A dose of reality should keep us in union

Robert Hoskins seeks, but fails so far to find, an honest appraisal from independence supporters of what the coronavirus support package means to many Scots, and hopes that with new leadership Labour can more effectively champion our vital union.

If I were studying for a masters in contemporary Scottish politics and had to choose a topic for my 20,000 word dissertation, I would choose the Scottish media’s coverage of the 2014 independence referendum campaign. I would drill down on that topic limiting it to the role played by pro-independence journalists only.  I would find the work of these journalists in all the main Scottish based dailies and their Sunday equivalents.

My search dates would run from the day the referendum was called in 2012 to September 18th 2014. I would then enter the following key names to generate the articles for my search: Macwhirter, Kane, Hassan, McKenna, Riddoch, Wishart and McMillan. I would then enter key words like Scottish independence referendum, fiscal transfer, Barnett Formula, fiscal deficit, population share of UK debt, capital flight, currency, lender of last resort. I would painstakingly find, retrieve and read every article these journalists wrote on the subject of Scottish independence over this 3 year period paying particular attention to every article which included a critical approach to any one of the topics highlighted in my key words search.

Out of this vast canon of work, my overarching hypothesis would be that I would expect to find only a handful of articles that these journalists had written that addressed any of the topics highlighted in my key word search, currency probably being the most likely ‘hit’. I would also confidently predict that from those handful of articles identified, not one would have questioned the economic viability of an independent Scotland, let alone concluded that independence was not the best outcome for the country. I would go so far as to say that it is an impossible task to write a pro independence article spelling out in detail what services would be slashed to accommodate the loss of the £10 billion fiscal transfer on day one of independence, and still conclude that independence would be the best outcome for the country.

Let’s fast forward to the last fortnight of March 2020 and repeat the above exercise, using the same journalists but this time changing the key search words to Rishi Sunak, £9 billion bailout of self employed, bailout of private sector, £2,500 per month guaranteed and, crucially, Indy Ref 2 and independence, and see what articles we generate.  Surely a fortnight on from the initial announcement of the private sector bailout and a week since the announcement of the self employed rescue package these journalists would have been falling over themselves to tell us how an independent Scottish state would have been able to pay the wages of hundreds of thousands of Scots who are currently facing lockdown? Surely at least one would have risen to the challenge? To be fair to them, a number of those journalists have indeed written pieces on the bailout package itself, but not one of them to the best of my knowledge has put it into the context of how an independent Scotland would respond. I wonder why?

So let me step up to the plate instead. There is as much chance of me bailing out my fellow citizens from my meagre savings account as there would be an independent Scotland without a lender of last resort, mired in debt with the millstone of a fiscal deficit of £12.6 billion tied around its neck. The only thing that we do know for an absolute certainty is that the First Minister would be on the phone to the IMF pretty damn quick asking it to bail the country out instead.

One would have thought that most of the country could now see what Scexit-sceptics have known for ages, and that is when Scotland faces a financial crisis the Empress Scexit is, and has always been, completely starkers. But apparently this message is not getting through. The latest set of opinion polls show that the exact opposite is true, that an ever increasing majority of the country still perceive her not only to be fully clad but dressed in a Saltire suit of impenetrable armour. 

How does one explain this? What is it about the thought of bankruptcy which is so attractive to so many fellow Scots that they are not only going to vote for the SNP in record numbers at the Holyrood election but they also appear to be eating further into the slender majority still held by Remain in the UK if there was another Scexit referendum?

Take the 330,000 part-time working Scots, the majority of whom I would imagine would be independence supporters who have just received the welcome news that they will have 80% of their income up to £2,500 per month reimbursed as from June. Many of those independence supporters you would have thought would now be experiencing genuine relief, perhaps for the first time ever, that we dodged a bullet in 2014 when we voted to stay in the UK.

You would think that those very same independence supporters would now be wanting answers to the very same questions that those independence supporting journalists dare not ask nor answer. Just how would an independent Scotland guarantee the salaries of hundreds of thousands of fellow Scots to enable them to put food on the table for themselves and their families?  One possible answer to this conundrum is that perhaps Scots actually do believe that it is Holyrood that is bailing them out, and not Westminster?  After all, the recent UK government £1.25 billion investment in the Naval Dockyard at Rosyth to build 5 new frigates also went totally unacknowledged by the First Minister. Why? Because acknowledging bailouts and mega investments breaks the first rule of nationalism – never credit Westminster for any positive contribution it makes to Scotland. 

A more credible explanation for the gravity defying polling could be that the First Minister, love her or loathe her, is a damn fine spokeswoman. She has created the ”Chief Mammy” role and claimed it as her own. For a politician her acting skills are extraordinary, and she has such a wide emotional range, from empathy through compassion to sincerity. It is no coincidence that these are precisely the skills that you need to manage a crisis.

Which brings me onto rule number two of Scottish nationalism: never ever participate in any UK-led initiatives to do good in the country. Even during this unfolding disaster, the branding must be Scotland and the prize has got to be independence. That means that we as a people can never all be in this public health disaster together, in solidarity with our fellow citizens in the rest of the UK by volunteering our services. Under no circumstances. Apparently ”Scotland Cares” (more than the rest of the UK is the unwritten subtext) is to be the recruiting banner which us Scots must rally to volunteer our services. We are witnessing the gradual politicisation of this crisis for party gain.

It remains to be seen if the Chief Mammy still reigns supreme in six months time, or whether she will be holed below the waterline by the aftermath of recent events in court. History tells us that even political parties that are bitterly divided will only implode if there is a credible opposition for voters to turn to as an alternative.

Next week, Sir Keir Starmer will likely be elected UK Labour leader, a leader who, according to polling, the public actually like. A leader who is collegiate in approach, who brings gravitas to the role and who is on record as being opposed to Scexit.  The Labour Party will hopefully also have a new Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland appointed in Ian Murray who will also be unequivocally opposed to another Scexit referendum as will, we must hope, the new Scottish Deputy Leader Jackie Baillie.  In the next few weeks, almost all the ingredients could be ready for a Scottish Labour fight back at the next Holyrood elections (whenever they may take place). It is to be hoped that by that point the rest of the country will realise that, in times of crisis, a party that is four square behind the union will do more to protect their economic security than a party who wants to break it up.

Related Posts

22 thoughts on “A dose of reality should keep us in union

  1. Hello Robert – nice to see you writing again. Obviously I cannot agree with anything you say in this for it is all conjecture. To start with you didn’t drill down and count the articles you mention you merely supposed that if you did so, you would find what your article wanted you to find.

    Again, I am a little surprised at your advocacy for the union is based on more initiatives from a fairly right wing conservative government. It is strange indeed how many times on this website that Labour supporters extol the virtues of the conservatives.

    The bail out package was necessary certainly, but where did it come from? How was it magicked up? Where was all this money hidden. It reminds me so much of Thatcher paying the shipyard workers off upon a Friday as there was no money (lame ducks) and then employing them upon a Monday to refit ships for the task-force. As a socialist, I am concerned by this bail out package and how it is to be paid for. Will it be the rich who fork out for it? Will it be the financial institutions? Or might it be the ordinary citizens of the UK? I have a gut feeling it will be the latter. As it always is in the wonderful UK.

    I would have thought that the complete mishandling of the current crisis by the UK government would be an advert FOR independence. Experts better than the WHO. A complete misunderstanding of the concept of herd immunity. A keep the economy going and if some old people die so be it approach to the health of the nation. Is this really an advert for the union?

    With regard to the Labour revival in Scotland – one that I always wish for incidentally – I do not think the dream team you mention of Keir Starmer, Ian Murray and Jackie Baillie is going to do it for the party. The constitutional question will remain the same problem for the party and the aforementioned team have nothing to offer that will attract former Labour supporters back from the SNP or Greens. They cannot avoid the fact that the constitutional position in Scotland is a major part of the political landscape here and will not go away. With the most recent polls putting the SNP on 51%, Conservatives on 26% and Labour 13% there is a very high mountain for the party to climb to even reach second now.

    Labour in England has its own problems to deal with and they too are not going to go away after this internal election. Labour still has a massive bloodletting to go through down south to find out what the party stands for and where it sits on the political spectrum. And what happens if your crystal ball is wrong and it is Rebecca Long Baillie who wins the election – will you personally be happy with that?

    To finish, there is an interesting wee article on Labour List that is indicative of the party’s wider problems within and its problems with regard to socialism too. I have put in a link below – apologies to Duncan if this is not within the site rules but the article is written by Sabrina Huck who it states is a momentum supporter


    1. Hello Wynn

      Glad to see you are still reading my articles. Conjecture you say? Well I’m sure you will be able to direct me to any article written by said pro Scexit journalists that has put the recent bail outs into the context of Scexit. I look forward to you posting the link here so I can read it, Tell you what. Post it and I will personally tweet said journalist and congratulate him/her for writing an article that is honest enough to state that an Independent Scotland could not afford to bail out its citizens in their time of need – and that independence would be a disaster for the country as a result of this inability.

      Wynn the question I’m really asking in my article is this. Do you in your heart of hearts really believe that an Independent Scotland would be able to bail out its citizens to the generous level that the UK has promised? If you don’t – how on earth can you support Scexit and deliberately vote for an option that you know in advance would make you and your family and the rest of the country poorer for generations to come. I don’t believe for a second that you actually DO believe an indy Scotland would be able to do this,

      I agree with you on one thing the constitutional question is not going away, But as I stated in my article once the majority of the 320,000 Scexit supporting recipients receive thier Westminster bailouts I have a funny feeling that the rational Nats among them (the one’s who don’t want to live through generations of self inflicted austerity) will realise that if a nation who wants to be independent can’t put together a credible economic rscue package for its citizens in their hour of need it can’t afford to be independent

      i read your article Wynn. What the article is suggesting is too far left for my liking. I’ll support whoever my party has voted for to start the fight back.

      1. Hello Robert and thanks for the reply. I will just concentrate on two things quickly: I appreciate that you really are concerned about the possibility of severe austerity after independence but can you let me know the country that you view Scotland as being most in danger of becoming like in such circumstances. Which state is it that we can look at to see how bad this scexit austerity will manifest itself? Secondly, the big bail out. Generosity indeed, but whose generosity is it? Ultimately, who is paying for this? I think it will be like the big bank bail out. We will pay for it.

  2. Yet UK debt at March 2019 was in excess of £1.8 TRILLION. However will the UK survive? How can UK seemingly generate the funding for the “rescue” package and how could an independent Scotland not do similar for a much smaller population? What is it about the UK that makes it inherently able to do things that, according to your viewpoint, it would be inherently impossible for an independent Scotland to do? Why is Scotland seemingly the only country inherently incapable of doing anything?

    1. Hi Gordon

      Excellent question, which I will try to answer for you. The UK economy will survive because it is big enough to, as Standard & Poor’s have acknowledged by crediting it with an AA rating the same as France.. Whereas in 2017 Moody’s https://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/781404/Moodys-Scotland-JUNK-credit-rating-independence-referendum stated that an Independent Scotland’s economy would have ”junk status” rating which means that it would not be able to pay off its debts or go to the money markets and get loans.

      Scotland as part of the UK can be bailed out during this crisis – because it is in a political union with the rUK and is in a currency Union with rUK and is in a free trade union with the rUK.

      Where is the money coming from to bail us out? Good question. I think we are going to see a balooning of UK debt which will no doubt more than double as a result ot shutting down most of the economy. So we are talking about a UK national debt of circa £4 trillion. More bad news for Scexiteers I’m afraid. In 2014 according to Scotland’s leading expert on currency Prof.Ronald McDonald reckoned that Scotland’s population share of UK debt would have been in the region of £120 billion population share of UK debt to pay off over a 20 year period at £6 billion per year which would cost £5 billion per year in interest to borrow. I think we can safely double those figures now which kills the dream stone dead. Any new country refusing to pay for its pop share of debt on cessation would get short shrift from money markets.

      1. Ah, yes! Scotland too wee. What about Denmark, Norway, Finland. Ireland, New Zealand? And what would be the value of Scotland’s share of the assets or is Scotland only here to bear the burden of debt; much (most?) of which the Scottish public would certainly not have agreed to incur?

      2. Let’s have a dose of reality then.

        (1) There is NO legal case for a newly independent Scotland to take on ANY of the “continuing” UK’s national debt. That is simply a fact. The debt lies with the UK and it would stay with the UK. George Osbourne confirmed this prior to indyref1 but unionists have continued to argue the opposite as if he said nothing at all. I think “blinkered” is the apt expression.

        (2) Professor Brian Ashcroft of Strathclyde University (a unionist) brought out a paper in 2013 that, initially, sought to make the points Mr Hoskins gleefully makes about Scotland’s fiscal position within the UK.
        Unfortunately for him and the unionist cause it actually proved the exact opposite. To his credit though, he still published it. Naturally, because it blew the “subsidy junkie” myth out of the water thus undermining the case for the Union, it was ignored by the media and few ever got to see its findings.

        The Professor found that between 1980 and 2012, Scotland had £1,357bn spent on it. However, the actual tax take over the same period was £1,425bn! That is, despite the UK having around £1-1.5trn of debt in 2012, Scotland had contributed absolutely nothing towards it and was actually £68bn in credit. Yet we were still having to stump up for interest payments on a population share of the UK debt (the Prof estimates that cost at £83bn), thus the “subsidy junkie” myth was invoked when in actual fact the exact opposite was the case.

        UK govt austerity, incompetence and gross mismanagement of North Sea resources may have seen a “real” deficit in Scotland’s finances since 2012 but that won’t amount to anywhere near the £68bn in credit we started on, or impact on the truly humongous debt run up by the rUK.

        The upshot from this is that there is no moral case for a newly independent Scotland to shoulder ANY of the UK’s debt run up by 2020.

        (3) With no legal or moral case for Scotland to “help rUK out”, Mr Hoskin’s claims here are non-sensicle. They belong on the extreme edge of the cringe mentality that besets the unionist cause. Any attempt by the rUK to force a newly independent Scotland to pay for rUK’s debts could only be successful through fraud (ie convincing the Scottish govt of the “subsidy junkie” myth) or threats which are unlikely to endear Scots or the wider international community to them.

        (4) The recent splurge in UK govt spending would easily be affordable (within the context of this discussion) for a newly independent Scotland as it would have no historical debt for it to be added to. 8% of the “splurge” + £0 = 8% of the “splurge” …. 8% of the “splurge” + 8% of £1.8trn = a bad argument for the Union.

  3. Robert, why can’t we in the Labour movement get past this attitude that this country (I mean Scotland) is condemned for ever to depend on handouts from our generous southern friends? If Labour is to regain any relevance in Scotland we have to address why it is that the union has reduced the place to this dependent position you describe here and why the country could not emulate other small successful European countries. All that articles like this do is reinforce the feeling that all Labour in Scotland is really interested in is the preservation of the United Kingdom and its elite structures and is content to have right wing governments imposed on Scotland in perpituity. I’m afraid our former voters have left this behind and Robert is again one of the lonely wolves howling at the moon. Good luck with this line.

    1. Michael

      Those ”handouts” as you put it, are provided by the rUK and what is keeping the wolf from the doors of millions of Scots just now and it is precisely why Independence will never happen. Because, Scotland has proven in this time of crisis that it could not do this. I don’t know if you are self employed or a part time worker Michael, I would like to think that if the thought of receiving this ‘handout’ is so objectionable to you, that you will do the honest thing and return it to HM Treasury.

      1. Robert,
        In the next few months we will find out. Is Micheal right or are you?. How will Scotland fair when Cvid really kicks in? How will the figures stack up? Scotland’s stats compared to proper independent nations of a similar size in Europe?
        Who is your money on Robert?

  4. Oh dear, where to start? Well, “An independent Scotland…..mired in debt (Yet Scotland cannot borrow a brass farthing), with the millstone of a fiscal deficit of £12.6 billion round its neck”. That’s it, right there.
    Why has Scotland, over the course of a century, gone from one of the most industrialised and wealthiest (concentrated in a few hands) parts of the world to —-this? And sitting on a sea of oil, which was used to bail out the ramshackle economy of the entire UK. We can see how Norway utilised its own industry to exploit its share of the North sea oil field, and how the oil revenue was used to entice car manufacturing to England and flood the City of London with capital.
    Wasn’t it Labourite Ian Davidson who was quoted as saying——- “Scotland, who cares”?

    Robert then uses the Covis-19 bail-out to somehow claim we in Scotland should abase ourselves in gratitude. This type of stimulus package is world-wide now: my brother in Canada says the government there, has initiated a huge package of support and stimulus. Denmark is paying 75% of salaries and companies the rest, to make up100% of wages: where that isn’t possible the Danish government will pay 90% of wages. Its a huge stimulus package based on borrowing and printing money to keep liquidity into the economy—and will have to be paid back.

    Astonishingly we are then given a (much reduced) defence contract for ships on the Clyde as an inducement. Perhaps Robert could give us a break-down of Scotland’s share of defence? Spending and procurement for defence relative to Scotland has been shrinking for decades, and the UK had become so embarrassed by the figures, that it stopped promulgating numbers.
    By the way, if the rUK stopped spending defence moneys in Scotland because of independence, there would be no incentive for a Scottish government to purchase kit from down south. The world is awash with countries desperate to sell defence equipment. Not that Scotland would need much. There is also the base at Faslane. Rented out for a decade? Or just shut down?

    Robert also cites a £10 billion fiscal transfer. Much of that money is speculative at best, and disappears on examination as it largely applies to Scotland within the UK.
    There is also the terms of the dissolution of the UK. Unlike the “Velvet Divorce” where both the Czechs and Slovaks became “Successor States, the rUK wants to be regarded as the “Continuator State”, taking on the previous Treaty Rights and Obligations of the UK. This would have an huge impact on the share of assets and debts divied out between Scotland and rUK, and would appear to leave Scotland as debt-free on day one.

  5. Hi Gavin

    I’ll keep this short as you appear to be in denial with regards to the current state of Scotland’s finances. People will not vote for Scexit if they have resaon to believe that they will not be bailed out in an economic crisis. Again if you are in receipt of a bail out and object to receiving it so much – please – please send it back to HM Treasury. Oh and a barrel of brent crude is currently trading at $26. In 2014, SNP were trying to scam us by telling us that the Indy project could be financed by a barrel of Brent crude being $113. Thank goodness we voted to remain in the UK. Over and out.

    1. The SNP did not try to “scam” anybody. The figures for the cost of a barrel of oil was one of several (some estimates were higher than the one used) being proposed by various business organisations and sector analysts. You really are scraping the barrel.

  6. Robert,
    Why this obsession with the SNP?
    Let me tell you a few realities as I see them.
    Better Together camp won 6 years ago (that is a fact). The union is safe.
    There will not be another independence referendum – Even Sturgeon and the vast majority of SNP MPs, MSPs and members know this.
    The reasons why the SNP have dominated Scottish politics at all levels for so long are complex. That is a fact. The explanation for this hegmony has very little to do with independence. To understand why, a student of Scottish constitutional politics should look at the relationship between Scotland’s unionist political parties and the Scottish electorate over the last 50 years. The deligent student will pay attention on one unionist party in particular.
    The Scottish parliament is an unnecessary vanity project. The concept – devolution, was flawed. It was thought up for the wrong reason: fear rather than sense. Devolution is a divisive mechanism of governance. If it benefits anybody it is the parent parliament, in that it gives the devolved regions a false sense of self government.
    That is where I think Scotland is now. So what about the future?

    Coronavirus will change everything.

    If Scottish Labour has any chance of ressurrection it needs to recognise the situation as described above, and take it as its starting point Next it needs to stop defining itself by its visceral loathing of another. Take a look back at previous articles on Labourhame, take a look at this article; they are not about Labour, they are about the SNP. People dont like negativity. The next thing it must do is not so easy, but it must try and understand the reality of what Scotland post Cvid might look like,. From there it must formulate ideas, solutions, its own ideas, unique policies, ones that make sense..
    Im trying to think of a metaphor that would suitably portray the improbability of this happening, The monkey, the key board and the Shakespearean sonnet comes to mind but no, that wont do, eventually, given long enough, the monkey will type it..

  7. Interesting that you failed to answer Gavin’s point about Denmark. If an independent Denmark, similar in size to Scotland, with no significant oil or gas resources, can afford a bailout as you call it, why wouldn’t an independent Scotland manage to do this?

    1. Alister,
      Your point and Gavin’s is well made. Put all the other issues aside, the one thing British unionists up here in Scotlandshire cannot face, is when Scotland’s progress or lack of it, is compared to other European states of a similar size.
      Some of the smaller countries of Europe are less than 30 years old. Unionists visit these countires. They see how they thrive, They feel the vibrancy. But their belief in the union is stronger. It over rides everything. Even honesty.
      When I hear a British unionist say, ‘I know Scotland could survive as an independent country, but I believe the union is sacrosanct ‘. I have heard that many times, I understand and admire their honesty. Scotland and England’s bonds through shared history run deep. I get it.
      There is another kind of unionist; The kind that need to justify their unionism. These unionists put their shades on when they go on their European city breaks, better that, than face the facts of what they witness This is all the more an imperative to the ‘justified unionist’, especially now, remember they saved the union in 2014.
      So lets see where we are in a year or two, hopefully Cvid will be gone. The comparisons will be stark, death rates, unemployment, suicide. Lets see how Scotland fairs? Maybe The Union will as Robert Hoskins says save us from the worst.. But I dont think it will.


  8. Hi Richard,

    Thanks for your reply most of which I completely agree with. Why this obsession with the SNP you ask? Firstly there will be no Labour revival in Scotland until folk realise that the indy dream is dead due to a lack of a viable economic case for it. Hence the copious number of articles I have written for Labour Hame on this very topic stating this and this is precisely why those articles cause so much debate, upset and controversy here amongst the nationalist community who at least do me the honour of actually reading and engaging – a backhanded compliment perhaps. A vital part of a Scottish Labour revival is that the party has also got to be seen to be electable as well, otherwise we will not regain those SNP supporters who now realise that the Empress Scexit is indeed completely starkers when it comes to bailing us out when we need it most, to coin a phrase.

    I agree with you that there is next to no chance of Indy ref 2 or Independence happening because of the economic case for it is not and never has been there. If this was not the case before Covid19 it 100% is after it. That is why that I am very optimistic that post Covid 19 will see a renewal of Scot Lab fortunes.

  9. Thanks for replying Robert. What a shame you don’t seem to want to engage, or refute any of my points. Never mind.
    No I am not in denial about Scotland’s poorly performing economy. Other small European countries all thrive. But Scotland is in a country, where for more than a century, all State enterprises, government departments, banks, corporations, “casino” market manipulator so etc, have been induced, ordered, centralised into one city/region. Where most infrastructure spending goes by dint of the rule of “most benefit for most people”. Every part of the U.K., outside London and the South East, requires subventions.
    Why should Scotland remain in such a deliberately unbalanced country?
    Why would a future Scotland be unable to do as all other European countries are doing with fiscal support during this crisis?
    I do not have a bail out, just my private pensions and the State pension we were lied to about in 2014.
    Oil was never cited as financing independence. Oil price at the referendum was based on Treasury and industry figures.
    Oil prices were stable at 110dDpb from 2012 to 2014. Treasury estimates had a high of 115Dpb by 2015. The OBR had oil dropping to 99.3Dpb and remains stable at that price for years.
    The U.K. Government DECC forecast 128Dpb by 2018 and the International Energy Agency was projecting an oil price, by 2020, of between 132Dpb and 144 Dpb.
    Perhaps Salmond scammed them all—-except they were first to forecast their prices.
    But oil is gone. Scotland will have to invest in its human capital for our future. Just like every other small country.
    But consider this, Robert. London has been the golden goose for Westminster politicians. After Brexit the City may not be the money spinner it’s been in the past. Much of manufacturing will also suffer by tariffs and customs delays.
    I’ll take my chance with Scotland joining the world. Boris Blighty leaves a taste in my mouth–an unpleasant one!

  10. I appear to be persona non grata here now. That’s a shame. I’d always praised the site for its willingness to post views contrary to its own stance.

  11. Robert I got Dr Calderwoods letter another 3 months isolation but as a former workmate texted we were already doing it for underlying health reasons
    The virus has changed everything people are isolated now we including me are relying on other people ..Every Government in the world including the UK government is borrowing vast amounts of money .
    If that crashes it will make the last one seem like a walk ln the park.
    After this we need to have a national emergency plan we need to look at everything to do with the NHS and some hard decisions taken we need to look at how we source medication and equipment .
    For example my oxygen mask and equipment are made in Australia medication in EU countries can we allow this to continue .We don’t have the staff or equipment we need leadership not threats from the UK government at present .
    Matt Hancock said today Sunday if we don’t follow the rules we wont be allowed out for exercise .
    If he including the PM Prince Charles and other politicians had followed the rules they might not have got the virus .
    Who decided to let the queen leave for Windsor I think a week early complete with dog in a convoy and then send a message of solidarity .
    Who let Charles who had the virus fly to Balmoral in a private plane that we probably paid for were the crew and staff at Balmoral told about Charles having the virus .
    And who let our PM out to clap on Thursday .Knowing he has the virus .
    And I saw Hancock being asked by CH4 news who decided he should be tested when others including NHS workers have not been tested .
    Answer Chief medical officer for England decided senior management and decision makers would get priority testing.

  12. From David the comment about self isolation was from me ,aaa was BTS fault haha

  13. Can I again ask everyone tonight Thursday and every Thursday at 8pm join the clappin for our wonderful NHS council staff and every one else trying to help us .

Comments are closed.