The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Vote No, close Holyrood

Posted on August 05, 2013 by

You might find this an interesting read.


(No, we have no idea why his face is so shiny.)

The standout quote, if you’re in a hurry, is this:

“When you ask for powers that will inevitably lead to the break-up of the UK tax regime, then you are in a different ball-game altogether. So I think it is, in a sense, fraudulent to give the impression that if there is a No vote Scotland will still get greater powers. The prospect of further powers is ridiculous.

That’s why I’m completely distanced from the Better Together campaign. I have done nothing for them and am not lending my name to them because I don’t believe that it’s other than fraudulent.”

Don’t say you weren’t warned, from every possible direction.

Print Friendly

    78 to “Vote No, close Holyrood”

    1. An Duine Gruamach says:

      My.  That is a shiny face.

    2. Mosstrooper says:

      Almost as bizarre as oor Alan ( Ooo! there’s a bandwagon) Petrie but not nearly as funny. Off to bed. ‘night all.  

    3. Famous15 says:

      That needed to be said! All hail the Biinns. Listen…Listen…

    4. The Man in the Jar says:

      Tam Dalziel. You cant get much more establishment. His ancestor Lieutenant General Thomas Dalziel formed the Royal Scots Greys in 1681 to “keep civil order in Scotland” (Hunt down and kill Scots that resisted the kings attempts to enforce Episcopalianism = Covenanters!) In 1688 the regiment changed sides during the “Glorious Revolution” and took the side of William of Orange and fought against the Jacobites at Killiecrankie.
      Right Tam, time is up for you and your kind. Now feck off!

    5. Elmuzzerino says:

      Part of me agrees with him (maybe out of spite) but I really see no point in Holyrood continuing to function if there’s a NO vote in 2014. 
      If Scots really do want to re-solidify Scotland’s place in this world as a region of a larger country, then so be it. Close Holyrood and concentrate all efforts on Westminster again, after all that’s what normal ‘regions’ do. 

    6. Angus McLellan says:

      The strange thing is not that Tam said this. That’s no sort of a surprise. He’s been anti-devolution, anti-independence and pro-Westminster for over forty years.

      No, the strange thing is that no other politician seems to have said it. The majority of our MPs and Lords and ex-MPs are from the dead-cert, cast iron No camp and dead set against devomax or devoplus into the bargain. If you look at the Social Attitudes Survey, that’s less than half of the population. And of that group somewhere between a quarter and a tenth want Holyrood abolished.

      So why are all the other great and good who believe as Tam does – and there must be dozens and dozens of them who’d merit an interview in the Sunday Times during the silly season – keeping schtum?

    7. Doug Daniel says:

      I initially thought he had covered his face with slime, but on closer inspection it’s like when you use Paint to erase a particular colour from an image…
      Anyway, Tam Dalyell is one of a rare breed these days: an honest unionist. I’ll bet if you asked him, he wouldn’t have any hesitation in saying that Britain was his country. It’s clear he considers Holyrood to be little more than a jumped-up regional council, but of course they can’t say that and still expect to win, hence the “best of both worlds” pish.
      Being someone of a science background, I’m getting really tired of this “devolution is a process, not an event” line. There is a very simple model for describing a system: Input -> Process -> Output. We know what the input is: Scotland being totally run from Westminster. We know what the process is: Devolution. So what is the output, if not independence? If devolution is only ever meant to lead to the continuation of Scotland in the UK, then it isn’t a process – it’s a feedback loop. Could somebody from the unionist camp just tell us what Output devolution is processing us towards?
      As an aside, the behaviour of Euan McColm, Tom Gordon and Paul Hutcheon on Twitter today over the Labour For Indy business is making even an argumentative indy-obsessive like me start to feel sick to death of the “debate” so far. “Ooh, if you zoom in you can see a Labour For Indy leaflet in his hand” etc – it’s fucking juvenile, and people who aren’t interested in politics don’t give a shit about any of it. If it wasn’t for the fact that I know this is EXACTLY why the No camp are doing it, I would just ignore the internet for a year and come back after the referendum.
      (Except for checking out Wings every day, obvs.)
      I wish there was a way that journalists, politicians and party apparatchiks (including pro-indy ones, quite frankly) could be completely banished from the debate. I can’t even be arsed with the new blog that Pat Kane and others have been tweeting links to recently (Mair nor a roch wind) which made me feel like I’d had the misfortune of stumbling into a room full of politics students wanking themselves to death about shite that NOBODY. GIVES. A. FLYING. FUCK. ABOUT.
      Keep calm Doug, only 7 days to go until you’re away to Germany for a wee break…

    8. Barontorc says:

      One thing you can say is that Tam D, shiny face or not, is a conviction politician and to all extents even an honest man at that. He wants no truck with independence. He’s championed the iniquity set by  the West Lothian Question, which to my mind has been the harbinger of independence, given its logic.
      I had no idea, nor interest in his background, but not surprised in the least that he’s UK through the core, but than again, why no elevation to the despicable ermined mob? Hmmmm!
      Funny innit, how you can see the value in people.

    9. kininvie says:

      Dead right, Doug. Out canvassing, I meet No, Yes, Haven’t thought about it. I never, ever, meet anyone who spends time on Twitter obsessing about whether LfI is some kind of scam or not.
      If the referendum is lost, it will be because we have all convinced ourselves that we are talking to (and about) people who Matter – ie those like ourselves (on whichever side)
      We don’t matter – the only people who matter are the voters who remain to be convinced

    10. Barontorc says:

      Forgot to mention – Tam D doesn’t hold a candle for Tony Blair either  – according to wiki he thinks he’s a torag – Dalyell accused the then Prime Minister Tony Blair of being a war criminal. Stating, “since Mr Blair is going ahead with his support for a US attack without unambiguous UN authorisation, he should be branded as a war criminal and sent to The Hague.”[10]

    11. Alba4Eva says:

      Lets hope Catalonia vote yes on the 7th or 14th September 2014.  That would be a serious game changer.   (Story on Newsnet Scotland)

    12. NorthBrit says:

      That Witchfinder General thing on National Collective was closer to the truth than we realised:
      Maybe Tam’s lost another card game with the devil, with the forfeit being to work for Better Together. 
      Despite being a SLab politician, there are depths to which he won’t sink, lest he besmirch the family name, which is currently relatively clean. 
      Anyone would look a bit shiny under the circumstances.

    13. Erchie says:

      I also noticed that Euan McColm “tell me where you work” thing, which has an implied chilling effect, much as his failed “tell me where Stuart Campbell lives” was supposed to do.

    14. scaredy cat. says:

      @Doug Daniel
      Talking about being juvenile you should see Better Together’s facebook page. Some idiot has been threatening to hack into people’s computers to release personal information. This follows some comments posted on their page by another group called ‘Silenced by Better Together’ who are compiling data on censorship on the BT site.
      Looks like trolling but the guy was really spooked. Interesting that BT didn’t see fit to censor the threatening posts. The stats collected by SbBT show how much censoring goes on. It’s unbelievable.
      And they call us bullies and moan when Alex Salmond doesn’t speak out! Talk about double standards.

    15. Chic McGregor says:

      Ah, the Pest Lotion Question.

      Actually, looks like the only pictures they could find of him had been ‘Hitlered’ and had to be photoshop edited (badly).

    16. Chic McGregor says:

      @Doug Daniel
      Happy holidays, hope you got Schotten preise.

    17. CameronB says:

      Is the father of the House confused, through his association with ill-informed members of the general public or the Establishment, or is he deliberately trying to mislead the public?
      “There are a lot of people that would now go along with it because they don’t want the break-up of the country and they think this is the way that it’s heading”.
      Is he suggesting we all live in a country called Britain?

    18. Fergie35 says:

      Dalyell looks like Father Jack Hanlan from Father Ted! Erse!

    19. craig m says:

      I don’t recall Tam D resigning from the Labour party in protest at Tony B, or did I miss something. In my opinion he’s just another professional career politician full of his own importance. What good has he ever done? He reminds me of G Galloway with posh accent, daring to be controversial and outspoken because he identified a niche career for that sort of thing. How did he do in the expenses scandal? Clean or mean?

    20. Chic McGregor says:

      TBF I’d much rather have an open and honest Unionist like Tam than the sleekit closet U variety we often have to deal with.

      You might not agree with his views but you can respect him for his candor.

    21. david says:

      never liked nor respected dalyell. as he wishes our children to be ruled by right wing political aristocracy all their lives, i was right not to like or respect him. i agree with above comment

    22. Seasick Dave says:

      No, thanks, Mr Dalyell.
      The thought of a future under Westminster rule fills me with despair.
      A new, independent future ruled from Holyrood at least gives me hope for the future and ensures that we will no longer have hideous nuclear weapons on our shore and a government in thrall to military misadventures on the other side of the world.
      We have the chance of a new future which can only be achieved by a YES vote.

    23. Erchie says:

      Remember that Tam Dalyell took his mother’s name, presumably for the higher cachet for having the name Tam Dalyell of the Binns, rather than Thomas Loch.

      I believe he was chairman of the Conservative Association at University, so not much of a drift for him

    24. Robert Kerr says:

      I note that the Times has no mention of the “West Lothian Question” first proposed by this person, known in his constituency as “Tory Tam the Labour Man”.
      Barontorc is of course correct. The WLQ is the logic behind all this devolution/independence problem.
      There is no political solution other than independence. 
      Power devolved is power retained. If westminster wishes to dissolve and annul the Scottish Parliament all I can say is “Bring it on !”
      It is important for everyone to know that that can still happen….
      Hail Alba

    25. HenBroon says:

      He returned to Britain upon The Restoration of Charles II. By 19 July 1666 he was appointed commander-in-chief in Scotland, with orders to subdue the Covenanters. Dalyell defeated them at the Battle of Rullion Green, in the Pentland Hills, south of Edinburgh. He treated the defeated with great cruelty, imprisoning some 1,200 Covenanters in Greyfriars Kirkyard amongst other things, earning him the nickname “Bluidy Tam“. Legends of his cruelty were probably exaggerated by anti-Royalists. The General obtained several of the forfeited estates of his opponents.
      You can understand why Tam Dalyell is what he is given his ancestry. For him to be any other way would mean the betrayal of his ancestors and the admission that he lives in a castle that was obtained by a treacherous war criminal. Like all unionists who have lived of the union all their lives, to reject it would be unthinkable. The colonised jocks are on the run though, if you look at the hysteria emanating from that orifice that is the U-KOKS.

    26. Geoff Huijer says:

      I would suggest that some local councils are against Holyrood only now that their little Labour-Love-In has been disrupted.
      It would be interesting to know how many Labour run councils are ‘supporting’ the Bedroom Tax through inaction.
      The biggest Labour one I can think of is Glasgow City Council and we all know how they operate – I’m sure they would rather be left well alone…

    27. Simon says:

      There is a lot of scope for running with this.

      Logically, the two stable end-points are independence on the one hand; or, on the other, a unitary state, with a single legal system, single education system, etc. i.e. Scotland is truly absorbed within a greater England and is left with no distinguishing institutions or status.

      Anything inbetween is a temporary fudge.

    28. Robert Kerr says:

      Very well put indeed.
      This is the absolute and brutal truth.
      The only question that needs answered is “Is Scotland a Country and a Nation…. Yes or No ?”
      Hail Alba

    29. HenBroon says:

      The Lochs and the Dayells have a vile CV as far as Scotland is concerned.
      Ooor Tam has every reason to be so sour faced, he failed to join the hallowed ranks of the officer class and then failed to gain high office in Westminster. His latest wittering can be regarded as the wretched bitterness of one who failed to gain entry to the upper class to which he no doubt feels he belongs. Trooper Tam, whit an arse.

    30. HenBroon says:

      Another one that springs to mind in the mold of unionist barkers was, Sirrrrrr Nicholas Fairrrrbairrn, as the speaker addressed him when he was called to give his post lunch gin sodden burblings in the house of commons. What a bloody embarrassing spectacle he was.

    31. Tom Hogg says:

      “Devolution was always intended to be a process” – seems to be one of the new-ish Unionist lines (ps if they can capitalise nationalist then I’m doing the same back).
      I don’t recall George Robertson saying that, nor more recently Ruth “line in the sand” Davidson.  It’s another pile of horse shit that they are trying to feed the less knowledgeable electorate.

    32. Caroline Corfield says:

      @Simon, I agree they are the only stable conclusions. I believe the current Tory Party also see that, they will only accommodate a Scottish No vote by ignoring the country further but they will not integrate Scotland into England, thus at some point down the line the desire for independence will rise again, possibly at a less beneficial economic juncture, with worse negotiators on our side, and a worse outcome for the newly independent Scotland. But Westminster has no appetite for the wholesale amalgamation of Scotland into England (sorry did I mean The UK?), stagnation and poverty are all that awaits the result of a No vote. It might be jam but its got green furry stuff on it. 

    33. Hetty says:

      T D has land and he has a big house does he not? ie; a very very priveleged life.
      It’s interesting, it’s the old people I talk to who are more dead set against Independence. They are most often not connected to the internet and read the daily papers and believe what they say, and I’m talking about very intelligent older very retired people here, they hate the idea of Independence and they are mostly though not all, staunch royalists. They are also all comfortably off with no mortgage and most retired early. They had no college fees, had good jobs for life and were able to buy their houses etc. It was a different world for them. I wonder do they care about the children they’d be condemning to a life of misery and turmoil under a tory regime that has no interest what so ever in their needs and aspirations.
      Crikey just read the above post from Simon, is he suggesting assimilation? Just felt a shiver down my spine there, how creepy and sinister this sounds, vote no, get totally emasculated, brrrr it’s cold in here.

    34. tartanfever says:

      Doug says : ‘Anyway, Tam Dalyell is one of a rare breed these days: an honest unionist.’
      Not sure I’m with you on that one Doug, his whole position is based on the myth that in the event of a ‘No’ vote Scotland will be delivered more powers by Westminster, which as we know is absolute rubbish.

    35. Robert Kerr says:

      You have all, including me, missed the core point of his argument which is “changing the UK tax regime”. Yes follow the money every time.
      Hail Alba

    36. JLT says:

      Tam, to a degree, represents the views of quite a few folk of his age. My parents are the same.
      They keep telling me that they would rather see an end to the Parliament, and they talk about the ‘Good Old Days’ when we were all British (even though I’m a history buff, I struggle to work out which era that was – was it the fifties (poverty after the war), the sixties (whit! the Beatles and drugs)…can’t be the seventies or eighties (all those strikes and poverty) …so when was it?).
      Anyway, I find that a lot of folk over the age of 60 consider themselves ‘truly British’. I bicker with them when we talk politics, and they have a hatred of Salmond (why? I have no idea! When I ask, they just say he is corrupt (He’s corrupt! God help the rest of them then!).
      I think with the passing of our parents generation over the next couple of decades (both my parents were born in the early 1940’s), I think we see a heavier emphasis on Independence, as the stalwarts of the Union will be gone. I wonder in this case …did the Referendum come 20 years too soon?

    37. JLT says:

      Your right, he was not the worst politician out there, but at the same time, he was not all that honest. I remember he got his fingers burned during the MP’s expenses scandal (£10,000 bookcases if I’m right). For me, that was just one thing he got caught out on. What else did he wangle for himself over the years through tax payers money.
      But compared to Blair, Brown, Cameron or Osborne, Dalyell is practically a saint!

    38. roboscot says:

      Shared sovereignty is perfectly feasible and countries like the US and Germany prove it. The problem with shared sovereignty in the UK is that London is not prepared to share sovereignty, to in any way reduce the sovereignty of Westminster. We can have ‘local’ control of those things – like our legal system, education system and health service – that don’t matter to Westminster, but even here the control is devolved and Westminster retains its sovereignty.

    39. Atypical_Scot says:

      Slap! Er. 

    40. Craig Dalzell says:

      I do like the old poem attached to the clan.

      “Deil an Da’yell begins wi yae letter; Deil’s no Gude and Da’yell’s nae better”

    41. Morag says:

      He’s also right down the rabbit hole as a conspiracy theorist.  I could practically recite his stock speech questioning the Lockerbie conviction from memory, I’ve heard it so often, and it’s all rubbish.  He comes over as someone who has gleaned some information early on, formed an opinion, and then never wavered.  No matter what new information comes to light, no matter how much of his early information is shown to be mistaken, he has his little spiel and he ain’t changing the script.

    42. Robert Kerr says:

      TDs house the Binns is funded by the National Trust.
      “In 1944, the house, its parkland, its contents, and an endowment for its upkeep were given to the National Trust for Scotland by Eleanor Dalyell”
      I wonder if the endowment from 1944 is sufficient for the present or if the NT subsidised the upkeep.
      Time for some investigative journalism…. Oh dear.
      Hail Alba

    43. seoc says:

      Tam D comes over as an honest man, even as an honest politician.
      His description of Westminster and its inhabitants simply underline our need to get the hell away from it.

    44. velofello says:

      @ Doug Daniel; i enjoyed your expressed view on “devolution is a process” however I suggest that a Decision Tree analysis is more fitting to describe the politics process in Scotland.
      Vote Yes – proceed to independence;vote No – loop back to integration with Westminster
      @ Hetty: careful now, i’m one of these oldies you describe and can tick each one of the benefits you describe.I’m also an active Yes campaigner. My now well worn line to fellow oldies of the “I’m quite content with things as they are” response is “and future generations are their prospects such that they should be content or is that not our concern?”. Usually gets a feet shuffling reaction.

    45. John Brownlie says:

      Tam is a career politician who knows which way his bread is buttered but it would be interesting and concentrate minds if the vote was between independence or a return to Westminster rule.

    46. Ian says:

      Those of us who have spent our lives striving for a democratic Scottish state should make no excuses for the outpourings of this Labour dinosaur. He is an enemy of democracy, one of the ugliest faces of unionism and is anything but an honest politician. Clearly he has no understanding of what is at stake in the debate on Scotland’s future. For a self-confessed socialist to advocate the abolishing of our national parliament and to deliberately consign us to a nightmare of a future moulded by English Tories whose only interest is the asset stripping of our country is a perfect example of why we have to relegate Labour to the annals of history. A no result in the referendum is not an option.

    47. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “his whole position is based on the myth that in the event of a ‘No’ vote Scotland will be delivered more powers by Westminster, which as we know is absolute rubbish”

      Um, that’s the exact OPPOSITE of what he says in the piece.

    48. Holebender says:

      I’m confused; Tam Dalyell wants to scrap Holyrood but praises the Unionist parties for being “committed to further devolution”. Is this to be devolution Mk2 in which some powers are ceded to local councils, who report directly to Whitehall?

    49. CameronB says:

      So if he is an honest man, then Tam Dalyell would appear to be confused, as he does not seem to recognize the component countries that are joined in political union to form the unitary state called Britain.
      Can you be honest if you don’t know what you are talking about?

    50. Rod Mac says:

      I do not accept the blanket over 60s are all Brits etc.
      Just as i refse to accept all Rangers Supporters are die hard British unionists.
      When you whippersnappers were not even a glint in your old man’s eye “youngsters” like me were scaling up and down lamp posts delivering leaflets  getting Winnie and Margo  and Jim Sillars elected.
      We were hte torch bearers that have ensured this once in a lifetime referendum is happening.
      Do not write off the over 55s etc these results in Hamilton and Govan  the 2 million signatures on the Covenant could  not have happened without that feeling of Scotland in the hearts.
      The YES is in every voter irrespective of age or football allegiance.
      It is up to us the completely convinced to bring out that desire for a Better Scotland in all age groups and all sections of our society.
      Because some are harder than others to convince does not mean they are a lost cause it means we are not working hard enough.

    51. The Man in the Jar says:

      I can’t believe the sympathy for this dinosaur in the comments.

    52. Jimbo says:

      “Tam D comes over as an honest man, even as an honest politician.”
      I don’t recall ever hearing him ask for the McCrone report to made public back in the 70s. I don’t recall him, or any other of his Scottish Labour ilk, complaining about McCrone’s report being suppressed. I don’t recall him ever talking Scotland up, or telling us the true worth of our country and it’s natural resources.

    53. Red squirrel says:

      While TD’s hatred of Holyrood renders this article a foaming at the mouth rant, the stark alternative to independence strikes me as an absolute truth the unionists will aim for. Another fear tactic perhaps but something the no and undecided voters need to consider before they commit.

    54. Simon says:

      Power sharing is not truly possible because of the nature of Westminster. For a thousand years give or take the Westminster system has evolved and developed, and one if its key principles is the idea of the Crown in Parliament. The Crown is the ultimate source of all power and that power is wielded by Parliament. One insightful commentator said that in Westminster, power is like a cricket ball, hard and solid and indivisible. It can’t be meaningfully shared.

    55. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Hen Broon
      I believe the troop of Irish dragoons,as mentioned in the Bonnie Lass of Fyvie were involved in that battle and many of them were buried in the grounds around Edinburgh castle. Other were imprisoned. Many of the Kanes found in large numbers around Central Scotland are reported to be descendants.
      I think the fact that Tam Dalyell has described the Better Together campaign as “fraudulent” will have a very strong effect

    56. SCED300 says:

      If there were a No vote the demotion of Holyrood back to a regional assembly would be high on the list for many Conservatives and, I believe, Labour MPs.
      That would be a first step; its abolition would be a distinct possibility as long as the SNP hold power. Though, in the hands of hard line Unionists, it would continue to be tolerated, but with minimum control of taxation.

    57. david says:

      ive took a huge liking to humza yousaf. genuinely nice guy, the kinda guy u would want as one of your best pals

    58. Bugger (the Panda) says:

      Whist I am with you on his silence wrt McCrone, I think I can understand and with difficulty have to live with that. He does what is says on the tin. He is a Westminster and London supremacist; end of.
      It is those who purport to work for us in Scotland, who tell us that Scotland needs us to fight against Westminster and we are your saviours. It is the fifth column who say they are with us and secretly work against our better interests, for their personal benefit. Dalyell was not that, he had all he could have possibly needed from his family and their wealth and influence. He was an enemy, easily identifiable and proud of that.
      It is the forked tongued words from Lamont, Tavish, Bain, Murphy, Moore  (maybe saveable?) Stair Heid, FFSake et al who are the real enemy within, not to mention the Dead Tree Press, BBC (Scotland) and the hired liars on the No side. 
      They are the people for the tumbril, come the dawn.

    59. JLT says:

      Hi Rod Mac,
      Apologies if you perceived that I believed all over 60’s are staunch unionist. No disrespect – it’s just from experience with my parents generation that quite a lot of them do believe in what is a ‘United’ Britain, and that we are British first, Scots second. I find that folk in their 30’s and 40’s are more open to Independence.

      And yes, I wholeheartedly agree with you, that a percentage of Rangers fans will also vote for Independence.

      However, make no bones about it, my parents are utterly frustrated at the Unionist parties. They keep waiting for a ‘saviour’ to come along and rescue British politics, but we all know that that is never going to happen! While the money men of big business and the banks control the parties, they control the politics. Anyone idealists within the unionist parties will be turfed to the side. We now have American style politics, and it is something that the Establishment has grasped wholeheartedly since the early 1980’s (thanks to Reagan and a couple of the big trader giants who got the keys to the Federal Reserve).

      I have told them that the only way to change Britain is to ‘break it.’ They think that is extreme, but that is the only way, we will get real change.

    60. a supporter says:

      About all that can be said of Tam Dalyell is that he is a stupid old fart, and he is doing it into the wind. His suggestion of closing down Holyrood is ridiculous. There is no appetite anywhere in Scotland (nor in Westminster) for getting rid of Holyrood. And if it were attempted there would be absolute hell to pay, bearing in mind that the majority of Scots want MORE powers. And what with the internet and other social media, Scots would not meekly accept such an event.

    61. Dorothy Devine says:

      I am one of the ” ancients” so time is of the essence as far as a Yes vote is concerned because I won’t be around in 20 years time.
      But being an ancient I remember strange things from many moons ago one of which was a scrap of a little ditty with a chorus of ,” But Dalyells awa with the fairies…..” to the tune ” he danced awa , he danced awa ,he danced awa with the exciseman…!
      Any other golden oldies out there throw any more light on it ?

    62. callum says:

      I have the same experience, the vast majority of the baby boomer generation have “too much to lose” whereas the GenerationX (those in their 30’s, 40’s) have had to deal with looser employment rights, prospects of working 10 years longer than their parents to bolster their contributory non-protected pensions and had to pay student loans instead of receiving grant aid.
      Any populace that feels “comfortable” will not vote for change.  There’s a whole chapter about this theory in the book “Freakonomics”.

    63. HandandShrimp says:

      Tam and Alan Cochrane – a marriage firmly forged in the bowels of a very peculiar Hell.

    64. Ronnie says:

      @Dorothy Devine
      I’m probably of similar vintage, as my three score and ten are behind me, and I’ve been waiting for this since the coronation.
      Father-in law is 89, ex-Lancaster air gunner, who hasn’t got a kind word for any politician and hasn’t voted for years, is also voting ‘YES’.
      I think that you may have confused ‘Deil’ with ‘Dalyell’, check this out here –
      Vote Yes to make Scottish history,
      Vote No to make Scotland history.

    65. Ronnie says:

      Oh! Just re-read your post, sorry, don’t know of the alternative version!

    66. Onzebill says:

      Like one or two others on site today I am somewhat older than the average visitor at 66 years old with a wife who is only slightly less old  but I have wanted Scotland to be an independent nation since as long as I can remember and becoming aware of UK/Scottish politics and I can assure you that we will both be voting YES even if it makes us poorer in some way at first, freedom may always be a struggle initially but in my opinion worth the effort for the long term.
      I have always thought that it was/is totally wrong to be controlled by a country that had and has no interest in us apart from what can be asset stripped by such as Crown Estates, tne EBC etc. etc., these early thoughts being reinforced by having spent around six-seven years living in the London & Manchester areas in my forties/fifties.
      Dalyell is a strange beast as noted above he never made it to the top, a foot soldier for the right and I think more a Tory than anything resembling the Socialist he pretended to be when it suited him and someone for whom I personally had a great dislike .

    67. Another London Dividend says:

      The Man in the Jar says: at 12.55

      Tam Dalziel. You cant get much more establishment than the Bluidy Tam Dalyell connection .
      Actually “Tam Dalyell” was born as the Rt Hon Thomas Loch and is a direct descendant of Thomas Loch the infamous factor for the Duke of Sutherland.
      To ensure family money was inherited his parents adopted his mother’s name of  Dalyell after the 11th baronet was born.
      He then went to King’s College, Cambridge to study History and Economics, where he was Chairman of the Conservative Association, and Vice-President of the Cambridge Union Society but failed to be elected to its presidency.
      The moniker “Tam” was given to him by West Lothian Labour Party who wanted to portray him as a man of the people in the 1962 by election.

    68. James Morton says:

      The problems for Dalyell is that there is no British Identity. It’s was and remains a collective term that has acquired to much negative baggage over the years. No attempt has ever been made by any political party to take the disparate parts of the Union and try to forge a nation out of them. What you have is 300 years of compromise and fudges to try and keep the whole rotten mess together.

      The other issue for Dalyell is that Better Together don’t even believe that Scotland is part of Britain, hell according to them its barely part of the union. It clearly contributes nothing to it and they have pretty much painted Scotland as being the mere recepient of UK largesse.

      That he is a conviction politician there can be no doubt. Its just a shame he is defending something thats being torn apart from Westminster, not Holyrood. If he wanted to save the Union he really should have been starting there.

    69. Marian says:

      At the Accord Hospice charity dinner event in Paisley last year last year Andrew Neil of the Politics Show said:-

      “Devolution, the Calman Commission, the Scotland Bill, the Edinburgh Agreement, all of this and more you have, is because Westminster parties are scared of the SNP.  If you vote NO you massively change the balance of power and they will not only give you nothing, but will probably take powers away from the Scottish Parliament”. 

    70. AnneDon says:

      I do not agree with Tam Dalyell’s opinions on how great Westminster is, and I have not met anyone outwith the Labour party who wants it abolished.
      However, his comments on the professional politician career ladder giving us a generation of politicians who are out of touch with ordinary folk.
      Of course, Tam was never in touch, an effect of his privileged background!

    71. AnneDon says:

      Didn’t Auld Tam marry into the Dalyell family and change his name to stop it dying out? Or am I confusing him with someone else?

    72. handclapping says:

      See and read the wikis from HenBroon at 8:46 above.

    73. ann says:

      Tell you what!  In the event of a NO vote and if Westminster try to close down Holyrood and take away powers etc., etc.,etc. 
      Scotlands’ People should declare a Unilateral Declaration of Independance.

    74. Chic McGregor says:

      I have absolutely no sympathies with Dalyell’s views but at least he doesn’t attempt to hide them.  
      To use a more than usually appropriate old maxim; ‘Better the Devil you know.’

    75. mato21 says:

      Sorry ann if Scotlands people cannot go out and vote yes there is no chance of them backing UDI or anything else I’m afraid

    76. James Westland says:

      Interesting piece in the Herald from 2001, when Henry McLeish endorsed the name Scottish Government instead of  Scottish Executive:
      Heres an example:
      “The reaction from some Labour MPs at Westminster was immediately hostile.
      Mr Dalyell, the author of the West Lothian question, raised the issue at a meeting of the Scottish Labour parliamentary group at Westminster last night.
      ”Maybe people will understand now why I was so vehemently opposed to devolution for two decades. This is a very important moment,” he told The Herald.

    77. FiatVoluntasTau says:

      @Dorothy Devine
      I am not one of the ‘ancients’ but my Granny knew George Donald who was in Scotland the What? and one of there bits was a musical number with ‘Dalyell’s awa’ wi’ that fairies’ Not sure if it is the original or not 

      Bit late maybe 😛

    78. Sheena W says:

      @AnneDon, you are confusing him with someone else. He is married to Kathleen Wheatley whose father was an eminent judge. To give Tam his due, he is consistent, honest and determined and will not kiss anyone’s backside.

    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