jimtoggleJim O’Neill highlights a raft of failures from the Tories and another week of diversion from the SNP.

 

Well wasn’t that a week of stereotypes reasserting themselves? With child poverty in Scotland reaching an eye-watering 25%, the SNP started the indyref2 ticker going again, and the Tories showed why they only think of themselves rather than the needs of everyone in the UK.

First, we should not be surprised in any way that Theresa May rejected Nicola’s call for a referendum by 2019. It is a basic tenet in military studies that you should not fight a war on two fronts. Mrs May will be too deep in losing negotiations with the European Union to spend the time and money focusing on a campaign to keep the United Kingdom together. Mind you, if she shows the same enthusiasm for the Union that she showed for the Remain campaign then we should all be looking out our tartan togs and shortbread tins.

Then we heard that the Tories had been fined £70,000 by the Electoral Commission for falsifying their returns at the last General Election. This, at the same time that 12 police forces in England have submitted reports on electoral fraud in twelve constituencies to the CPS, and Police Scotland admitted that they are investigating David Mundell, Scotland’s only Tory MP and therefore the Secretary of State for Scotland. Given how small the Tory majority is in the Commons, this suggests that they could have stolen the last election. If the reports to the CPS are submitted to the courts and are upheld, it could mean at least 12 by-elections in England and the removal of May’s majority.

And what about a Chancellor who has to withdraw the central tax proposal of his budget a week after he announced it? Given that he had another budget to look forward to, and a report into business taxation coming from Matthew Taylor, there was no need to announce the change in the spring budget. But without even seeing the Taylor Report, panicky Mrs May reinstated the promise of no NIC increase until the end of this parliament. Clearly the Daily Mail is running this country once more.

Finally, George Osborne. What must the good people of Tatton be thinking? The man who invented the Northern Powerhouse and was so committed to the people of Cheshire that he still chairs its board, is so short of money that he has to accept a job as the editor of the LONDON Evening Standard, committed to all things London. That is on top of his hundreds of thousands advising a bank and his role as a visiting fellow at US Universities. How can he do all these things and remain an MP? Easy, he’s George Gideon Osborne. Smacks a bit to me of the Maurice Johnston story.

As it says at the top, Typically Tory.

I don’t want to say much this week about the Neverendum. After all, I will have two, or three, or four years to comment on it. However, I was offended by the news that 25% of Scottish children are languishing in poverty, a figure that has not been challenged by the Scottish Government. So, did Nicola tell us what she was going to do about this shocking report in her keynote speech to the SNP conference? No. She spent all her time issuing increasingly strident demands for another independence referendum, a referendum that all the polls tell her that Scots do not want. Indeed the most recent poll puts those who want independence lower than they were in 2014.

When are we going to hear about what the SNP minority government are going to do about child poverty, or the worst international educational comparators, or the GP crisis or the missed targets in the health service? Or are we only going to hear about referendum, referendum, referendum? The great danger of this, of course, is that the imminent local elections are drowned in the external noise about independence, rather than about the performance of the local elected members who provide, or have failed to provide, local services to our communities. This is vital too, to our communities who have faced austerity for so long.

Related Posts

142 thoughts on “Typically Tory

  1. “the Tories showed why they only think of themselves rather than the needs of everyone in the UK” – yet you still want to get into bed with the Tories to oppose Scottish Independence!

    1. Why is it when the SNP stand on the same platform as the Tories to oppose leaving the EU this was fine and principled and decent, but when Labour stands on the same platform as the Tories to oppose independence this is an outrage and unforgivable?

      Could it possibly be that nationalists are hypocrites?

      1. Except there was no joint anti Brexit platform there was only separate and distinct anti Brexit campaigns. Unlike “BETTER TOGETHER” which was and still is a JOINT COOPERATIVE campaign.

        You’ll be claiming next that the SNP ran on a joint platform with the Tories to opposed the Iraq War based on the few Tories that opposed it.

        Still being disingenuous corrupt and dishonest.

        1. I agree that Remain campaigns worked more separately than together, Mike, whereas Better together worked more together than separately. And that’s why the Remain campaign lost, and Better Together won.

          1. Labour don’t look like they won Duncan. Labour look like a party that has lost everything because of “Better Together”.

      2. The SNP have never “stood on the same platform as the Tories”, unlike Alistair Darling who spoke at a Tory Party conference! The SNP had nothing to do with the UK/Tory Governments Pro-EU campaign.

        It is actions like that that have condemned Labour in Scotland.

          1. You’ve already agreed with me that the SNP and the Tories stood on separate campaign platforms Duncan.

            Everything you say and do on the subject of Scottish Independence is dishonest disingenuous and corrupt.

          2. I said they did both – they campaigned alongside and separately. And as anyone prepared to acknowledge reality will accept, I am right.

          3. A TV debate!!!

            You are seriously clutching at straws there. Why no comment about AD speaking at a Tory Party conference? No the same as a TV debate, is it.

  2. Duncan,
    Yes you are right to point out the hypocrisy of the SNP but there is a difference between SNP and Labour hypocrisy and I will explain why that is. The difference is, perception and scale. When the SNP supported Remain along with all the other political parties except UKIP no one noticed. Today, when Scottish Labour stand next to the Scottish Tories to oppose a second referendum every one in Scotland will notice. Scotland is not as big as the UK. It will be analysed and commented on in Scotland and it will be seen as Scottish Labour siding with the enemy against not only the Scottish government but the Scottish people. I know that is arguably unfair but that is the way of politics in Scotland. People understand why the Tory’s are unionist (its in their name) but they don’t see why Labour support them, and they cannot understand why Labour are so strong in their support. It is as if Labour in Scotland are more unionist than the official unionist party. That is the perception, and it is accurate.
    Labour has lost its core support to the SNP because of this perception. That is the real problem for Labour in Scotland and it is killing them.

  3. Excuse me Duncan, didn’t labour also campaign to remain in the EU at the same time. And at no time did the SNP join with the Tories or labour during that campaign as you well know.

    So trying to say both campaigns are the same is lies, and you know it.

    This independence campaign will be a battle between Scotland and the Tories and people will have to chose, and it appears you have chosen the Tories. No surprise there.

    We certainly don’t have ask about you and hypocrisy.

    1. Sturgeon stood alongside Labour and Tory Remain campaigners. She even appeared in televised debates alongside them.

      Characterising this as a campaign between Scotland and the Tories is grossly offensive. Most Scots don’t want independence. When are you going to get that through your thick nationalist skull?

      1. Separate campaigns Duncan not a joint cooperative get in bed love in of mutual corruption and bare faced lying.

      2. With one poll at 50-50, how can you say most Scots don’t want independence?

        You Unionists are crapping it, as you know the lies you told during the last campaign can’t be repeated this time round and your chances of success have been reduced.

        1. Because like any sensible observer of polls, I don’t focus on the outliers that suit, I look at the trend. The trend shows Scots still oppose independence.

          I told no lies during the 2014 campaign, and I resent being called a liar by someone whose comments here consistently lack honesty.

          1. You said a No vote was the only way to keep our EU membership.

            Several times.

          2. In the 2014 choice between a No vote and a Yes vote, the No vote was indeed the only way to stay in the EU – a Yes vote would have meant us leaving the UK, the EU member state, and having to apply for membership of the EU as Scotland.

            Events which happened after that No vote – specifically the election of a Tory government in 2015 with the assistance of the SNP, and the Leave vote in 2016 thanks to a divided Remain campaign – are what has meant the UK is leaving the EU.

      3. Even at your most dense, that little lie is not getting you anywhere.

        If Scotland does not win this campaign they will be under a tory Westminster government for 10 – 20 plus years, aided by a complacent and useless labour party.

        You continue being one of the tories little helpers, you don’t seem to learn from past mistakes, Scotland doesn’t need you and Scotland definitely doesn’t trust you.

  4. ‘… should all be looking out our tartan togs and shortbread tins.’
    Why is it all you dependents suffer from the cringe?
    Get some self esteem and you might be able to summon up the courage to take control of your own future.

  5. “Independently produced GERS figures” Seriously Duncan?

    At the bottom of every Data Table you can read “Data from OBR”

    Like I said nothing but disingenuous dishonest and corrupt.

  6. “In the 2014 choice between a No vote and a Yes vote, the No vote was indeed the only way to stay in the EU – a Yes vote would have meant us leaving the UK, the EU member state, and having to apply for membership of the EU as Scotland.
    Events which happened after that No vote – specifically the election of a Tory government in 2015 with the assistance of the SNP, and the Leave vote in 2016 thanks to a divided Remain campaign – are what has meant the UK is leaving the EU.”

    More wilful bare faced lying. Nobody has ever been ejected from the EU after gaining their Independence. In fact the opposite has happened. Nations gaining their Independence have since become members.

    And now we have because of the No vote a Brexit from the EU that involves Scotland therefore you lied.

  7. Duncan,

    Please stop removing Mike’s posts.

    Granted; he posts a load of offensive clap trap.

    Nevertheless, Mike shouldn’t be gagged.

  8. I have been involved in the Labour election campaign in my area. Nobody and I mean nobody wants another Indy ref. We are hearing the phrase Nicola isn’t listening repeatedly. SNP voters of all ages are telling us they did not vote for Indy in 14 to be ruled from Brussels or Berlin. One man told me last night if there is Indy 2 he is 90 per cent certain to vote remain. This is because he voted for Brexit.
    People want to concentrate on local issues not another ref. That’s what they feel the FM is not getting. Where as I think she does get it. But the leadership is now trapped trying to keep the membership happy. Even Jim Sillars is not buying it
    My local council North Ayrshire came under Labour control 6 months ago. They have passed a budget . Its that good the local Nats are claiming the credit
    When my local community radio station during its Sunday Talkin Show asked for someone to phone supporting a ref. no one did. This was because all the calls had been against a ref.
    This weeks 2 day Indy debate should have been about local election issues .But as the good people in my area no matter how they are voting are telling both labour and NATS Nicola isn’t listening

  9. The debate in Holyrood today is really the deal breaker for anyone with a Labour history.
    We can have a self governing country. Join EFTA. Be in the single market AND get a trade deal with rUk. After all, Canada manages 75%of it’s trade with the US, while independent.
    OR——
    We can do what Scottish Labour proposes. Tag along being May and her cohorts, ignored, condescended to, with no say, no clue as to destination or outcome.
    A “red, white and blue” walk away Brexit could see working people in the UK reduced to genuine impoverishment for a generation or more. But hey, we would still be BRITISH!
    The “useful idiots” in Scottish Labour don’t realise the Tories won’t suffer. They keep their funds off shore, and anyway, as the economy goes down the tubes, Sterling will collapse, but the STOCK MARKET will soar. The rich only ever get richer.
    British nationalism trump’s common sense for Kezia and her gullible troops. Davidson is using her for cannon fodder and she doesn’t have a clue about it.

    1. It is independence that would condemn working people to impoverishment for a generation or more. Why are you so unwilling to acknowledge that?

      1. Because there is no evidence to support it. I see Independent Countries all over the world and not one of them has shown that they would be better off if run from Westminster or are any more impoverished as a result of not being run from Westminster.

      2. So you would prefer Scotland to remain under Tory Westminster control, under continuing austerity which could last another 10 – 20 years.

        It just shows labour are as bad for Scotland as the Tories.

        1. No, I’ll be continuing to fight against Tory government. But I’m opposed to the completely unnecessary additional austerity that independence would bring, which is why I’ll be continuing to fight against that too.

          As a reminder, the SNP have passed on Tory austerity rather than using the powers of the Scottish Parliament to reverse it. And now, of course, we see why – it’s so they can use it as a grievance to push for independence again. They don’t give a flying fuck about the Scottish people, just independence.

          1. What form does this fight take Duncan?

            You support the idea behind preventing the people of Scotland from keeping the Tories out via the ballot box.

            Where has Independence and self determination ever produced additional austerity?

            Which Independent country is deliberately imposing additional austerity on itself because its Independent?

            What actual powers does the Scottish Parliament have to reverse Tory austerity Duncan?

            Your excuses for continuing your unfathomable corrupt non belief in the UK State are ludicrous and are getting more moronic by the day.

            Why don’t you just admit the truth. All you care about is your own personal position within the Labour party?

            A Labour party that hasn’t seen fit to offer you any position of worth within it.

          2. “They don’t give a flying fuck about the Scottish people, just independence” – that is utter pish.

            Independence for Scotland would give the Scottish people the maximum say in how their lives are run by whatever party they vote into power. Just now, voters in England decide the government we get, with the Scottish Parliament (thanks to Unionist parties), being effectively powerless (where’s Gordon Brown’s Devo-Max we were promised) to do anything about policies we don’t agree with.

            So I would say it is Labour that “don’t give a flying fuck about the Scottish people”, that is why folk are deserting you.

          3. The Scottish Parliament is “effectively powerless” is it? Do you ever get even the slightest twinge of shame when you type these things, or is your boiling nationalist rage enough to see you through even the most ludicrous lie?

          4. The Scottish Parliament IS effectively powerless. The recent Supreme Court judgement on Brexit just confirmed that.

            Any UK Govt decision on a reserved area can be enforced. Any Scottish Govt decision on a reserved area can be overturned. The Scottish Parliament itself can be abolished at the stroke of a Westminster pen.

            Basically, the Scottish Parliament exists on Westminster’s sufferance. That is not the basis of a “powerful Parliament”.

            The economy is reserved to Westminster yet you continually attack the Scottish Govt’s “economic performance”. When all it can do is tinker round the edges while Westminster can drive a coach and horses through any plans without warning, “do you not get even the slightest twinge of shame when you type these things, or is your boiling unionist rage enough to see you through even the most ludicrous lie”?

        2. OK Duncan, instead of replying with insults, can you explain why are the real tax raising powers, which Labour along with the other Unionist parties did everything they could to prevent Scotland from getting, are still reserved to Westminster, and only minor taxation is devolved to the Scottish Government:

          Minimum wage – Reserved to Westminster
          VAT – Reserved to Westminster
          Corporation Tax – Reserved to Westminster
          Corporation Tax Avoidance – Reserved to Westminster
          Fuel Duty – Reserved to Westminster
          Defence Budget – Reserved to Westminster
          Duty on alcohol/tobacco – Reserved to Westminster
          Energy Policy – Reserved to Westminster
          Immigration (to increase Scotland’s population) – Reserved to Westminster

          Income Tax – we have limited use of a power Westminster hasn’t increased since the mid 70’s
          Stamp Duty – Scottish Government
          Business rates – Scottish Government
          APD – Scottish Government
          Aggregates Tax – Scottish Government

          So where are the powers Gordon Brown promised in his Vow? Why do Labour keep very quiet about this, I have asked you before and never received an answer. The simple answer is Labour don’t care about Scotland, and no amount of bullshit from the authors of the articles here suggesting otherwise will change voters minds.

          Labour have betrayed the voters of Scotland, you offer them nothing, and oppose everything the SNP try to do, and for that I hope your party, and its pathetic members get consigned to history, it’s all you deserve.

          1. The minimum wage isn’t a tax. Having variable VAT rates within the UK economy would be ludicrous. Corporation Tax Avoidance is not a tax. Varying corporation tax at Berwick would result in a race to the bottom as governments chase inward investment from multinationals by competing against each other. The only people who win from that are the multinationals. The people lose out. Fuel duty should be variable on the basis of rurality, not a line on a map. The Defence Budget is not a tax! Duty on alcohol and tobacco is sensibly set at a UK level. Energy policy is not a tax! Immigration is not a tax!

            Please don’t post this rubbish again.

          2. You just don’t get it, these reserved matters impact Scotland’s finances, yet we have no control over them. So they aren’t rubbish, yet more deflection from you.

            Still no mention of Gordon Brown’s Vow – why not? Why won’t Labour admit they lied to the people of Scotland.

          3. It was him that proposed it, and it was adopted by all 3 Westminster parties.

            So why did Labour side with the Tories & Lib-Dems to water down the Vow until it was effectively useless?

            I really want an answer to this, so stop avoiding the issue.

          4. No it wasn’t. Your answer is the same as I keep giving: what you are saying is NOT TRUE. So please stop saying it.

      3. Independence would be a chance for Scotland to shape ITS economy for the benefit of its own people.
        A First world country with a huge oil field, is declared BANKRUPT after it is exploited for 40 years—does that not sound like exploitation? It does to me.
        As for my comment on “the rich only ever get richer”–the Guardian has a story that “millionaires will get richer through Brexit” according to a Swiss Bank—-that suit you Dunc?

        The powers of the Scottish Parliament to nullify “Tory Austerity”—could you tell us by how much the rate if income tax would have to rise by to do that, Duncan?
        As I have previously stated, you are full of shit.

          1. Its the daily theme of Dugdale, davidson, Wee Wullie et al, that Scotland has a deficit so large it could not be a self governing country.
            This is a Scotland which has NEVER had control of all or most of its economy, ever.

            “Who declared Scotland bankrupt”, you ask?
            Well, George Foulkes for one, though he is not alone. There is a whole Z list of weirdos every bit as creepy as Foulkes, who have asserted the same.

            On the Guardian story. Perhaps you could list all the Labour millionaires whom the Swiss bank UBS claims will benefit from Brexit.
            Tony Blair? Alistair Darling? Peter Mandleson? Gordo?. The list is endless.

          2. All of those people argued for Remain. You are pointing out that they argued against their own self-interest, and then criticising them for it. Utterly bizarre.

          3. The rich get richer. And richer. And richer.
            Its how things are in the UK, Dunc.
            Remain or Leave.
            For your rich Labour(and rich Tory) chums the way the vote went, DIDNT MATTER.

            Its the ordinary people who will suffer through Brexit, but Labour dont give a damn about them any more.
            Labour threw in the towel and “Got with the May/Farage programme” on Austerity, Brexit, anti-Scottish democracy and whatever else.

          4. It’s the ordinary people who will suffer even more through independence, but the SNP have NEVER cared about them. They’ve been left-wing and right-wing, pro-EU and anti-EU, whatever worked best at the time to argue for the only principle they ever had or ever will have: dividing the UK.

          5. Independence gives us the ability to grow and shape our economy to suit the needs of the Scottish people. Labour are fucked as a political force, split from top to bottom, in a perpetual state of feud, and, as we saw in their last, wasted 13 year stint, have zero interest in Scotland economy.
            We can either stay in a Tory low pay sweatshop economy, or we can be a self governing country.
            We might even be able to grow our economy at the same rate as other countries, a feat denied us under Westminster’s indifferent control.
            But Labour doesn’t give a xxxx for Scotland’s economic well being, does it Dunc?

          6. This is the core claim backing up the economic case for independence, isn’t it, and it’s absolutely tissue thin. It requires you to discount GERS entirely as a unionist plot (perpetrated by the SNP government for some as yet unknown reason); discount the result of the 2016 election in which Scots elected first and second two parties which promised tax cuts, not tax rises; discount the need to deal with a £15bn deficit which any rational economist knows means tax increases and public service cuts; and buy instead into a conspiracy theory that Scotland’s economy is just bursting to outperform its neighbours once the as-yet-undefined yoke that was allegedly placed on it by evil Wastemonster is removed.

            I mean it’s laughable shit, isn’t it? Or it would be if there wasn’t an army of lying bastards telling the most vulnerable people in the country that this catastrophic choice is their route to salvation. At that point it stops being funny. At that point it’s something to get bloody angry about.

            Stop promising people a lie.

          7. Duncan, you blind idiot.
            Scotland is surrounded by small independent countries which do very well, economically, socially, well being to the max.
            You must not have noticed them, away, way out there, beyond the horizon of the UK border . Beyond even Vera’s hologram!
            A century ago, Scotland was more economically advanced, more industrialized, more entrepreneurial than any of them. Then we fell into a recession we have never come out of as we lacked the power to devalue our currency or any of the other NORMAL fiscal or economic answers.
            We stay in the UK, it will be more of the same with bells on. Westminster has already stated Barnett will be revisited in 2020, and we dont do well on the other 40% of UK spending.
            Independence is the best route to prosperity for Scots, unless you ascribe Scotland’s long 100 year period of extreme low growth to a racist explanation.
            By the way, the Chairman of the Clydesdale Bank stated Scotland had been in recession for 150years, for which he was attacked and abused by British nationalists, but its as close to the truth as you will find. He was an Aussie, so had no dog in the fight.

          8. Recession is defined as a fall in GDP for two consecutive quarters. I’d have thought the chairman of a bank would know that, and would therefore know that such a statement is, typical of you and your lying cult, complete nonsense.

          9. Well, GERS WAS a Tory plot. That is a simple matter of record.

            Your little jibe about it being “perpetrated by the SNP government” is just the disappointing perpetuation of the lie (and you know it is a lie) that GERS are Scottish Govt figures. They aren’t and you know they aren’t. They are Westminster guesstimates published by the Scottish Govt.

            GERS does not give an accurate indication of an independent Scotland’s fiscal position by any means. Even Delloite admit this and I hope you would describe them as “rational”.

            As to the “as yet undefined yoke” placed on the Scottish economy. It has been defined over and over again. It is the result of being a peripheral region in a larger unitary state where the economy is being run, from Westminster, in the best interests of a region furthest from our own. Of course it is more complex than that, but that is the basis.

            If independence is not the answer and the Union has clearly failed to deliver over many, many decades, what is your explanation for Scotland’s poor economic performance? Especially when compared to our small, independent neighbours. Are we just “too stupid” and the Union is saving us from making an even bigger hash of it? You have repeatedly failed to come up with an answer to this.

          10. They are Scottish Government figures, produced under a methodology radically amended by the SNP, by people answerable to the Scottish Government.

            And when they suited you you put them front and centre in the White Paper as the economic argument for independence.

            Everyone can see you’re only rubbishing them now because they no longer suit you. It’s pathetic.

          11. When you get abusive over some posts, its excusable due to the “robust” nature of the content.

            When you get abusive over the more reasoned posts, it gives the impression you’re losing the argument.

            You know full well, NO neutral economist or financial expert would describe GERS as being in any way accurate or indicative of the financial position an Independent Scotland would initially find itself in. That is simple fact.

            The figures provided to the Scottish Govt from Whitehall are chock full of guesses based on estimates using popln share, consumer studies and anecdotally based “gut feelings” with more than a little bias (whether conscious or unconscious) thrown in. Again,all simple fact as NO accurate data regarding tax take, trade or UK public spend specific to Scotland is gathered by the UK Govt

            And you still haven’t given an explanation for Scotland’s poor economic performance under the Union over the last century or more in direct contrast to our small, independent neighbours. Is it because you truly believe we are “too stupid” and the union saves us from ourselves?

          12. Here’s what Professor Ronald MacDonald, Research Professor in Macroeconomics and International Finance at the Adam Smith Business School, former advisor on currency and exchange rate issues to the European Commission, IMF, World Bank, European Central Bank and a number of other central banks, previously Bonar Macfie Chair of Economics and Adam Smith Chair of Political Economy at the University of Glasgow and Professor of International Finance at the University of Strathclyde, had to say on the matter:

            “It is important to note that that GERS is a national Statistics publication and assessed by the independent UK Statistics Authority. The statistics are produced by civil servants, and not by a partisan group, and are best practice in the sense that they meet the Code of Practice for Official Statistics, a code that is consistent with the European Statistics Code of Practice.

            As in practically any statistical exercise the GERS statistics depend on estimates and there is nothing unusual about that. In that regard it is noteworthy that the statistics produced and reported in GERS come with standard confidence intervals indicating the uncertainty with which the central estimates are held. An examination of these confidence bounds demonstrates that the generally accepted position on Scotland’s fiscal and trade positions are unchanged. This is why mainstream economists, statisticians and commentators will continue to use these statistics in their work.”

            And here’s what Professor Angus Armstrong, Director of Macroeconomics at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) and previously Head of Macroeconomic Analysis at HM Treasury said:

            “All economic statistics involve sampling and estimates. But when the UK Statistics Authority designate figures as ‘National Statistics’ that’s hugely significant. This is a kite-mark showing they meet international statistical standards. Anybody who says these figures are “easily rigged” or “nonsense data” frankly doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously. The people who work to create these statistics are honest, hard-working and dedicated public servants who aren’t allowed to answer back to defend themselves. Anyone who questions our national statisticians’ honesty and integrity should take a hard look at themselves.”

          13. The key word in my post regarding “experts” was “NEUTRAL”.

            As both these academics were active in the anti-independence campaign, it is no surprise they would be keen to promote GERS. There are plenty less partisan academics who would disagree. GERS may be the “best” figures we have but that is only because they are the ONLY figures we have. For some reason the UK Govt has declined to collect and publish actual accurate data concerning Scotland’s fiscal position, preferring to stick with estimated figures based on ….. guesswork. Why?

            And I’m still waiting for you to tell me why, if we (for the sake of argument) take these GERS figures to be accurate, is the financial ruin of Scotland an argument FOR the Union? Why is Scotland’s poor economic performance over a century or more, in direct contrast to our small, independent neighbours an argument FOR the Union?

            Will you answer?

          14. Angus Armstrong was not to my knowledge active in the anti-independence campaign? He and NIESR produced impartial analysis during the referendum, but to my knowledge he did not campaign. Can you provide evidence to the contrary?

            GERS does not paint a picture of financial ruin for Scotland, so I have no idea why you keep pretending it does. The argument I’m making for the union is that the history of fiscal transfer over the last few decades shows periods where money flows one way, and periods when money flows the other way, and the UK being able to pool and share resources and balance out economic difficulties in that way is a huge positive argument in favour of maintaining it.

  10. “….specifically the election of a Tory government in 2015 with the assistance of the SNP….” If EVERY voter in Scotland voted Labour, and EVERY Scottish M.P. returned was a labour M.P, we would STILL have a tory government. Furthermore, due to the complete farce that is the Labour Party, there will be a U.K. government formed by your erstwhile friends in Bitter Together.

    1. The late Tory surge in England was, according to their own campaign manager, largely the result of the repeated use of the posters and adverts with Miliband in Salmond’s pocket saying that if Labour won the SNP would form part of the government. That’s how the SNP assisted the Tories’ election. Nothing to do with the votes in Scotland. You’ve been told this before.

        1. “Failure to shake off the myth that we were responsible for the financial crash and therefore failure to build trust in the economy.
          “Inability to deal with the issues of “connection” and, in particular, failing to convince on benefits and immigration
          “Despite his surge in 2015, Ed Miliband still wasn’t judged to be as strong a leader as David Cameron
          “The fear of the SNP “propping up” a minority Labour government.”

          “It adds that of these, the effect of the SNP threat is the most disputed.”

          “The Tories played heavily on it at the end of the campaign. The evidence is unclear. Some analysis suggests there was no clear late switching. However, it was heard consistently on the doorstep that this scaremongering raised concerns. It may have reinforced the views of those who had already decided not to vote Labour, and, if so, may have had a decisive impact in a small number of constituencies.”

          Why do you insist on stupidly lying when the evidence is so easy to find?

      1. Even if your nonsense were true, it would not have been the “SNP assisted the Tories”, but that the Tories USED the SNP in their sectarian propaganda. In the same kind of way that minorities are used by corrupt regimes everywhere—to deflect criticism and scapegoat others. But Labour cannot see this for what it is—Labour preffering to victimise the SNP as well—the SNP here, are the minority, the target, the scapegoat, the OTHER.

        But why dont you look at yourselves Duncan, instead of blaming others.
        You are a political movement in decline. Ideologically split. A leadership battle that has no solution. Membership dropping. Distrust and feuding among MP’s. No trust between the leadership and Scotland. Many in the public have lost faith in you as a solution to anything—lost in Scotland first.
        Your solution? Follow the Tories down the Brexit road, deny Scots a vote on their own future, Labour keyboard warriors targeting Sturgeon for personal abuse, and cross your fingers behind your backs.
        What could possibly go wrong?

        1. I don’t remember at the time the SNP squealing loudly about being misused in their “sectarian propaganda”. Could this be because it suited the SNP agenda to see the fear factor raised by the Tories

          1. The SNP had no agenda other than maximising their vote. They offered Labour their Parliamentary support in a similar way to the SDLP, only to be rebuffed by Labour.
            Tory near racist smears did not affect the SNP vote, being aimed at the English electorate. It was surely up to Miliband and Labour to defend themselves against a nasty Tory attack using the voting patterns of a minority nation in the UK as a weapon.
            But Labour proved how utterly ineffective they were on a Scottish/English/UK level, paving the way for Corbyn and all that entailed.
            The history books may well define the nature of Tory tactics in that election campaign as the end of the Union, and Labour’s inability to respond, as the end of Labour.

  11. “It’s the ordinary people who will suffer even more through independence,”

    How? Through all the warmongering? Maybe from all the Tory Governments that will be elected?

    Maybe through all the unnecessary ideologically targeted austerity policies that will result from all the Tory Governments we will elect?

    Maybe we will be stupid enough to elect another Labour Government based on believing the rhetoric vows and promises?

    Maybe that Labour Government will ideologically tax us to death again? While cutting public services or privatising them?

    Nobody says an Indy Scotland will guarantee we will be free from POTENTIAL suffering. What we are saying is that it can ONLY happen if we make the wrong choices relative to having suffering imposed on us by other people making the wrong choices outwith our control.

  12. The Scottish Parliament is “effectively powerless” is it?

    Wont a successful denial of a second Indyref prove how powerless it is?

  13. ” It requires you to discount GERS entirely as a unionist plot (perpetrated by the SNP government”

    GERS can be discounted on the basis that its “FORECASTS” are cut and pasted from OBR “FORECAST” data based on UK Government reserved expenditure guestimates which are never corrected within the reports when the actual figures become known.

    And of course the FACT that its the Scotland Office and not the Scottish Government which oversees the actual compilation of GERS.

    All the Scottish Government does is “PUBLISH” the report. It doesn’t supply nor compile the DATA within it. That’s pure OBR data.

    How many times do you have to be reminded?

    1. Mike, it is simply a lie that GERS is compiled by the Scotland Office. It is compiled by the Scottish Government.

      1. OK lets agree to disagree on that one maybe you can help me with this little piece of actual data.

        From Twitter somebody has completed some sums of their own.

        Total deficit of satellite UK nations i.e Scot NI and Wales = 39.7 billion
        Total Satellite population within UK = 10.26 million
        Total UK deficit = 67 billion
        Total UK population = 64.1 million

        Satellite Nation population proportion to UK population = 16%
        Satellite Nation deficit proportion of UK deficit = 59.2%

        We’re supposed to believe that 16% of the UK is responsible for 59.2% of the entire UK deficit?

        You buying that?

        1. No idea, but if I saw some primary evidence as opposed to “somebody from Twitter” it would probably be easier to judge the veracity of the claim.

          Deficits aren’t arrived at by hunches. They are arrived at by analysing data.

          I know that London and the south-east have experienced something of an economic boom time while much of the rest of the UK was in recession and in recovery, so I don;t think that sort of figure is beyond belief. But let’s not try to have economic debates on the basis of “somebody from Twitter”, eh?

          1. Are you disputing the actual accuracy of the figures and numbers?

            I just gave you accurate indisputable data that shows that according to these sources that give us deficit figures

            16% of the entire UK population is responsible for 59.2% of the entire UK deficit.

            Worse than that the 16% is specifically grouped within specific borders and is not scattered throughout the UK.

            An HONEST observer would conclude that there is a massive flaw and discrepancy in the deficit data.

            Unless the population figures are wrong?

          2. As I said before, given the state of London and the South East compared to the rest of the UK, I don’t find the conclusion outlandish. “That’s a bit much, it can’t be right” is not the method economists use to establish deficit figures. It shouldn’t be our method either.

        2. No Mike, You can’t agree to disagree. Either it is produced by the Scottish Government or it isn’t. Duncan is right. You are wrong. Try admitting that once in a while. You will find it cathartic

      2. So Duncan, where do all the figures for expenditure out with Scotland come from, if these are Scottish Government figures?

        To be honest, there is more signs of intelligent life in road kill, than in your comments here.

        1. They are estimates from a range of sources, including Scottish Government, the OBR and National Statistics. Why not read up on them?

          1. So the OBR and National Statistics figures come from Westminster based organisations – not Scottish Government ones!

          2. The Scottish Government compiles the figures, which is what I KEEP saying and you KEEP ignoring, and GERS is recognised as being National Statistics, meaning its methodology is rigorous.

            The more you run away from GERS having based the 2014 economic case on it the more duplicitous and dishonest you appear.

          1. Duncan, the whole point of that article I gave the link to, is that the source of the “data”, and I use that word loosely, is extremely dubious.

            So trying to analyse these figures to produce results is extremely flawed, the figures from chokkablog site is utter pish at best.

            Any Engineer/Scientist using flawed data in their calculations would be ridiculed, yet unionists slobber all over that bugger and take his analysis as gospel.

            There are plenty of respected organisations out there that back up the fact that the GERS figures aren’t accurate and can in no way reflect what the finances of an Independent Scotland would be like. Yet Unionists refuse to acknowledge that.

          2. Did you bother to read the link I sent? It quotes expert opinion (on economics, not tax which is Richard Murphy’s specialism) endorsing GERS as National Statistics. It also explains that most national statistics – indeed most statistics – are based on estimates. That doesn’t make the data flawed, or dubious. It also explains that GERS, like other National Statistics, comes with standard confidence intervals indicating the uncertainty with which the central estimates are held.

            Name me a single non-partisan “respected organisation” that back up “the fact that the GERS figures aren’t accurate” please.

          3. You realise the guy you are basing your argument on is trashing a man described as;

            “Richard Murphy (58) is a chartered accountant and a political economist. He has been described by the Guardian newspaper as an “anti-poverty campaigner and tax expert”. He is Professor of Practice in International Political Economy at City University, London and Director of Tax Research UK. He is a non-executive director of Cambridge Econometrics.

            According to International Tax Review Richard was the 7th most influential person in global tax in 2013. In 2016 Richard was in the same journal’s Global Top 50 in tax, one of only two people to have been so for the whole five years it had published such a list.”

            While your guy makes …. dog food or something. A fine trade, but it hardly qualifies him to trash a man of Richard Murphy’s standing with any credibility.

          4. He is not “trashing a man”, he is trashing what a man wrote. And as you point out, Richard is a tax expert. His last foray into economic was to be “the father of Corbynomics”. He has now disowned it, so that was a success.

            Kevin Hague is a man with a reputation for honesty and decency. I am not prepared to allow you to traduce him again on this platform.

          5. Yes I looked at the link, it doesn’t make him right.

            Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited stated that GERS “does not model scenarios for an independent Scotland in which the Scottish Government would be enabled to make its own fiscal choices”. I would rather believe a company like that, than a non-entity writing a blog using flawed data.

            Unionists take flawed GERS data, and assume, for some bizarre reason, that this will still apply in an independent Scotland. Only when Scotland is independent will we see the true figures, and our deficit will be nowhere near the £15B assigned to us by Westminster.

            It is strange that the Scottish Governments budget is balanced, the part of the budget spent on our behalf by Westminster is grossly over spent. Yet we can’t accurately quantify what we are supposedly spending our money on.

            I can’t be arsed arguing with you anymore, as folk like you can’t see past your precious union with all its flaws.

          6. So do you think the SNP Scottish Government were lying in 2013 when they based their entire economic plan for independence on GERS?

            http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2013/11/9348/6

            “The starting point for this analysis is the National Statistics publication, Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS). GERS is the authoritative publication on Scotland’s public finances.”

            It’s obvious to every observer that when GERS looked good it was lauded as authoritative as the basis of an independent Scotland’s economy, and now it doesn’t look so good it is being traduced as a unionist plot. You people are genuinely pathetic.

          7. The SNP Govt used GERS as the basis for the White Paper because they had no choice but to do so. To ignore GERS would have laid them open to all sorts of disingenuous criticism from the likes of yourself and Mr Hague. It is the authoritative source because it is the ONLY source. It does not make the figures correct or confirm the Scottish Govt’s belief in them. They believe Scotland’s position is far better than GERS would indicate but, as I said, they had no choice but to use them.

            As to “traducing” Mr Hague; I didn’t “traduce” him. Unless YOU believe being a pet supply business owner is some how embarrassing. Being owned by a cat, I am a great admirer of pet suppliers as they enable me to keep “her ladyship” in the kind of luxury she demands.

            But I still fail to understand how being a small/medium business owner gives him the credentials to “traduce” (and he did) one of the foremost tax experts in the World. An expert who has no ties to Scotland and “no dog in the fight” as the saying goes. A man who Deloitte (one of the foremost financial consulting firms in the World) effectively agrees with on GERS.

            Why should I believe Mr Hague over them? Especially as Mr Hague seems to have blotted his “honourable” copybook by retweeting fake tweets from a parody account linked to his own Twitter account as a means to bolster his GERS case. Surely you must condemn that.

            And you still haven’t answered my question on why Scotland’s poor economic performance over the last century or so makes the Union worth keeping. Notional “fiscal transfers” wont cut it. They are only an accounting mechanism and are not cold harsh cash. And they still don’t account for Scotland’s poor economic performance. Can you answer?

  14. “Stop promising people a lie.”

    Your capacity to project yourself onto others is boundless.

    Can you explain to me how its even possible for Labour to deliver on a promise to grant Federation across the whole of the UK just by winning an election to the Scottish Parliament?

    1. Given that Labour have never claimed they would do that by that route, I’m not sure why you would… Oh, no, wait, I remember. It’s because you’re habitually dishonest in every argument you pick, isn’t it.

      1. So Labour in Scotland are no longer promising to deliver a Federal solution to the constitutional question?

        1. Learn to read, Mike. I said we never promised to deliver federalism just by winning a Scottish election. We said from the start it needs to be a UK-wide solution.

      2. Duncan, you and labour are totally screwed, you have nothing to offer Scotland apart from a policy to increase income tax on the working people who can afford it least. And to commit to backing the tories yet again against Scottish independence ??????????? who would actually believe it.

        After losing every MP bar one and now being the third political party in Scotland and your figures are still going down, YET you still continue trying to defend that direction of travel.

        Stupid doesn’t even come close to describing yersel & labour, you can moan, complain , lie and spin, but its all of your own making.

        “reap what you sow”, theirs never been a more apt saying to describe labours fortunes. Hell mend you, you deserve it.

  15. “Deficits aren’t arrived at by hunches. They are arrived at by analysing data.”

    How can deficits be arrived at by “ANALYSING DATA” when its possible for analysis to be wrong?

    The “ANALYSIS” it telling us that 59.2% of the entire UK deficit is being credited to 16% of the entire UK population.

    An HONEST observer would seriously doubt that would certainly question the accuracy of the deficit claims if they can verify the population data is accurate.

    Why wont you?

  16. Duncan

    Do you believe 16% of the UK population is responsible for 59.2% of the entire UK deficit?

  17. Mike quoted twitter . Why do you still have a twitter account. The Police are investigating on line threats made against our leaders. What we can do is stop using twitter and Facebook . That will make the companies sit up and take notice. I don’t have Twitter or Facebook. On the campaign trail we are being told by SNP voters as well as Labour we are fed up with and don’t want another Indy Ref. I am hearing Nicola isn’t listening. They want us to concentrate on local issues. Very few comments about the local elections. That’s a disgrace

    1. I don’t have a Twitter account either. I have an interest in Twitter only as a reader not a contributor.

      I didn’t “Quote” Twitter I divulged information I gained from a Twitter account.

      The numbers within their context are indisputable. These are actual numbers published by the UK State.

      The numbers PROVE beyond all argument that the deficit figures being promoted are at best seriously suspect much more likely a crock of utter shite.

      And the people of Scotland are being sold another pup from a source that’s been questionable and discredited so many times already.

  18. “As I said before, given the state of London and the South East compared to the rest of the UK, I don’t find the conclusion outlandish.”

    Really? You accept without doubt or suspicion data that tells us to believe 84% of the UK population is responsible for ONLY 40.8% of the entire UK deficit?

    And you expect people to believe you? Do you even give a shit if the numbers are suspect or not?

  19. “Learn to read, Mike. I said we never promised to deliver federalism just by winning a Scottish election. We said from the start it needs to be a UK-wide solution.”

    Can we expect to see this “Federal Solution” included within the next Labour Scottish Parliamentary election manifesto?

  20. “The Scottish Government compiles the figures, which is what I KEEP saying and you KEEP ignoring, and GERS is recognised as being National Statistics, meaning its methodology is rigorous.”

    Its methodology is estimation.

    No the Scottish Parliament publishes the report. The Scotland Office compiles the report from UK Government data derived from the OBR via the ONS which the Scottish Government doesn’t have access to.

    UK Government data compiled by UK Government Offices. How on earth would any Scottish Government be able to compile data ONLY the UK Government is privy to?

    The 15.8 billion deficit figure is a phantom estimate originated from the OBR. An estimated account that never actually materialised into an actual expenditure figure. Its never been stated as anything other than an estimation.

    The same discredited worthless source estimated a deficit figure of 14.7 billion for Wales and 10 billion for NI. Unless you’re going to claim these figures are also derived by GERS?

    These figures from this same worthless discredited source is trying to convince us that 16% of the UK population is responsible for 59.2% of the entire UK deficit and that 84% of population is only responsible for 40.8% of the entire UK deficit.

    You can clearly see why the source is regarded widely as worthless and discredited except by the agenda driven bare faced liar who will happily pretend faith in these figures til the cows come home.

    1. You keep lying about this Mike and I keep correcting you. The Scottish Government compiles the report, not the Scotland Office. That’s what it says on the GERS website. But I realise facts get in the way of your many, many grievances.

      1. And yet you cant answer any of the questions I posed to you on the matter.

        How does the Scottish Government “compile” data its not privy to?

        1. Of course it’s “privy to” the data Mike, you absolute cockwomble.

  21. “Name me a single non-partisan “respected organisation” that back up “the fact that the GERS figures aren’t accurate” please”.

    Name one that has been asked for an opinion on the issue then name one that does back up GERS figures.

  22. Duncan Federalism cannot be delivered by the Scottish Labour Party because the Labour Party UK do not support this policy, as for the First undelivered Vow by Gordon Brown and the Second proposed Vow by Gordon Brown on Federalism this is pure fantasy as was exposed when Kezia Dugdale got grilled recently by the mainstream media who confirmed that the First Gordon Brown Vow was undelivered and he has lost all credibility and also Kezia and I am sorry to say that if you believe them then you are also added to the list.

    1. Gordon made no vow. The Vow as featured in the Daily Record and signed by the three UK party leaders has been fulfilled in full. Don’t spout your lies here again.

      1. “Gordon Brown has said Labour’s general election pledge to allow Scots higher state pensions and benefits was the “Vow Plus” as he admitted it was only affordable thanks to the UK taxpayer.” (Link For Reference)

        http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11385355/Gordon-Brown-Higher-Scottish-benefits-are-Vow-Plus.html

        Duncan the quote above refers to” Vow Plus” post referendum so it follows that Gordon Brown was the co-architect of the “Vow” pre-referendum so it is the truth.

        1. Amazing. I love it when the evil MSM transforms into the “even the flimsiest reference to something I want to be true must be true because it is here” gospel.

      2. I don’t recall anybody telling us about a Smith commission looking to compromise on more powers to the parliament with Labours contribution to consist only of granting more income tax with caveats. I recall a vow to deliver Federation Home Rule and Devo Max from both Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling.
        Don’t recall being told to expect EVEL the day after a No vote either.
        Oh or to expect to be dragged out of the EU.
        Or to expect nothing but Tory Governments for the foreseeable future.

        Did you?

        1. You’re proving me right. That Alistair Darling clip at the end, for example – it simply doesn’t say what you claim it says.

          The fact is that “the Vow” was published in the Daily Record and signed by the three leaders, and it has been fulfilled in full.

          1. The Daily Record didn’t originate the vow Duncan they published “THE” vow that originated from Labour.

            They ensured the vow was known throughout Scotland in case there were some who missed it on the BBC.

      3. Labours contribution to the “Vow” was to recommend within the Smith commission the denial of all extra powers to the Scottish Parliament except income tax with caveats.

        That didn’t fulfil any vow. That was a betrayal of the vow.

      4. VOW – WE ARE AGREED THAT :

        “The Scottish parliament is permanent”.

        well has that happened Duncan ?

        1. YES! The very first section of the Scotland Act 2016 makes it so!

          http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/11/part/1/enacted

          PART 1 Constitutional arrangements

          The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government

          1 Permanence of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government

          In the Scotland Act 1998 after Part 2 (the Scottish Administration) insert—

          “PART 2A

          Permanence of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government

          63A Permanence of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government

          (1) The Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitutional arrangements.

          (2) The purpose of this section is, with due regard to the other provisions of this Act, to signify the commitment of the Parliament and Government of the United Kingdom to the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government.

          (3) In view of that commitment it is declared that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are not to be abolished except on the basis of a decision of the people of Scotland voting in a referendum.”

          1. No, it doesn’t. And the Scotland Act says it is, and cannot be removed without a referendum. So stop punting this bullshit.

  23. In yesterdays debate before it was stopped . Alex Neil asked for 2 referendums 1 for INDY 1 for EU membership. He does not want EU membership. He said he finds it no more appetising for Scotland to be ruled by MR Juncker than to be ruled by MRS May. He also said austerity from Brussels and from London are equally damaging. Apparently this will not go down well with the SNP leaders.
    The Professor of politics at Edinburgh University has said a ref yes team will use the same tacticts as leave did in the leave campaign. It will be take back control . It will be we don’t have all the answers things will be uncertain. Scotland will deal with it not London. He believes there will be little attempt next time to answer questions on currency oil or EU membership.
    After yesterdays attack in London I hope we don’t take it out on innocent people. Those people had nothing to do with yesterday. I hope they wont be punished just because they are of a different religion or a refugee

  24. “No, it doesn’t. And the Scotland Act says it is, and cannot be removed without a referendum. So stop punting this bullshit.”

    2. Nothing in the Scotland Act prevents the UK Parliament from legislating on matters which are within devolved competence: section 28(7) makes that clear. However during the passage of the Scotland Act, the UK Government announced that it “would expect a convention to be established that Westminster would not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters in Scotland without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.”

    The Court ruling means that the UK Government doesn’t need to seek that consent at all.

    Stop punting bullshit Duncan.

    1. The constitution isn’t a devolved matter! You literally haven’t the first clue what you are talking about. As ever.

  25. Mike how about sticking to the local election. The ref if we get one is about 18 months away. Local Elections are in May they are important

    1. Oh yes David, that’s a good idea! Then we will all watch in awe as Labour romp home and the SNP’s share of the vote crashes and burns, as the MSM declare in their headlines ‘The SNP Honeymoon is Over’

      Then all those people who keep telling you on the doorsteps that they are sick of Nicola and the SNP going on about the referendum, will come out into the streets cheering ‘Kezia! Kezia!’ We’ll Keep the red flag flying high’ as labour take their ‘rightful’ place as the biggest party in Scotland.

      Funnily enough, Wings over Scotland has yet again published a message from Duncan in which he was making similar claims as you about what people were saying to him and how unpopular the people were telling him the SNP/Salmond was.

      The outcome? a surge in votes for the SNP and the beginning of the present woes for Labour.

      Looking back over this thread and the complete inability of Labour activists to engage with people on Labour Hame, without insulting and smearing them, shows the main reason why Labour are unlikely to ever get back into power at any level in Scotland again.

      1. Alternatively take a look back over this thread, on a Labour site, which is full of people who hate Labour making false statements about Labour and about Scotland, which they are used to getting away with on sites like Wings which exist to promote division, and see a small number of Labour folk standing up for the truth and for fairness, against an onslaught of nationalist lies.

        Patrick, your righteousness would be more believable if you once, just once, took on Mike – or Wings – or one of the others when they spread lies and dishonest arguments. You don’t. That makes you as bad as them.

        1. Oh believe me Duncan, I’d like nothing better than to expose Wings for telling lies, because he pays people a tenner if they can point out a deliberate lies he has told.
          Since you insinuate he tells a lot, that’s a lot of cash that someone can make, if you’re prepared to share these lies with the rest of us.

          So please make a list for me and make me some money!

          In fact, why don’t you print an article here on Labour Hame pointing out all the lies he has told (not mistakes that have been corrected, and not matters of opinions) just downright lies that are intended to deceive.
          That way we will all make some dosh, and no one will be able to accuse Slab of not helping Scots!

          Duncan your problem on this thread is your desperately trying to defend the GERS figures, when every neutral financial expert says that all they are is an estimate that has been designed to make Scottish figures look a lot worse than they really are.

          The one pertinent question that you have failed to answer is how does the UK financial system account for 16% of the population being responsible for nearly 53% of the UK deficit?

          It makes no sense whatsoever, unless you do some very, very creative accountancy.
          One figure that people have rightly been asking (that I’m sure Labour will happily answer as they have seen the figures) is of the whole UK military budget, how much is spent on each region?

          The present government point blank refuses to give the figures…why?
          what are they hiding?

          What about the fact that Scottish ports have been so underfunded in the ‘Union of Equals’ (no laughing at the back) that we are UNABLE TO EXPORT OUR GOODS because we don’t have the facilities (are you kidding me!)

          So how do we count these exports Duncan? or put another way, are you able to climb out of your Culde-sac mentality for a few moments to see that perhaps…just perhaps, the powers that be at Westminster see this, and a lot of other opportunities, to make sure they can keep making Scotland look like a financial basket case.

          Why not suggest Slab campaign that would actually raise a few eyebrows with the voters in Scotland Duncan, how about an ‘Open the Books’ campaign?

          Will you campaign Slab to force Westminster to open the books and withhold all the financial information to the devolved nations?

          The very fact you are having arguments about GERS and all the other financial matters shows the dishonesty of Westminster, including the UK Labour Parties, attitude to Scotland. keep them in the dark and feed them (you know what)

          If we are to have a true democracy in Scotland the people need to have access to the truth and then they need to make decisions based on these truths.

          So what say you Duncan?…start the campaign, or keep Scots in the dark?

          It’s black and white, wriggle on the edge of a pedantic pin all you want, or fight for Scots.

          Or keep watching your party crash in the polls, because more and more people are waking up to all the lies we are told.

          1. I, and many others, have pointed out lies in Wings’ work. He just ignores it. You don’t need an article on Labour Hame – read Kevin Hague’s blog. Except that Wings is desperately carrying out a character assassination on him just as he did on me a few years ago. It’s how he deals with people who expose him.

            As for your conspiracy theory about GERS and the “real” government spending, it is littered with the sort of half-truths that make for a really good conspiracy to those who are desperate to find one. Public services cost more to deliver in less populated areas and a lot of finance and business activity gravitates around London. For god knows what reason, you think that we should cut ourselves off from the benefits of being part of the same country as London, and hold up the evidence of us benefiting as an argument that the evil government is lying to us. It would be funny if it weren’t so dreadfully, critically serious.

            Next time you read Wings, or any other source talking about this stuff, ask a few wider questions. What statistics are they choosing to use? Have they picked a single year to compare? What would other years look like? Have they chosen two particular areas to compare? What do other comparisons tell us?

            In 2014 the Yes campaign chose to fixate on the most recent GERS figures and said they showed an independent Scotland would be successful, because that single year’s figures looked good. This year the self same people are telling you that GERS isn’t, and never was, a good indicator for how an independent Scotland would fare.

            Open your eyes, Patrick. Or if you’re not prepared to do that, at least stop lying to other people about your delusions.

  26. Hello Patrick thanks for your comment. I stand by what I said people in my area are telling all off us SNP Labour members. They are fed up listening to all the talk about Indy and Brexit . They are telling us to concentrate on local issues . We keep hearing Nicola isn’t listening . They are telling me whats your guy gonnae dae aboot that son. I know the local NATS are being told this as well I have talked to them about it.
    Local Elections for me are very important. The people will tell us what they think .We might not like what they say or vote . That’s the way it is and that’s how it should be. If you want the truth about the current negotiations between the FM and PM tell them to publish the record of their meetings. I still think at this time concentrate on local issues

    1. Ok I except that David, I don’t think it will help Labour in the local elections, but I’m sure there’s a lot of people who will feel that way.

  27. Duncan Says:

    “I, and many others, have pointed out lies in Wings’ work. He just ignores it. You don’t need an article on Labour Hame – read Kevin Hague’s blog”

    I won’t ignore all his lies though Duncan, I’ll be busy making a pretty penny claiming all those tenners! so c’mon buddy don’t let me down here, I need all that free cash!

    SPILL THE FLIPPING BEANS!! All that £140,000 pounds that he has raised will go sailing down the swanny as we all line up to claim our reward from him…AND it will all be the work of Duncan Hothersall!

    I’ve never read Kevin Hagues work, so can’t comment on what he says about rev on there, but I did notice he had to apologise to wings for re-tweeting a fake tweet about wings, over the weekend. (not a good look for a respected sales-man).

    because of this fake tweet episode, I’m not sure Kevin is a trustworthy source of information, because let’s be honest, if you can’t tell the difference between a fake tweet that had a different font-family, as well as extra underscores after the name, then your hardly in a position to spot fake financial information provided by Whitehall for Whitehall’s (political) benefit.

    The more important point about Kevin is: He has never told me that wings is a liar, so he can’t make me and everyone else on LH money.

    But you did Duncan, so are you willing to publish all those lies that Wings has told, for all to see? He can ignore it all he likes, but he can’t ignore people who fund him (I gave the little blighter £55.00) but that was before I knew you and Kevin Hague had a list of lies.

    I and most of the people who fund Wings do so because we believe he is a trustworthy source of information, and he prides himself on his integrity.

    He is a danger to the media and politicians who lie through their teeth, and he is a threat to the Union, so the smears and lies that are told about him are many and varied. but up until today, I’ve never heard anyone claim that they have a list of lies he has told and that he knows these are lies but has just ignored it when they have been pointed out to him.

    If you don’t share these lies with me Duncan, I can’t pull him up on them, so spill the beans!

    1. Haha. “No, I won’t read the evidence because the guy who wrote it once misread a tweet.” You’re a walking cliche, Patrick. Go and troll someone else.

      1. Evidence!!!

        Flipping Nora Duncan, bring me the Mulah!
        I’ll even donate 50% of all the cash I get from wings, to Labour Hame, if you will just print the ‘evidence’ that the despicable fibber Rev Stu has been telling lies all along!

        I ONLY fund him BECAUSE I TRUST him to tell me the TRUTH.

        As i said I don’t know anything about Kevin, so wont comment on his integrity, and he hasn’t ever told me directly that Wings tells lies.

        People help fund the rev because they trust him, yet you have assured me that there is a list of reasons that make him untrustworthy.

        I know you have tweeted that people shouldn’t fund him or words to the effect that people are being duped into funding him, so this is your chance to prove that your reasons for this is truth rather than just the political smears, so loved by New Labour and still practiced by Slab.

        Print the list of deliberate lies he has told, or at least have the decency to stop smearing him just because he has a different political outlook to you.

        People are watching Duncan, This is as much about you and Slab, than it is about Wings.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: