Throwing mud in glass houses”

  1. muttley79 says:

    Yes, Blair McDougall said as much last week (to mark a year to go).  They want to bypass Holyrood and give power to their councillors.  They simply do not care about the people of Scotland, they want to reward their party instead. 

  2. Jiggsbro says:

    The problem with the Scottish Parliament is that the SNP stole its powers from Labour. So those powers have to be devolved further, to Labour councils.

  3. HandandShrimp says:

    It was a Bitter speech from a pretty useless politician. She got her arsed kicked by Sturgeon in the Newsnight debate and then got it kicked again by the voting panel on that debate.
    Labour are losing faith with devolution because they thought they had fixed it so they had a permanent fiefdom. They can’t handle being second place in Scotland and their twisting and turning over devolution is a symptom of that bitter pill. Curran is just echoing Davidson. Kelly, Foulkes and Wilson. 
    The plus side is, I guess, that Labour will not put anything concrete on the table that looks like more powers for Holyrood. They want to rip powers away and give then to their power base in the West of Scotland…although what they will do if we the voters take that off them too is anyone’s guess.

  4. cath says:

    Then what happens if the SNP start winning all the councils as well?

  5. Bobby Mckail says:

    Blair McDougal when asked Newsnicht what devolution he wld like too see, couldn’t name any but when pushed he said that he would like to devolve powers to Councils and not give Alex Salmond any more powers. 

  6. Moujick says:

    Their plans are becoming clearer and clearer as time goes by and it stinks.

  7. Triangular Ears says:


  8. Cllr David Turner says:

    i have to ask does Margaret Curran even Know the answers to the questions she asked because as a Councillor  whose ward covers part of easterhouse in Wellhouse and easthall areas  i have to say  Margaret Curran has only been noticeable by her absence in the area  she has not turned up at a single community council meeting in area in 5 years and is known by nickname of Kodak as she only turns up if there is a press camera at the event

  9. Training Day says:

    Bang on the money.  As Muttley says, McDougall let the cat out of the bag last week, but many of us have been saying for some time that Labour’s vision post a No vote is a return to the soul-destroying municipalism of Strathclyde region et al.  Think Glasgow and North Lanarkshire wrapped up into a corrupt, croneyistic monolith. 
    That’s Labour’s version of democracy and the Scottish people can GTF.

  10. tartanfever says:

    Bizarre history revisionism from Curran. Devolution has failed, therefore it must be destroyed. Using devolution as the scapegoat for 70 years of Labour party failings is absolutely bizarre.
    As Costner said playing Jim Garrison in the film JFK
    “We’re through the looking glass here, people, where black is white and white is black.’

  11. balgayboy says:

    Frightening picture though, do not fancy wakening up and seeing that each morning!

  12. Gillie says:

    What happens to Labour’s great plans on localism when Glasgow falls to the SNP, as it surely will?
    Also there are dangers to unionism if Scotland ends up with its own HMRC and Treasury, that is akin to fiscal independence. Not much of a step to independence from there.
    Running through all this is Labour’s visceral hatred for the SNP. The nationalists by winning at Holyrood have spoiled Labour’s grand devolution plan of retaining power in perpetuity. 
    I would take the threat to Scotland’s independent education and health systems seriously. Labour intends to have one size fits all education, health and welfare systems controlled from Whitehall.  The Tories will love that.

  13. AnneDon says:

    Hypocrisy of the highest order, from the former Labour Minister for Communities at Holyrood. Surely it’s becoming obvious, even to the apolitical, that all she cares about is her career?

  14. muttley79 says:

    Then what happens if the SNP start winning all the councils as well?
    They will want to implement these things before that happens.  They have a fairly narrow time frame in the event of a No vote to achieve it.  They are not doing themselves any favours at all with their conduct during the referendum campaign (just need to look at Lamont’s ‘virus’ remarks). 

  15. Bill Fraser says:

    I know we are advised to stay positive but to quote the Rev Stuart Campbell —“bites tongue” —-.
    How do you do that when this pathetic excuse for a human being who for the last 40 years, in conjunction with the UK Labour Party, the Glasgow Labour Council and the first 10 years of the Scottish Parliament. Representing the East End of Glasgow has done nothing but add to the poverty resulting in “MEN born in Glasgow’s deprived east end will die nine years before men born in India”.

  16. creigs17707repeal says:

    And if people in England are complaining just now about how it is so much better in Scotland – free tuition, prescriptions, road tolls, elderly care, concession travel etc – just think what it will be like in Scotland if Labour ever had the opportunity to implement such a stupid plan. Would there be free bus passes in East Renfrewshire but not in Pollok? Would you have to then buy a ticket to continue your journey? Would there be free elderly care in East Dumbartonshire but not in Glasgow? Would half of Glasgow then decide to move to East Dumbartonshire? Would there be free tuition fees in Edinbugh but not Glasgow? How over-subscribed would Edinburgh centres of learning become?
    Ridiculous idea. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I’m away for a cup of tea and a Curran bun.
    YES Scotland.

  17. Triangular Ears says:

    Does anyone know how the reduction to 52 MPs for Scotland is likely to play out for the 2015 election in the unlikely situation of a No vote?  Scottish Skier?

  18. Bobby Mckail says:

    Andy Burnham in the Holyrood magazine all but say the same thing. Maybe link his piece as more corroboration. (As if you need any more) This and your article a year ago scares the bejesus out of me.

  19. A2 says:

    c) The powers are at an appropriate level.

    IE there’s no point having Glasgow city council deciding on (say) defence whilst bin collection is a major discussion point at holyrood

  20. muttley79 says:

    @Training Day
    Labour’s vision post a No vote is a return to the soul-destroying municipalism of Strathclyde region et al.  Think Glasgow and North Lanarkshire wrapped up into a corrupt, croneyistic monolith. 
    That’s Labour’s version of democracy and the Scottish people can GTF.
    That is absolutely their mindset.  There can be no doubt about it.  They would rather reward the Terry Kelly’s, Matheson’s of their world, than see the people of Scotland as a whole benefit for running our own affairs, and using our abundant natural resources to benefit the people here.  It is a mean spirited, closed-minded, tribal, duplicitous, self-serving mindset. 
    Hypocrisy of the highest order, from the former Labour Minister for Communities at Holyrood. Surely it’s becoming obvious, even to the apolitical, that all she cares about is her career?
    It is becoming more and more obvious as time goes by.  They are not even really pretending anymore.  Curran in particular it seems.

  21. HandandShrimp says:

    Triangular Ears
    Not sure the 52 seats things happened…think the Liberals went in a huff over  boundary changes

  22. fordie says:

    The bare faced cheek of it takes my breath away. The reason why many parts of Glasgow are in the state they’re in is the Labour Party. And it’s all so transparent. Desperately trying to seize power via Councils. No care for the impact on our Parliament or on our people. And put that together with the poisonous Lamont and her demonisation of (as a minimum) one third of the Scottish population. This is going beyond ‘Labour’s visceral hatred for the SNP’ and moving towards ‘Labour’s visceral hatred for those supporting independence’. Labour have given up even pretending that, if elected, they will represent all of the people. They represent only themselves.

  23. A2 says:

    I have caught the distinct impression that labour feel their coat in glagow is on a shoogly nail

  24. Feil Gype says:

    Ha they would devolve planning to councils and afore ye ken it aa the Labour ran eens have planning in for new nuclear power stations on their doorsteps !!! Vote Aye .

  25. Triangular Ears says:

    HandandShrimp, yes, I think you’re right.
    From Wikipedia:
    “The Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Act 2011 provided for the reduction of the number of seats in the Commons from the current 650 to 600. It also instructed the boundary commissions to undertake the Sixth Periodic Review of Westminster constituencies before 2014, which would have involved a notable redistribution of seats between the four parts of the UK and the near-equalisation of constituency sizes by registered electorate. In accordance with this, the boundary commissions began a full revision of constituency boundaries with an instruction to reduce the number of constituencies to 600 and to recommend constituencies which are no more than 5% above or below the standard size. However, in August 2012, Liberal Democrats Party Leader Nick Clegg announced that his party would oppose the implementation of the new constituency boundaries as a reaction to the failure of the government to enact House of Lords reform.[2] In January 2013, the Government lost a vote on this timetable, which effectively ended the entire process.[3] The boundary commissions were required to produce their reports by 1 October 2013 but they announced the cancellation of the reviews on 31 January 2013.[4][5][6][7] The next boundary review is now set to take place in 2018, meaning that the next general election must be contested using the same constituencies and boundaries as the 2010 election.”

  26. Luigi says:

    According to Labour, devolution was really great up until 2007, then for some reason it just didn’t seem to work anymore. 
    The big problem for Labour, however, is that most people in Scotland think devolution has been working effectively since 2007.  If the people of Scotland realise what Labour politicians are trying to pull here, they will never be forgiven.

  27. Triangular Ears says:

    Ach, was going to cut down that quote of mine but got locked out because of Luigi!

  28. Craig P says:

    Triangular Ears, that is unknown territory. Scottish voters have turned to Labour in the last few elections as the anti-Tory vote is stronger than any other impulse, but it is hard to know what would happen in 2015. I can think of three likely possible outcomes:
    1. I have a feeling the electorate might have a ‘what have I done?’ moment and return a SNP majority. 
    2. The next most likely scenario is disengagement with the Westminster process and a historic low turnout – which could go any way.
    3. Least likely, Labour might reinvent itself between now and 2015 as a genuine progressive alternative and gain voters who are voting *for* something, rather than against something else.

  29. Horacesaysyes says:

    Luigi Says – If the people of Scotland realise what Labour politicians are trying to pull here,
    And again, that’s the big problem – getting this sort of information out to people, shorn of the spin from the MSM.

  30. Mosstrooper says:

    OT Over on Bella Doug Daniel says
    I’m Y.E.S. Positive   What a great car sticker that would make.

  31. David Smith says:

    These people have elevated hypocrisy and mendacity to the level of fine art.

    I shudder at the thought of what will come if the people of Scotland are cowed into accepting the grip of Westminster’s tentacles next year. Vampires like Curran and Lamont will of course thrive as their nastiness and incompetence gains them ever more reward.

    There is only one way to prevent this and it is to get out there and spread the word.

    Our people aren’t stupid, just misinformed and if more and more can have their eyes opened to the truth then more and more, Curran and her cronies will be exposed for the crooks and shysters they are.

    Even if all you can do is link this site and its companions from your blog or email address, it is still getting the word out in a small way.

  32. HandandShrimp says:

    Talking about Curran’s speech this morning Weir managed to to excel himself on the dissembling front
    Basically according to Weir everything was wonderful when Labour ran Holyrood and it all went downhill when the SNP took over…which is why the SNP were returned with the first majority in Holyrood presumably. Whether people are convinced about independence or not they knew who was competent to run the administration and who was incompetent. I’m just surprised he didn’t repeat Baillie’s lies about hospital infections or pretend crime was lower when they were in power. Whatever merits there may be in giving Westminster back to Labour from the Coalition there are none in giving Holyrood back to Labour.

  33. Craig M says:

    Labour’s brand of local democracy is just their implementation of control of society, for Labour’s ends. Scotland is going to be punished in the event of a No vote. The Labour One Nation vehicle stinks of a Totalitarian rebranding; One Nation, Ein in Reich, ein Führer.

     speak all you get are the words of an extremely bitter and vengeful person. What I suspect is being discussed within the higher Labour ranks goes way beyond a simple shifting of government to Councils. The clue was in Lamonts reference to the SNP and a “virus”. The SNP are hated to such an extent that Labour will go to great lengths to curtail their activities post a possible No vote and that’s potentially scarey. To the mantra, “One Nation” add “One Party” and that’s going to be Labour, even if it means tearing up the current rule book.

  34. Ron Burgundy says:

    Contributors are correct in pointing out that Devolution has turned sour on the SLAB. The best they could hope for in 2016 would be a re-run of a coalition with the Lib Dems but at the moment they are a totally busted flush so SLAB are likely to be in the wilderness.

    Wilson for one stated as much a few moths ago in his weekly Johnston Press piece when he echoed Curran’s line that he was “doubtful about the benefits of Devolution for Scotland but he was in no doubt that Devolution had been a disaster for the Labour Party”

    So the game is in fact probably up for SLAB in Holyrood so they come up with this. A neat idea and one in which they will hope to get off the ground with the support of Tory / Lib Dem and useful idiot independents in the council chambers of Scotland.

    But I am not sure how many of the powers of the Scottish Parliament could be delivered in a Balkanised municipal context. It would be massively expensive to construct expanded bureaucracies in all of the 32 local authorities and hugely inefficient in the massively reduced rUK budgets after a No vote.

    Many councillors and especially SLAB ones lack the intellect, the energy or the time because they not are full time for such responsibilities. The whole thing could backfire for SLAB in a welter of incompetence, bad decisions and corruption. Christ they would need the MSM and the BBC for cover then big time.

    Also such a policy might appear such an obvious spoiling act of spite that voters locally would see it as such and vote accordingly
    Would make more sense for Curran to “go back to the future” and have powers devolved to the Scottish Office a la pre-1997 – NOW YOU’RE TALKIN

  35. Luigi says:

    Why do they think support for independence is a virus?
    Are they afraid it might catch?
    Oops – too late, 40% of the country infected and rising!

  36. ronald alexander mcdonald says:

    No doubt about it. Vote NO and The Scottish Parliament will be dismantled.

    What the brain of Britain Margaret Curran has effectively said is that the previous  Labour administrations in Edinburgh were a waste of space. 

    The poor in Easterhouse? Well after 13 years of Labour governments in Westminster they certainly have become poorer.

    Her message? Labour government either in Westminster or Edinburgh are crap!   

  37. Ananurhing says:

    “After all, talent rises.” As does scum. Interesting thought that Scottish Labour cooncillors aren’t scum enough to hack it at the top trough.

  38. Craig P says:

    As for subsidiarity, I like the idea. Right now Shetland, Orkney, and Eilean Siar councils are in discussions with the Scottish Government to gain more autonomy, whatever the outcome of the independence referendum. I hope there will be more powers at a local level after independence – provided they are appropriate. For e.g. who should determine ferry timetables – island groups or Calmac in the Central Belt?

  39. Craig M says:

    Think my typing went a bit wrong in my last post, but you get the idea, I hope.

  40. JLT says:

    If by next Spring, or the start of Summer, the ‘No’ camp still haven’t revealed the new powers for Scotland if it votes ‘No’, then I think the electorate will smell a rat! They will begin to realise that something isn’t right.
    If they try to put a (now, how do I put this politely) …’an illegitimate son’ of Devo-Max back on the table by late Summer, then the electorate will again, realise that the ‘No’ camp is panicking, and once again, they will smell a rat! 
    The longer this goes on, with nothing from the ‘No’ camp, and not endorsed by the London paymasters, then the worse it will be for the ‘No’ camp.
    The ball is in their court. The problem, is they don’t know if they should throw it, kick it, knee it, whack it, header it …or just plain leave it alone! They’re actually stumped!

  41. desimond says:

    Very polite Rev, i think we all know, that aint Mud!

  42. Murray McCallum says:

    Throwing mud and blocking light leading to the death of all that lies within. This is basically the real inside story on New Labour as written by Damian McBride.
    It’s no wonder the leadership of New Labour didn’t see the approach of the financial crisis – they were too busy fighting over first dibs on the tax payer funded trough.

  43. Peter A Bell says:

    Stu Campbell correctly identifies two conditions which must be met if local devolution is to be a “good thing”. That those who wield power at local level be competent and honest. And that the powers they wield be relevant and appropriate. But there is a third condition that I think is just as crucial. It relates to the purpose for which power is devolved to local authorities.
    It surely goes without saying that the devolution of power to local level should be motivated by a desire to better serve the interests of the people of Scotland. But can we trust that this is British Labour’s purpose? Is it not more likely that the intention is to allow British Labour controlled councils in particular to drive a wedge between the people of Scotland and their parliament? Is it not inevitable, given the known attitudes and priorities of British Labour in Scotland, that they will be more concerned with using any new powers at local level to undermine and embarrass an SNP administration at Holyrood, rather than to provide better services for the communities they are supposed to serve?
    Is it not all to easy to believe that British Labour in Scotland will seek to connive with the UK Government to by-pass the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government altogether in an effort to damage its credibility?
    Surely it is essential that devolution of powers to local level be done after independence under the auspices of a democratically elected Scottish Parliament committed to the interests of Scotland’s people rather than being the product of of a UK Government and a cabal of British political parties whose motives are, at best, highly questionable and seriously malign at worst.

  44. liz says:

    Labour would love power devolved to the councils as they like working behind closed doors so they can carry on with their bullying and intimidation which is the only way they seem to know how to work – think Ian Davidson, Jim Murphy etc.
    A story I remember from the 1st days of the SG or as the ‘cringers’ called it the SE was when  Frank Macaveety  was forced to apologise for misleading parliament when he turned up late for a ministerial question time claiming to have been unavoidably detained on ministerial business. It was later discovered that he was actually eating pie, beans and roast potatoes in the parliament canteen, whilst talking to a journalist.
    This highlighted to me how they were so used to lying and getting away with it.

  45. Arbroath 1320 says:

    Craig P says:

    Triangular Ears, that is unknown territory. Scottish voters have turned to Labour in the last few elections as the anti-Tory vote is stronger than any other impulse, but it is hard to know what would happen in 2015. I can think of three likely possible outcomes: 1. I have a feeling the electorate might have a ‘what have I done?’ moment and return a SNP majority. 2. The next most likely scenario is disengagement with the Westminster process and a historic low turnout – which could go any way.3. Least likely, Labour might reinvent itself between now and 2015 as a genuine progressive alternative and gain voters who are voting *for* something, rather than against something else.
    In my view Craig the 2016 election is going to be very interesting.
    Firstly as everyone knows the current SNP led Scottish Government is highly respected by the electorate.
    Secondly, after a YES win in 2014 I do not think nor believe the Scottish electorate will jump ship mid negotiations away from an SNP led Scottish Government back to Labour. Once we win next year I strongly believe the SNP will retain the trust of the people of Scotland to allow them to finish the necessary negotiations with Westminster before Scotland officially returns to being an independent country in 2016.
    Third, as has been proven in 2007 and 2011 the Scottish electorate have not trust in Labour when it comes to running our own country. As others have said, Labour is a busted flush in Scotland when it comes to Holyrood.
    2016 is too early, in my view, for Labour in Scotland to get its act together and show it has any prospects to become a leading political party in Scotland. Mind you the group led by Allan Grogan, Labour for Independence, could possibly, in my view, grow into what most folks want out of a Labour party in Scotland. The only question is whether Allan wants to take up the lead role in this and if L.F.I. do turn into the new Labour party in Scotland can they do so in time for 2016.

  46. Taranaich says:

    Is anyone else profoundly offended and disturbed by the equation of nationalism – and by extension, nationalists – with a virus?  They’re comparing an ideology and people who believe in it with something below even animals, below plant life, below scum.  Just think: this isn’t only Lamont thinking and saying this, she has a whole PR and spin team who looked at this, and decided to go with it.  Equating nationalism and nationalists with inhuman organisms.
    This is what we’re up against. We’re up against people who will openly and frankly compare other human beings to a disease. I envy those of you who can make jokes about it, because I feel nothing but the most nauseating disgust for Lamont, for Labour, for the politicians who peddle this poisonous, evil propaganda.
    Because that’s what this is. It’s evil. Disagreeing with independence is one thing. Thinking several individuals are evil another. But saying independence is a virus, that it corrupts, that it destroys – that people “infected” with this are destroying society – what else can you call it?

  47. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Is anyone else profoundly offended and disturbed by the equation of nationalism – and by extension, nationalists – with a virus?”

    Tune in at 5pm.

  48. chalks says:

    Devolution doesn’t fkn work, it’s why we want independence.
    To say that the NHS and education has always been ours is a misnomer as well and I wish to god that more Yes supporters would start using the Barnett formula and the privitisation of the NHS in England and Wales as an argument for indy, as it is one of our strongest, we are getting railroaded into running down our public services by a government imposing policies that we don’t want. 
    We don’t control the budget for them, therefore we have no control over it.
    Get angry. Get peoples attention.
    Sorry for the rant.  Long day and Curran’s mug sends me into a blind rage.   

  49. Murray McCallum says:

    Next up “cockroaches”? Where will this disgusting rhetoric end in New Labour’s race to the bottom?

  50. Keef says:

    What Taranaich said with added revulsion.

  51. Macart says:

    What an absolute disgrace to the human race they are. Labour the party of the working class? My fecking arse. They are not fit walk in the shadow of the poor of this country. Decades they had, decades and yet the result is this ….. piece of work questioning what good devolution has been?

  52. All I think has been said,and I cant add anything,just concur with all here.Labour are only looking for themselves over the short term.

  53. Gillie says:

    An interesting aside, Miliband’s speech as per Daily Record and the reference to  Labour delegate who suffered a heart attack in Liverpool.

    Miliband will say about delegate’s treatment at the Liverpool’s Broadgreen Hospital, “The doctors and nurses don’t ask whether she lives in England or Scotland. No. They know she is Scottish, and British. I don’t want Cathy to become a foreigner.”
    Well it transpires that the Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospital Trust do record patient profiles based on ethnicity/colour/nationality, religion, sex, age, marital status, etc; See here;

    So if you find yourself being treated in an English hospital you will be asked if you are British, and you can answer if you wish, “No, I am Scottish”. 

  54. Luigi says:

    Yep, I hear what you say.  I joked about it because I think it is a ridiculous comparison to make, but the intention is certainly dark indeed.  To label support for independence as a virus is a crude attempt to make it something repulsive, something malign, something highly dangerous, something to be snuffed out as quickly as possible.  Perhaps we are being prepared for a political sterilzation or quarantine programme after a NO vote.  I kid you not.  Very sinister indeed.
    Anyway, let’s see what the Rev has to say on the subject at 5.

  55. Training Day says:

    Virus, cockroaches, but I think I’ll go for nationalist ‘bacillus’ as Labour continue to plumb the depths – a word much favoured by a certain Austrian politician.

  56. Triangular Ears says:

    chalks, totally agree.  I’ve been making the ‘English NHS privatisation + Barnett = hostage to Westminster policy’ argument for ages now, and it is getting results.
    I work in the NHS in Scotland, and many of my colleagues have no idea how it is funded (or structured, incidentally).  When I explain to them the Barnett formula and what is going on in England I see worried looks.  The major misunderstanding is that people think Barnett decides what percentage of UK spending we get.  It doesn’t.  It decides what percentage of ENGLISH spending we get, making us hostage to their policy and costings.  That’s without even getting into the “indentifiable spending” bit.
    Also, people have no idea how much is spent on the NHS, either in the UK as a whole or just in Scotland.  I often throw in the soundbite that our share of HS2 (which we won’t even see here until the 2030s, if at all) would pay for Greater Glasgow’s entire NHS for 2 years, or that our share of London’s new sewerage system will pay for several of the smallest boards for a year.  This is where I get into the “identifiable spending” part of the argument.
    These are easy facts to construct and tailor towards your audience.  So, if you work in local government, equate it to your organisation’s budget.  If you work in secondary education, work out how many schools this will pay for.  These figures aren’t hard to find.
    People hear our arguments about the economics of independence, but don’t necessarily conceptualise them well.  I find that these simple explanations of Barnett, our funding and forced Westminster policy are very effective weapons in explaining the limitations and dangers of continued devolution vs independence.

  57. Hairy Potter says:

    That woman should just go back to writing books about wizards and owls.

  58. Inbhir Anainn says:

    Last week of course at FMQ’s I can recall Ruth Davidson making snide remarks when she retorted:

    The First Minister may stand here today and say, “I’m a wonderful person”, but a really unpleasant picture is building up of a bunker mentality and a man who refuses to be challenged, to take advice or to engage at all. How can it be that all those experts just do not get it, while the First Minister alone is always right?


  59. Alex Taylor says:

    That’s one of my daughters with the smiling face at the start of the video of the rally over at the Yes site.
    That’s the first glimpse I’ve seen of any of us on any footage: I was beginning to think we’d dreamt we were there.

  60. Ellie says:

    Well there certainly have been people that Devolution hasn’t worked for……Margaret Curran and the Labour Party being chief among them.
    This sends a shiver down my spine though and I think it should be taken very, very seriously, a no vote can only end in disaster.

  61. muttley79 says:

    I have posted on another site that Lamont’s comments may well be a precursor to more extreme rhetoric coming from SLAB.  I could well imagine SLAB figures, such as Lamont, comparing the SNP with the Nazis and Salmond with Hitler.  They have hinted at this in the past (see Anne Moffat in 2007), but have never actually said it.  It may not be too long in coming.  After all  Neil Kinnock called the SNP “fascists” in the House of Commons, and Ian Davidson said they were “Neo-fascists”.  Therefore, they have form for this kind of a smear, and I believe they are certainly capable of it given the circumstances, when they are fighting for their privileges and careers in London and Scotland as well. 

  62. david says:

    my wee pal was raised in easterhouse. he came to the rally with me on saturday. lives in stepps now. he told me people in glasgow are coming to realise labour councilors are gangsters in their city

  63. Kenny says:

    Is anyone else profoundly offended and disturbed by the equation of nationalism – and by extension, nationalists – with a virus?

    Unfortunately, this is an all-too prevalent mode of thought, which results in progressive micro-nationalism being tarred with the insidious brush of macro-nationalism, as purveyed by all manner of historical baddies. Even Mario Vargas Llosa was at it last year:

    When no less august a figure as a Nobel laureates is caught out making this mistake as part of a glib crack at right-onism, it’s easy to understand how the conflation has become so pervasive. Jo-La and the SLAB policy makers are fully aware of this, and latch on to it in a cynical bid to muddy the waters further.

  64. velofello says:

    In the Telegraph article “She also indicated her support to abolishing the Barnet formula ….and replacing it with  a system based on need”. Recently Gordon Brown spoke of sharing out resources on the basis of need.Now how do Labour propose to determine the financial needs of Scotland? The councils reporting to Westminster via some “Fiscal Study Group” quango appointed by Westminster, Holyrood having been disarmed of any authority?
    What is glaringly absent from Curran and Brown is their proposals and thinking on the subject of CONTRIBUTION. How much revenue will Scotland contribute? And how much will Scotland receive in some post-Barnet arrangement? A balance sheet for Scotland would make interesting reading. And of course ending the ex-region scam of crediting oil and gas earnings to the Westminster Treasury, and recognising these earnings as an element of Scotland’s contribution.
    So is Lamont’s FM Question Time appalling behaviour at FM Question Time a strategy to weaken the standing of the Scottish parliament by indulging in petty name calling and time wasting stupidity? 
    I smell shite.

  65. Dcanmore says:

    Sounds like Labour is gearing up to tear down Scotland’s parliament, from the inside and out.

  66. david says:

     anyone who can accept johann lamont as their leader does not deserve respect. i mean really, could anyone out there  honestly accept this person as a leader. its one of many ways to judge someone, (who they are prepared to follow) and msps are gonna be judged whether they like it or not and any reasonable  human being would not follow that woman.

  67. Doug says:

    Curran/Lamont/whomever –  their rants/slurs reminds me of this charming fellow.

  68. Training Day says:

    The message is now very definitely not ‘Vote No, get Nothing’; it’s ‘Vote No, lose the Scottish Parliament’.

  69. david says:

    they sat her next to carolyn flint during milibands speech. must be trying for the male votes

  70. muttley79 says:

    @Training Day
    Pretty much. 

  71. Eddie says:

    A no vote puts me in mind of turkeys voting for Christmas.

  72. Macart says:

    @Training Day
    What muttley said.

  73. mrbfaethedee says:

    @ cath
    You’re right.

    But they’re just kicking the can of democracy down the road. Or trying.

    They want power, if circumventing the existing demicratic order is what it takes that’ll do for them and we’ll have to catch up all over again.

    But we’re not playing anymore; come the referendum, come yes – “game’s up the poley”.

  74. magnus barelegs says:

    now we see the british labour party in scotlands true colours slowly but surely the mask is slipping, we have gotta get away from these utterly ruthless career troughers/gangsters and warmongering psychopaths or else.

  75. les wilson says:

    It is labour that is our problem, you can point the finger at them for many of Scotland’s problems including cheating us out of a just win in the last referendum  among the many.
    It is they, that really need taken down.
    The habitual labour voters must be appalled at the shambles their party are now in. They cannot take the beating they got in 2011, it interfered with their cosy way of keeping us hemmed in,and fuzzed their view of riches at Westminster. That panic’s them and the people see it!
    They really do not care about the people of Scotland, just as long as they can get their votes from us, and their noses in the Westminster trough.

  76. The Man in the Jar says:

    After all the positivity of the weekend now this. I await my unionist friends arriving in triumph declaring that “Thats yooz separatists fucked now we have proved that Labour is the party for working people” The thing is that they believe all this pish from labour. They just cant get enough of this crap.
    Very depressing indeed. 🙁 

  77. muttley79 says:

    @Training Day
    Virus, cockroaches, but I think I’ll go for nationalist ‘bacillus’ as Labour continue to plumb the depths – a word much favoured by a certain Austrian politician.
    Anyone who knows anything about European history in the first half of last century will be highly uncomfortable with the use of these terms of hate.  That a politician, from a so called social democratic party, is using them in the early 21st century to describe supporters of the independence of a small European nation, is a shocking glimpse of the virulent British nationalism now at the rancid heart of SLAB Unionism.  This is Lamont’s Heart of Darkness moment.

  78. desimond says:

    A problem Scottish Labour continue to face, and to which their actions and decisions show they have no idea how to handle let alone address, is that the majority of the voting population now see them for exactly what they are, while the party players only see the highly held positions of days gone by.

    To go from a party of power to become a party of total rejection of any policy or appraoch favoured by the population confirms their sense of importance only extends to whats good for the self and good for the Party.

    Theyre in the mud searching for scraps of wood to make a stable door when the SNP have already moved forward and invented the automobile.

    In conclusion. F*ck em!

  79. NorthBrit says:

    We should welcome this kind of thing.

    Because if it is ok to tar all nationalists with the same brush, it would be reasonable to adopt the same approach to people advocating political unions between nations.

    In particular, this year is the 75th anniversary of two European nations with a common language adopting a political union, which in fact is the most recent example of union between countries that subsequently became EU countries, so arguably is fraught with interest as a precedent.  

    At the time, the Times compared this “union” to the Union of Scotland and England.

    Strangely, the unionists who are so obsessed with anniversaries have not focussed much on this particular one.

    As the Beeb helpfully points out, Anschluss means “union”.
    Anyone for Anschluss?  I’d rather have a virus.

  80. chalks says:

    Well said triangular ears.
    As for vote No and lose the Scottish parliament……if Scotland votes no, we deserve to lose the Parliament, the national team, the rugby team even the name of ‘Scotland’ replace it with ‘gobshites’

  81. Taranaich says:

    Tune in at 5pm.
    Oooooh! *Watches clock intently*
    @Gillie: “The doctors and nurses don’t ask whether she lives in England or Scotland. No. They know she is Scottish, and British. I don’t want Cathy to become a foreigner.”
    Why would it make a difference, Ed? Are you saying foreigners don’t get treated in English hospitals? Because, uh, they do.
    @muttley79: I have posted on another site that Lamont’s comments may well be a precursor to more extreme rhetoric coming from SLAB.  I could well imagine SLAB figures, such as Lamont, comparing the SNP with the Nazis and Salmond with Hitler.  They have hinted at this in the past (see Anne Moffat in 2007), but have never actually said it.  It may not be too long in coming.  After all  Neil Kinnock called the SNP “fascists” in the House of Commons, and Ian Davidson said they were “Neo-fascists”.  Therefore, they have form for this kind of a smear, and I believe they are certainly capable of it given the circumstances, when they are fighting for their privileges and careers in London and Scotland as well.
    I feared as such. Comparing SNP & Salmond with the Nazis and Hitler (among others, like Clarkson comparing him with Mugabe, which almost made me kick in the TV even though it was clearly meant as a jest) is par for the course, but going the extra mile and attacking the people who voted for them is pretty horrific. All the effort we’re doing to normalise the idea of a Yes vote, and now people are using the same tactics normally reserved for zionist conspiracy nuts.
    @Kenny: Unfortunately, this is an all-too prevalent mode of thought, which results in progressive micro-nationalism being tarred with the insidious brush of macro-nationalism, as purveyed by all manner of historical baddies. Even Mario Vargas Llosa was at it last year:

    It really is problematic. I wasn’t always a fan of “civic nationalism” as a phrase, but I’m starting to think it’s vital as a way of emphasising that there actually is a difference between what we’re looking for and what other groups using the term are up to. Then again, when socialism is equated with communism (and the Soviet distortion of communism at that) how can we expect people to appreciate the nuances of nationalism?

  82. muttley79 says:

    @les wilson
    They really do not care about the people of Scotland, just as long as they can get their votes from us, and their noses in the Westminster trough.
    That is basically their mentality.  The defeats of 2007 and 2011 have meant that the rotten edifice of SLAB’s, and the other Unionist parties in Scotland’s, self serving British nationalism has been revealed.  What a horrible sight it is. 

  83. desimond says:

    To take us up up to 5pm…add your suggestions too

    Q: How many Scottish Labour Supremoes does it take to change a lightbulb?

    A: None. Keep everyone in the dark!

  84. Elizabeth says:

    O/T here’s an unedifying little tale from the Scottish Times:
    Pro-Union bra tycoon in bugging row
    During a tribunal relating to an unfair dismissal charge, it has been alleged that a former director of Michelle Mone’s Ultimo woman’s lingerie firm, MJM International, had his office bugged. Scott Kilday discovered the device in his office hidden among artificial flowers and promptly walked out of his job. He was later told that there were “business strategic reasons” for the bugging. Ms Mone is one of the leading business figures backing a ‘no’ vote in next year’s independence referendum.

  85. Taranaich says:

    Och, I don’t think you could top that!

  86. Vambomarbeleye says:

    Will labour even exist in Scotland in a few years time. The way they are and have been acting over the years dictates not. We all ways thought that the Tories were the ones to watch. How wrong we were. The enemy within.
    What I would like to see is a Independent Scottish Parliment that has non of the hurra boo politics of westminster. No second house with titled members. Infact I would like to see titles done away with except profesional ones that have been earned. Not too sure about Clan chiefs. I want a parliment that puts the people of Scotland first with the weakest in society at the front of the prioritys.
    Now we have that with the SNP as much as they are allowed too. How do the other main partys measure up. Not too good at all.

  87. Chic McGregor says:

    The increasing call for independence over the last few decades is down purely to the very worst kind of nationalism.  A nationalism which has increased over that same period and persuaded many to join the ranks of those seeking independence for Scotland.
    I refer, of course, to British Nationalism, which is based on delusions of grandeur and concepts of superiority, entitlement and priviledge.  
    It is innately imperialistic and oligarchical and has no compunction about ‘correcting’ other nations errant in their ways and if some payment can be taken by way of various resources, natural or human, for this act of beneficence,  then so much the better.  There should only be one global culture – theirs.  It is reactionary and recidivist but they truly believe the clock can be turned back to a time before the social advances which have unfortunately become accepted standards of civilization in the developed world in the past two hundred years.
    It is the very antithesis of Scottish nationalism, which is anti-imperialistic, egalitarian and anti-priviledge in nature with no desire whatsoever to ‘correct’, invade or rob any of the other nations of this world.  Where diversity of national cultural perspectives around the world is seen as a good thing for civilization.
    One of these is very bad and one is very good and it doesn’t take a lot decide which is which.
    Regarding ‘disease’, I don’t think that is in any way appropriate, but the kind of Nationalism espoused by the BritNats is, I think, delusional and evil to the point of mental illness.

  88. Rooster says:

    Devolving powers to Labour led councils will see a sharp increase in the privatisation of council services.

  89. Quick the suns oot says:

    Taranaich @2:46 It is frightening, I’m not sure I want to read whats coming at 5pm 🙁
    I went looking for the speech earlier and could only find a subscription only translation (politicsblog or something like that). I ended up on the Herald reading Ed Balls article and looking for some positivity today noticed that there were only 4 comments under it and between those comments, only 5 votes! The article was published yesterday, people giving up with them?

  90. Triangular Ears says:

    Well said Chic.  I’ll also add that the attempts to extinguish the Scottish identity by British nationalism goes counter to their claimed desires for multi-culturalism.  What could be more multi-cultural than every nation on earth running their own affairs?

  91. Big Jock says:

    Nearly as silly as Lamont claiming Nationalism was a disease. Surely she wasn’t referring to her British Nationalism. Sorry is it only non British nationalism that is a disease. She describes herself as an internationalist. Why not hand Westminster over to Brussells if that’s the case!

  92. Luigi says:

    Listen up, fellow viruses,
    Don’t you know that we need strong Labour councils to protect vulnerable people from the bedroom tax.  After all, have you not just been told that the Scottish government chose not to do anything about it?
    Power to the party people!

  93. Tamson says:

    Regarding Miliband’s latest remark – he meant to say
    British defibrillators for British myocardial infarctions!

  94. Caerdydd says:

    @chalk 2:54
    The NHS in Wales in not privatised and its internal markets have also been dismantled, as in Scotland. I appreciate that this is not the main concern of this particular post but it is important not to lump the RUK into one homogenous zone as is sometimes the tendency in what can be a very binary debate, i.e. Scotland vs ‘England’. Personally, I hope Scotland votes yes, but am under no illusions that this would have profound implications for Wales in a new state that would be even more Anglocentric.
    On topic, it is difficult to find anything constructive to say about Scottish Labour’s contribution to the debate, and these latest ridiculous pronouncements reflect a level of paucity and ineptness that the Scottish electorate would do well to punish in future, irrespective of the referendum vote.      

  95. Papadocx says:

    the once proud and capable scottish Labour Party with many capable, sincere and talented members who served the scottish people without thought for themselves or their party. 50 odd years ago the old gaurd started dying off and some professional politicians were slipped into the nest. They and their prodigy are now the incapable and selfish face of slab, I’m sorry to say. They appear to be beyond redemption just like their old tolly pals. Thank god there are labour voters for independance. If we don’t get a yes vote in the referendum be assured the unionist paties in Westminster goaded on by their scottish friends and hangers on will be out for revenge & punishment! the natives will have to be put back in their cage And get  rid of all that nonsense about Being capable of running their own affairs and being equal to our masters and betters.  God help us if it’s a no vote. VOTE YES!

  96. Shinty says:

    ‘virus’ she says – well, let’s hope it’s of epidemic proportions before Sept 2014.

  97. gordoz says:

    I know this ‘Stairheid rammy’ spouts little other than nonesense and utter bile but she is still a big asset to YES camp as long as Laybur think she is some kind of big hitter (???)

    Public see through this mince.

  98. CameronB says:

    “Except that what they mean by the phrase isn’t more powers being devolved (the thing the Scottish people actually want), but the powers we have being devolved further, meaning away from Holyrood.”
    This fits with the critique of the left, by one of the most highly respected scholars in the field of Humanities, Prof. david Harvey. He is highly critical of the belief that tinkering at the micro level has the potential to resolve macro issues.

  99. CameronB says:

    Re. virus. They are some of the most resilient and successful* organisms known to science.
    * In an evolutionary context.
    “Are viruses more biologically successful than cellular life? Here we examine many ways of gauging biological success, including numerical abundance, environmental tolerance, type biodiversity, reproductive potential, and widespread impact on other organisms. We especially focus on successful ability to evolutionarily adapt in the face of environmental change. Viruses are often challenged by dynamic environments, such as host immune function and evolved resistance as well as abiotic fluctuations in temperature, moisture, and other stressors that reduce virion stability. Despite these challenges, our experimental evolution studies show that viruses can often readily adapt, and novel virus emergence in humans and other hosts is increasingly problematic. We additionally consider whether viruses are advantaged in evolvability—the capacity to evolve—and in avoidance of extinction. On the basis of these different ways of gauging biological success, we conclude that viruses are the most successful inhabitants of the biosphere.”
    On the Biological Success of Viruses
    Annual Review of Microbiology
    Vol. 67: 519-541

  100. tartanfever says:

    Cameron, I really appreciate how thorough you are ! Dedication is certainly not in question on your part.
    So now we are viruses, does that mean Jackie Baillie is going to subject us to a “Scotland, the disease centre of the world’ type accusation at FMQ’s ?

  101. CameronB says:

    Don’t don’t how to do a blushing smiley.

  102. john king says:

    gordoz says
    “Public see through this mince.”
    Do they?
     I’m not so confident

  103. Jeannie says:

    It does sound to me as if the Labour Party will try to bypass the Scottish Parliament in order to have policies in Scotland similar to those in England.  I think it’s crucial that we get to see what’s in those papers relating to a Scottish Parliament that they won’t let us see.  It’s possible that what is in them might be crucial to establishing whether the Scottish Parliament is safe in the hands of the Labour Party, if we vote No.
    Does anybody know how we could force their hand on this – maybe start a petition?  It would at least raise awareness that they’re keeping information hidden and force them to explain why they won’t let us see what’s written there.  Highlighting that they’re keeping something hidden is enough to raise the question of whether Labour would protect the Parliament.

  104. Morag says:

    Hmmm.  You could try one of these official government e-petitions and try to get a lot of signatures.  Might at least raise awareness.
    I think the hidden stuff is likely to be a demonstration of how self-serving they were, and how the whole thing was designed to get and keep power for Labour and not at all to benefit the people of Scotland.  Maybe with a lot of stuff about dissing the SNP, and trying really really hard to thwart the democratic will of the Scottish people if that will should some day decide it quite fancied independence.
    If that’s so, it could generate quite a few tasty headlines.

  105. Karamu says:

    It sounds like a fairly small thing but free hospital parking is amazing in Scotland. When we were up last Christmas my daughter bashed her head and we took her to A&E just to be safe. When we parked up I scouted around looking for a pay and display or something (the lack of barriers was a strange one for me coming in).
    I actually asked the staff when we were leaving “is the parking free?” and they looked at me like I was saft in the heid…
    This all comes from a couple of experiences with my local hospital in the Midlands- when my daughter was born and last year when my wife had an eye infection. Both times the parking bill of attending hospital several times over about a week came to nearly fifty pounds (oh and the prescription charges for my wife’s eye was another thirty or so).
    In my personal experience the quality of care of NHS Scotland has been far superior as well.

  106. Mary McCabe says:

    It’s baffling to me how the Unionist parties have gone largely unchallenged on their plans for after a No vote.
    They promise vaguely that devolution would be looked at again, and sometimes there’s a bit of disgruntlement that they won’t specify what extra devolution they’d give. Sometimes an interviewer or a newspaper columnist voices a suspicion  that there won’t be any more devolution and so we’d be left with the status quo.
    Nobody ever seems to suggest the most likely scenario of all: that Holyrood will be stripped of its powers.
    Yet Scotland would have lost all the leverage that got its Parliament in the first place, throughout forty years of difficult, often arid campaigning.
    By giving some of Holyrood’s powers to local authorities the UK Government can claim that they’re carrying out further devolution. Any independence activist who complains about the weakening of Holyrood will be taunted with the principle of subsidiarity
    In this way the UK Government would replace a Scottish Government which was strong enough to challenge Westminster’s hegemony with a lot of wee councils scrapping with each other over the largesse dished out from London. The right to free university tuition would become a postcode lottery.
    The cities would be set against each other, Highlands against Lowlands, the islands against the mainland. Regardless of whether the councils continue to be dominated by Labour or whether the SNP take power in some areas, the practice of Divide and Rule would ensure there’s nobody in a position to challenge London rule for at least a generation.
    Scotland after a No vote? Be very afraid.

  107. Barontorc says:

    So, Lamont thinks being a nationalist is a virus – well, slap my thigh and tickle me under the oxters, but really – what do I care, what Lamont thinks!
    For me to say that I am totally disgusted with Labour, is an understatement.
    I don’t want to see hide nor hair of any of these Labour front-benchers in a coming independent Scottish Parliament and I’m ready to give full praise to the first of their type who declares that enough is enough, ‘I’m scunnered and totally fed up’, to cross the floor.
    Just how much p**h can these socialists take before jumping?

  108. Benoit says:

    all I got to say is watch out the Yes vote they will come at you with every lie propaghanda they can find and even put in some no votes without legal rights we had the same thing happen back in 95 in Quebec 50k immigrantsd were allowed to vote within the same year of arrival witch usually takes 5 years + its was ackowledge that some dead people voted within the Candian records hope this gives a heads up to what to expect of the no movement in the futur months

  109. crantara says:

    Benoit is right. I believe that they will use the postal vote system to attempt to cheat us out of victory.Given that there is a period of time before the vote when the BBC must be seen to be honest and impartial the postal voting papers must be withheld until we are into that period and the system changed and policed to prevent fraud.As for Curran,I,ve heard her describe herself as Glasgow Irish.Perhaps that,s why she doesn,t see Scotland as her country and therefore doesn,t have to care.

  110. Papadocx says:

    So Magrit, your glasgow Irish so which would you recommend? independant Republic of Ireland or the crown colony of glasgow! Try and engage brain before opening gub. 

  111. Papadocx says:

    The only thing we have to fear is ignorance, that could well defeat a yes vote. The national biased media faithfully reports the lies uttered by the establishment for their masters the ruling elite, to allow them the crumbs from the big table and a tin gong. The majority of people living in Scotland
    have been turned off politics long ago by the same corrupt systems. How to get the truth and facts out to the potential voters is the key. A little bit of truth and balance by the media is all That’s needed. Truth is the first casualty of war, so now you know how serious the establishment are taking this threat to their power and wealth. watch yer back!

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