Munguin's Republic

DAVE SURELY DOESN'T THINK US LITTLE PEOPLE WOULD AVOID TAX?

2012-01-27T16:08:00.002Z

HMCR chief Dave Hartnett (you remember him, don’t you?), says that it is the public's duty not to paytradesmen cash in hand, otherwise said tradesmen may be tempted (look away if you are of a sensitive disposition) to 'evade payingtheir fair share of tax.' (Shock, horror.)

And, if you do not act as tax collectors (unpaid), and they do "forget" to declare all their earnings, this mightresult in even deeper government cuts to public services. (More shock and horror!!)

Now, would this be the same Dave Hartnett who, having allowedhimself to be bought, on over 100 occasions, incredibly expensive meals,arranged multi-billion pound tax avoidance schemes with the Goldman Sachs andVodafone...who, by strange co-incidence, had picked up the tabs for these "fine dining experiences"?

And did this multi-billion pound drop in tax revenue not in some way result in the government having less money to spend?

Some people might be tempted to think that Dave was saying that there was one rule for him, and one rule for the rest of us.

But we all know that none of our (the public) servants would ever do anything like that...

Olympics: Another Day, Another Laugh

2012-01-25T23:13:00.000Z

Because the transport system in London is at breaking point anyway, without the additional 3 million journeys a day anticipated to be made by the 800,000 spectators and 55,000 competitors and officials and VIPs, the Olympics minister, Hugh Something or Other, and the English Department of Transport have decreed that Londoners should try to... "think creatively and adjust travelling patterns, try different routes, stagger journey times, work remotely, walk or cycle to work" during next summer to avoid hold-ups during the Olympics.

Erm, it's just a thought, but, when they were bidding for this expensive extravaganza, did no one in London, like maybe Mayor Ken Livingston, or in the Westminster government, maybe Minister Tessa Jowell, or in the Olympics organisation like the head blokey, Coe, ever give a thought to the fact that there were people in London who had to get to work, school, to airports, to railway stations.... Did it never occur to anyone at all that the transport system just couldn't cope?

And what half wit came up with this advice;

to "try alternative routes"? If you've been going to work at a certain place for a fair amount of time, the likelihood is that you have already worked out the best route for you. Why would you change it;

to "stagger journey times"? So, how would that work if you're a shop worker, or a doctor, or policeman, a teacher, a train driver, or indeed most employed in the majority of jobs?

to "work remotely"? Yeah that will work with a lot of jobs, won't it? "I'd like two coffees and a rock bun, please"..."Well could you pop out to Epping. That's where the waitress is."

to "walk or cycle to work"? What if it's raining? What if you have bad feet or have to spend all day walking about? In any case, are there THAT many people that live so close to central London that they could reasonably walk?

I see that there is to be a trial for civil servants working from home to see if all the computers and networks are in place. I wonder how much that is costing us, and what budget it is coming out of? And what do we do if we want to speak to a member of staff in one of the Whitehall Departments? Phone them at home?

Not only that, but it's the first of three trials which is to take place before the actual event! What are they planning for? Nuclear war?

Another complete foul up in a fouled up set of arrangements for a fouled up games, after which I have no doubt Jowell will go to the House of Lords and Coe will...well, what can we do with him..? Make him Queen?

*****

Talking of Olympics and Fiasco, have you ever heard of anything as completely daft as this? Isn't a rather weird thing to do to take a baby to an event where you can't guarantee, for example not to be in a draft, or direct sunlight, where there maybe a lot of noise, or where absolute silence may have to be observed? But if people insist on doing it, surely they can't be expected to pay for a seat for someone who is going to sleep on their knee throughout.

*****

COME DINE WITH US...

2012-01-24T13:49:00.000Z

Sickened as I am by the quality of debate on the independence question, I have looked elsewhere for a subject to post on... and I didn't have to look far.

As each and every one of us "ordinary, decent, hard working families up and down the land" (don't they realise how patronising that is) cuts and trims their budgets, it appears that, despite calls for them to, and their promises that they will, cut the cost of bars and restaurants in Westminster, the subsidy we pay these 650 members has, according to the Telegraph, risen to an unbelievable £5.8 million. (£8,923.08 per person per year.) Forevery £10 an MP spends on lunch now, the public contributes £7.60; last year the sum was £6.90.

The menus are mouth watering, I warn you in advance, so be prepared:

Artichoke and tomato salad with truffle dressing: £2.05;

Seared breast of pigeon with aubergine purée and spicedcouscous: £4.15;

Spinach, ricotta and sundried tomato pizza with a rocketsalad: £2.75;

Roasted half spring chicken with stuffing: £2.95;

Risotto of pea and broad bean with goat’s cheese: £2.40;

Char-grilled rib-eye steak with hand-cut chips and béarnaisesauce: £7.80;

Green tea and white chocolate brûlée: £2.05;

Cheese board: £3.10.

And Pugin Room bar prices include a glass of malt whisky,Cointreau liqueur or Grand Marnier: £2.55; Glasses of 2009 Sauvignon Blanc or2010 Merlot: £2.35.

And at these prices, our brave representatives do a power of drinking. They spent £1.33 million in the last financial year in the bars (£2.046.15 each). Given the subsidy, imagine what that would have been in real prices.

But Holyrood cannot claim much superiority here. The Edinburgh parliament restaurant was subsidised by £80,000 in the last year (£620 per member).

The meal prices are equally mind blowing with smoked salmon and beetroot lax with potato blini, herb creamcheese capers and spring onions at £1.40.

and seared salmon with herb crème fraiche potatoes, braisedcelery and soy cucumber relish a mere £4.80.

Any restaurant on the Royal Mile would laugh at these prices. And with bar prices at less than £3 for a malt whisky, the bar is being subsidised at around £130 per member.

On average MPs are paid around £66,000 and MSPs around £52,000 per annum. With average salaries around the £25,000 mark, no one could say that they are not reasonably well paid. Surely it is unnecessary for the public to subsidise their eating, and absolutely unnecessary to subsidise their drinking! Something to think about if we are really "all in it together".

However, the laugh of the week has to be our favourite nut job, the Sarah Palin of English politics, Nadine Dorries, who tweeted about the state of the Westminster restaurants:

"Mice running all over dining room..disgusting been that way for six years I have been here.*shudders* shld be paying us to eat here"

Erm, we are, you silly old sausage!

HA HA HA...

2012-01-23T10:16:00.000Z

I'm sorry about another page of jokes. I'm up to my neck in work at the moment, but I promise a proper post soon!

*****

A guy has a talking dog. He takes it to a talentscout.

"This dog can speak English," he claims to the unimpressedagent.

The guy says to the dog, "What's on the top of a house?""Roof!" the dog replies.

"Oh, come on..." the talent agentresponds. “All dogs go 'roof'."

"No, wait," the guysays.

He asks the dog, "What does sandpaper feel like?" "Rough!"the dog answers.

The talent agent gives a condescending stare. He is losing hispatience.

"No, hang on," the guy says. "This one willamaze you."

He turns and asks the dog: "Who, in your opinion, was the greatestbaseball player of all time?"

"Ruth!" barks the dog.

And the talent scout, having seen enough, boots them out of his office onto thestreet.

The dog then turns to the guy and says, "Maybe I shouldsaid DiMaggio?"

*****

One day, a priest was walking through a forest, when he cameupon a pond. On the pond was a lily-pad, and on the lily-pad was the saddestfrog the priest had ever seen!

"Dear frog" the priest asked, "what is the matter? Why are youso sad?"

"Well," said the frog, "I was not always a frog."

"Tell me more" said the priest.

"One day, I was walking through these woods when I came upon a wickedwitch. 'Stand aside witch' I said to her. But alas, she called me a nasty cheekyboy and turned me into a frog."

"But that's terrible! Isn't there anything that can be done to reverse thespell?" asked the priest.

"Well" said the frog, "if a kind person wereto take me home for the night, feed me and put me to sleep on their pillow, Iam sure I would wake up human again."

"Well, this is your lucky day!" said the priest.

So he took the frog home, fed him and put him to sleep on his pillow. And loand behold, when he woke up the next morning, there was a 10 year old choir boyin his bed!

"And that, Your Honour, is the case for the Defence!"

BRAND NEW, FULL COLOUR TABLOID...SAME OLD BIAS

2012-01-21T15:04:00.000Z

Today we get the first edition of the new tabloid-sized Dundee "Courier", which they euphemistically term “compact”. I would like to say that it’s a welcome, fresh and new face to the Scottish media scene but unfortunately, I can’t. The best I can do is say that it is shockingly partisan and riddled with mistakes. So no change there then!

I would have thought that it would be impossible for as paper as pro-Tory and pro-Union as the "Courier" to be more biased, but with its re-launch it has somehow managed it.

Political Editor, David Clegg, launches the new paper with an interview with David Cameron, which is continued and fleshed out on page 10 under the headline “Leafy town key to fate of Union”.

The leafy town in question is David Cameron’s constituency of Witney in Oxfordshire. What follows is one of the most pro-Union, pro-Tory puffs I have ever had the misfortune to waste ten minutes of my life on. You can just picture David Clegg simpering and drooling over the PM and failing to ask a single hard hitting question.

If DC Thomson wanted to increase the circulation of the "Courier", instead of tinkering with its format and rumoured price hike of a whopping 25% to 60p, a good way might have been to cater for the political aspirations of its potential readers.

And that might have been indicated to them by observing the voting patterns of the folk in Dundee, Angus, Perth and Fife, which are most certainly not Conservative!

Instead DCT prefers to continue to frustrate them with this nauseating interview with the UK prime minister in which “Call Me” is allowed to expound the virtues of the Union and repeat ad nauseam that he “cares deeply” for it an that he “profoundly hopes” that people will vote for it.

Additionally, whilst in Witney, Mr Clegg conducted a vox pop of a supposed cross section of folk that he met. All, strangely, seem to agree with their leader.

Clegg tells us that the majority of people he spoke to wanted Scotland to remain in the Union, which is a little odd considering that every poll conducted in England shows a majority for Scots leaving the Union.

Is he trying to tell us that people in Witney in Oxfordshire are in inverse proportion to the rest of England? Or did he search out his respondents carefully before asking the question in an attempt to portray the English as dewy eyed lovers of all things Scots? (Instead of what they really think, which is mostly that Scots are a bunch of drunk, drug addicted, moaning spongers and subsidy junkies.

Really, David (Clegg), if you are going to try that kind of thing, it might be a good idea to at least try to keep it within the bounds of reality and not in the most far flung realms of cloud cuckoo land where the sky is a bluer Tory blue and the birds sing out for England and St George.

Now on the paper itself. One would have expected that with the re-launch all the stops would have been pulled out to avoid the perennial "Courier" blunders. (For those of you who don’t read it, the "Courier" is hilariously badly proof read, in fact I don’t think it is proof read at all. Apart from the usual typos, repeat words, spelling mistakes and grammatical snafus, stories end, mid sentence, on a word like “and” with whole sections missing, and even worse, sometimes an entire story is repeated verbatim later in paper.)

In the new paper I did not spot a mistake until page three, where we get the following “...Mr Hutchison said told the 'Courier'...”. Clearly Mr Hutchison at one point had 'said' something and later it was edited to him 'telling the Courier' but the word 'said' was left in. There are several more mistakes of a similar nature throughout the paper that are the result of sloppy editing and poor proof reading.

So all in all, not much change then... oh, except for the tabloid format and anticipated price hike of 25%.

LIGHTEN UP...IT'S THE WEEKEND

2012-01-20T22:06:00.001Z

I'm sorry about the lack to postings over the last few days. I've been having some work done on the flat and it's involved a shed load of clearing up. I've now got a load of decorating to do. I hope in the meantime you enjoy these American funny stories...

A frog telephones the Psychic Hotline and his PersonalPsychic Advisor tells him: "You are going to meet a beautiful young girlwho will want to know everything about you."

The frog is thrilled, "This is great! Will I meet herat a party?" "No," says his Advisor, "in her biologyclass."

****

A sixteen year-old boy came home with a new ChevroletAvalanche and his parents began to yell and scream, "Where did you getthat truck???!!!"

He calmly told them, "I bought it today."

"With what money?" demanded his parents.

"Well," said the boy, "this one cost me just fifteendollars."

So the parents beganto yell even louder. "Who would sell a truck like that for fifteendollars?" they said.

"It was the lady up the street," said the boy. I don"t know hername - they just moved in. She saw me ride past on my bike and asked me if Iwanted to buy a Chevrolet Avalanche for fifteen dollars."

"Oh my Goodness!," moaned the mother, "she must be a childabuser. Who knows what she will do next? John, you go right up there and see what’sgoing on." So the boy’s father walked up the street to the house where thelady lived and found her out in the yard calmly planting petunias!

He introduced himself as the father of the boy to whom she had sold a newChevrolet Avalanche for fifteen dollars and demanded to know why she did it.

"Well," she said, "this morning I got a phone call from myhusband. (I thought he was on a business trip, but learned from a friend he hadrun off to Hawaii with his mistress and really doesn’t intend to come back). He claimed he was stranded and needed cash, and asked me to sell his newChevrolet Avalanche and send him the money. So I did."

****

A woman's husband had been slipping in and out of a coma forseveral months, yet she had stayed by his bedside every single day.

One day when he came to, he motioned for her to come nearer.

As she sat by him, he whispered, eyes full of tears, 'You know what? You havebeen with me all through the bad times.

When I got fired, you were there to support me.

When my business failed, you were there.

When I got shot, you were by my side.

When we lost the house, you stayed right here.

When my health started failing, you were still by my side...

You know what Martha?'

'What dear?' she gently asked, smiling as her heart began to fill withwarmth.

'I'm beginning to think you're bloody bad luck....

****

A tough looking group of bikers were riding when they sawa girl about to jump off a bridge, so they stopped.
The leader, a big burly man, gets off his bike and says, "What are youdoing?"

"I'm going to commit suicide," she says.

While he didn’t want to appear insensitive, he didn't want to miss anopportunity so he asked... "Well, before you jump, why don't you give me akiss?"

So she did... And it was a long, deep, lingering kiss.

After she's finished, the biker says, "Wow! That was the best kiss I haveever had! That's a real talent you are wasting. You could be famous. Why areyou committing suicide?"

"My parents don't like me dressing up like a girl"

****

This will choke you up... it really will.

2012-01-16T20:04:00.000Z

We're in a recession (almost undoubtedly); everything costs more than we reckon we should spend; it's getting worse; unemployment is rising by the day and may reach 3 million; almost no one feels secure (except the chairman of Barclays who is heading for a £10 million bonus); the roads are dangerously full of potholes (drivers spend more time trying to dodge the worst ones instead of looking where they are going); Willie Hague has warned us he hasn't ruled out war in Iran (why not, it's Muslim, doesn't like us, and has a lot of oil); our sick are just about to be thrown on to a massive dole queue and ordered to find work that doesn't exist....

...But not to worry. Mr Gove, the House Elf who also doubles as England's Education Secretary (despite being Scottish), has the answer to all our woes. This will cheer us up no end, he reckons. Why not spend £60 million on a new yacht for the Queen?

Why not indeed, Mr Gove? It would cheer us all up immensely, especially those of us called Windsor and lord knows they have had it worse than most of us. They deserve a break..

What is this man doing in government? Does he have any idea what it's like down here on Earth?

What a silly little dip stick.

NO POLITICIANS, NO EXCEPTIONS, NO APOSTROPHES

2012-01-16T00:24:00.000Z

It seems to me that some places in small town New Hampshire (is there any other kind of New Hampshire, I wonder) have it about right.

Danny sent me this picture a week or so ago when the first primary of the season was under way.

Politicians, it seems, find it easier to get to people when they're out and about, rather than go knocking on doors. One of the best places to "nab" someone is a café or restaurant (which Americans use far more than we do), where the poor soul is captive until such time as he or she has managed to gulp his food and coffee and make a hasty exit.

So much so that café owners have got round to the idea that to attract more customers, even if it means shutting out the man who who might just be the next president, the best idea is to bar the politicos!

Not a bad idea really, is it?

It occurred to me as I read the notice that America restaurateurs must be better schooled than our equivalents. Without a doubt we at best would have had: "No Politician's No Exception's"

DON'T MENTION THE TORIES...

2012-01-15T16:46:00.000Z

In an article today in the paper edition of the Herald (apparently unavailable on-line), Michael Forsyth, one of Scotland's least liked Tories (in fact the man who led the Tories in Scotland to utter oblivion in 1997), writes that he thinks that the coalition parties should take a back seat in the referendum debate.

He seems to appreciate that the London government's involvement in the lead up to 2014's poll is bound to have a negative effect for their cause. He is probably aware that since Mr Cameron upped the stakes on the independence question last week, the SNP membership has soared. At one point 9 people per minute were joining, according to the Courier and Advertiser, Dundee's Tory-leaning morning paper.

He says that he knows that Scotland is a left of centre country with a tendency to vote Labour. He proposes therefore, that Alistair Darling, Labour's ex chancellor, should be involved in leading London's campaign for Scotland's dependence.

It is a shrewd choice. Particularly since Darling launched his attack on Brown in his memoires, he has become a relatively respected figure in Scottish politics in the elder statesman category. If I had to chose someone to present the status quo argument, he would certainly be on my short list.

But wait a minute. Forsyth, an arch Thatcherite Tory, thinks that the UK government (Tory and Liberal alike), which the status quo vote that he craves would force upon Scotland, possibly for the next 10 years or more, is so unpopular that it should keep away from the debate about that future?

Does Mr Forsyth really not see any irony in his argument?

PERHAPS THEY SHOULD JUST MERGE AND SAVE ON THE ADMINISTRATION COSTS?

2012-01-14T22:37:00.000Z

There are rumours that Ed Miliband is on the way out. Thebookies have cut the odds on his not leading Labour into the next election. Gossipfrom Simon Carr of the Indy, suggest he may be gone by Easter.

So who have they got to replace him? Surely his brotherwouldn’t consider being second hand Rose? In anycase would he be any better? So, would it be Ed Balls, close bosom friend ofthe retired chef de cuisine of thestew that the country is in, Gordon End to Boom and Bust Brown?

Ed’s wife Mrs Balls, knowing how her husband covets the job,would surely never take it from him. And the rest? Burnham, Murphy, Alexander?They’d all be just as bad.

Labour are lost. Tony Blair made them Tory Light in order tomake them electable in the south of England, where half the UK populationlives. It was a good move politically. They got 13 years of government out ofit, and Blair himself became a multi millionaire on the back of his war crimes. But ideologically they havenever really got over this, because they don't now know that they are for.

They used to be about the "working man":the factory worker, the miner, the foundryman, the ship builder, theagricultural worker, but Thatcher got rid of most of them, put them on the dole, or on the "sick", and sold the restshares and houses.

It wasn’t enough to be for the workers anymore; there weren'tenough workers.

So they elected themselves a complete loser. A man who oozes indifference; who seems even when he is telling you how passionate he is about something, lacks any kind of sincerity. A man who, from day one, has been a dead loss weight round their collective neck.

Cameron is not clever. He’s cunning and devious, but he’snot good with facts, lacks depth and gets easily flustered if people push him.The Flashman tendencies are never far from the surface, which makes himincredibly vulnerable. He’s already been forced to apologise for wisecracks, andbiting sarcasm delivered in barely controlled temper.

And yet this second rater can't begin to unseat him. Just imagine if there was a prime minister who was clever and knowledgeable!

Look at some of the things the government is doing willcompletely change the character of English life: eg, introducing a two tier healthservice where the rich will pay for better treatment IN NATIONAL HEALTHHOSPITALS, and where, because of the shortage of facilities, the poor will waittill their betters are seen to, scanned, exrayed, operated upon, looked afterin ICU, de-fibrillated... for their turn,if all the staff haven't gone home by that time.

And then there aremeasures that will cause hardship in the whole of the UK. Cameron once saidthat it made him physically sick to think of a guy who had stolen, say a coupleof bottles of water, being allowed to vote. (I imagine because he fondlyimagines that most of them would vote Labour; the people who count usually beingable to call in the odd favour to avoid such indignity.) Well, it makes me physically sick to thinkthat I belong to a society that sends patients with life threatening illness toa job readiness interview, or denies severely disabled children benefits whenthey come to 18, and thereby denies them any independence, because they’ve never paid any National Insurance.

And still this Labour can’t get get the upper hand, because theycan’t really argue with most of what Cameron says. Even tonight Balls was saying that it's unlikely that they would reverse any of the Tories cuts.

It doesn’t matter much whether it’s Miliband Maximus or Minimus, Balls male or female, Andy Birnham or anyone else for that matter. Labour hasn't gotany soul left. Once their raison d’être was lost, they were lost. In the south of England they competefor the same votes now as the Tories do. Nowhere else matters that much, for that is where the elections are won and lost.

That's why the Tories too were useless inopposition. They don’t seriously OPPOSE each other any more.

This should have been the Liberal’s opportunity to make a massive comeback, and they blew it, which is, I think, unfortunate for everyone in the UK.

Pics: Ed, David and Andy, all apparently describing things of varying sizes

YOU SHOULD HAVE MARRIED AIR MILES, RICHARD

2012-01-14T00:52:00.001Z

The extradition request from Turkey for Sarah Ferguson (right) has been turned down.

Well, I never! I suppose that the judge will be looking for a seat on the red benches.

The reason given was that what she did is not an offence in the UK. (I suppose they mean England, but they probably don't know,or care that there is a separate legal code in Scotland.)

So, in England you can go around filming orphans in orphanages without telling anyone you are doing it, can you? You can film children without their guardians' approval? That's OK? Funny, I thought it was banned to stop paedophiles storing up jolly memories.

(And before I get lambasted, I know that the conditions in the orphanage were appalling, just as I know that some of the ones run by nuns in Scotland were appalling, and it makes me weep to think of kids suffering like that, wherever it happens, and that Sarah should be commended for bringing this to out attention. But surely the reason given for excusing her extradition is nothing more than a fiction.)

Embarrassing though Ferguson may be to the Widsors, it would be unthinkable that someone who was once married to the Dipso Duke (above, making a fool of himself), friend of Gaddafi and other strange exotic dictators, and is the mother of two royal highnesses, Princesses Goofy and Podgy, no less, would be thrown into a Turkish prison.

(I'd add here that I quite like Fergie, even if she did produce these ghastly free-loaders. I particularly admire her for sticking it to the Windsors and managing to spend a lifetime getting money out of them...something which is extremely hard to do, given that they are as tight as drums with our money and ever tighter with their own.)

In other news Richard O'Dwyer (right, with his mum) will be extradited to America on charges of hosting a web directory, or search engine, for pirated films. Probably a bit like Google or Ask Jeeves. I'm not entirely sure that pointing out where pirated stuff can be purchased, as opposed to actually providing it, is, or should be, a crime in England, but it doesn't much matter. Despite both Cameron and Clegg promising to sort out the unbalanced extradition arrangement made with American by arch creep Tony Blair, they have, as we might have expected, done sod all.

Bad luck on Mr O'Dwyer, who probably should have had the foresight to marry Fatty York to ensure safe criminal activity almost anywhere in the world. Still some things are even worse than 10 years in an American prison, and close contact with Fatboy is probably one of them.

THE ANSWER ISN'T BLOWING IN THE WIND; IT'S IN THE QUESTION

2012-01-13T10:08:00.000Z

I haven't yet had time to look at FMQs from yesterday, but Ihad to laugh at the clip of Ruth Davidson on the STV (Grampian) News. Every poll everpublished (in the whole wide world in the history of mankind) agrees with me?What? It's a wonder then Ruth that you're not First Minister, or the Queen, orsomething. And of course, as James points out, clearly the poll of September last year, and umpteen others showing a lead for independence over dependence, were figments of our febrile imaginations.

Lamont was just as bad. "He has the majority, he hasthe mandate...." (well, thanks for admitting that Johann) ...so why, shewondered, didn't he call the referendum now.

Well, you see Johann, the clue to the answer is in the question. It works like this:-

He has themajority to decide whether or not, and when, to call the referendum. This is a majority given by us, we, the Scottish electorate. Andalthough by Westminster standards it is a tiny majority, it is, in fact, the majority that should never have been: a majority that was never envisaged: a majority that the system was set up toavoid ever happening (because Blair wanted 'parish councils' rather than strong government in 'theprovinces').

And (and this is important), it's not a majority based on the voters being sick of the last lot, as so oftenhappens, but instead a majority based on their being SATISFIED with the last lot, because as you may remember, the SNP was the last lot.

And as Johann says, the mandate is there; there's no escaping that. The referendum was in themanifesto. And, just in case someone who didn't know what the SNP was all about,and who didn't read the manifesto, was in some doubt, it was hammered home bynone other than Tavish Scott in the Leaders' Debates when he pointed out that"a vote for the SNP is a vote for independence".

And when pressed on the timing of that referendum, Johann,you may remember, Alex Salmond said, on national television, in front of thethen leaders of the now opposition parties, a hand picked studio audience, and anyone who was interestedenough to be watching, that if the SNP won the election, the referendum wouldbe called in the second half of the parliament.

So, to answer Mrs Lamont question, he is calling areferendum, and he is calling it in the second half of the parliament becausehe has the majority, he has the mandate, and that’s when he promised the Scottishpeople he would do it.

And why, anyway, is Mrs Lamont in such an all-fired hurry now to have areferendum that only a few months ago her party, in an opposition coalition withthe Tories and the Liberals, made clear would be defeated were proposals to “bringit on” brought before parliament?

Unless, as part of Labour’s “Bring it on: Don’t Bring iton” referendum policy, we're in the 'Bring it on' cycle.

Pics: Ruth Davidson, Conservative leader, and Johann Lamont, Labour leader, providing her own caption and advertising campaign.

"IF YOU SCOTCH PEOPLE INSIST ON TEARING MY COUNTRY APART, I WANT MY CURRENCY BACK AND YOU CAN'T PLAY WITH IT, SO THERE. NA NA NA"

2012-01-11T19:29:00.000Z

The scare tactics have begun. The respect agenda gone out the window. And we're only on day two!

A "spokesman" for Mr Cameron has said that Scotland could be "forced" to join the Euro if it insists on independence.

What does he think Alex Salmond is going to do? "Oh well, that's it lads. That Eton and Oxford education was too much for me. Call me has outwitted us. We'll just have to scrap any idea of independence"?

Yeah, that's likely!

In more civilized times, with far more civilized and intelligent leaders, Ireland was granted independence from the United Kingdom (although it took a war to make it happen) and carried on within the sterling area. There was no rush to throw Ireland out of the sterling area and the Irish Pound stayed pegged to the English pound until the advent of the ERM.

Here is a part of the Wikipedia page on the subject.

"Despite increasing political independence from each other from 1922 and complete political independence since the new constitution of 1937, the union left the two countries intertwined with each other in many respects. Ireland used the Irish pound from 1928 until 2001 when the euro replaced it. Until it joined the ERM in 1979, the Irish pound was directly linked to the pound sterling. Decimalisation of both currencies occurred simultaneously on Decimal Day in 1971. Coins of equivalent value had the same dimensions and size until the introduction of the British twenty pence coin in 1982,.

"Irish citizens in the UK have a status almost equivalent to British citizens. They can vote in all elections and even stand for Parliament. As well as this, some people born in the Republic of Ireland before 1949, but after 3 March 1922, are British subjects. British citizens have similar rights to Irish citizens in the Republic of Ireland and can vote in all elections apart from presidential elections and referendums. Under the Irish nationality law anyone born on the island of Ireland to a British or Irish parent can have Irish citizenship and so most children born in Northern Ireland can have a British or an Irish passport (or both). Before 2002, there was no requirement for one parent to be a British or Irish citizen and so all persons born on the island of Ireland before then are entitled to be Irish citizens."

So why does Cameron insist on behaving like a spoilt child? There is absolutely no need, nor is there a precedent, for Scotland to leave the sterling area immediately.

Can Cameron possibly think that threatening to force Scotland into a currency that is wobbling dangerously on the edge of extinction and which might not even exist by the time the referendum has come and gone, is a clever move on his part? Frankly I think it's a dumb as a stump.

But John Swinney will already have contingency plans in place for this eventuality, whether that is starting out own currency or working with another country like Norway.

Message to Cameron: If you want to behave like an 8 year old who isn't getting his own way, take your bloody ball and sod off home. We'll get our own ball.

AND SO IT BEGINS...

2012-01-11T10:57:00.000Z

Mr Cameron's announcement to the press that he was going to take the fight on the independence referendum to the Nats and set standards and rules so that any referendum would be "fair legal and decisive", instead, presumably of "unfair, illegal and indecisive", were it left to the Scottish parliament to decide have kicked off, rather earlier than we might have expected, the campaign for Scottish Independence.

The Scotland Office has launched a consultative document and solicited responses from those who are interested. James Kelly at Scot Goes Pop drew this to my attention this morning in this post.

He points out that the consultation is a waste of time (well he actually calls it a "farce"). I largely agree. We all know what they think: they don't want Scotland to leave the UK. But over the few days since Cameron's rather sudden first mention of the UK government's intervention, made in the wake of his deputy apparent assertion that those who wanted either independence or the status quo were extremists, there have been a number of changes in tone.

And as James points out, there is obvious difficulty from a PR point of view, in holding a consultation and then ignoring the results of it.

Who knows if, or how, the UK government will persuade its supporters to complete the consultation giving the Westminster side, but it is certainly important that those of us who feel differently from the way Cameron would wish us to, do our best to balance the exercise by putting our point of view.

In his post James has generously offered first drafts of his responses to the consultation's questions. (They may be "first drafts" to him; they seemed like carefully honed responses to me.) And he has invited comments from readers.

I think that those of us who want independence for Scotland should take the time to take part in this exercise and the one that the Scottish government will launch. I hope that those of you who have blogs will consider linking to the Scotland Office site.

James has definitely come up with good stuff (far better than I'd have done) and my responses will certainly be influenced by his.

****

For those who are interested and who missed the broadcast. Mr Salmond was interviewed by James Naughtie for the Today Programme this morning (Thursday, January 12) at approximately 7.50.

In the interview, which, as ever, he handled in the Alex Salmond way, courteously and intelligently, putting his point of view and never being flustered by Naughtie, he pointed out again that the SNP were campaigning for independence, but that he realised (as do we all) that there is a strong level of support for 'devo max' among the Scottish people.

He said that the referendum would contain a yes or no option on independence, as has always been promised and as is demanded by Westminster, but did not rule out the possibility that it might contain another question relating to 'devo-max', if that was shown, by the Scottish Government's consultation, and in parliament, to have strong support.

****
I'd also like to draw you attention to an article at Lalland's Peat Worrier, and most particularly to a response from Peter Thomson, part of which reads:

".....In international law (which trumps Westminster) the sovereign people of Scotland have the legal right guaranteed by UN Charters, Helsinki Accords and the Treaty of Vienna to hold a referendum on the issue of independence.

Further the UN legislation states the power from which the other is seceding can have no role in the organisation of or campaigning in the said referendum....."

I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on the legal legitimacy of this point of view? I can imagine condition's like these being put in place to protect citizens in a union where dirty tricks could reasonably be expected to be the order of the day. But if they do exist, they must surely be equally binding on a liberal democracy such as the UK...

THIS IS THE AGE.....OF THE TRAIN

2012-01-10T14:17:00.000Z

England's high speed railway link between London and Birmingham is to go ahead, according to the Telegraph, with tunnels through the most highly disputed areas of the countryside between London and Birmingham. Parliament still has to vote on the matter, but as Labour is also committed to the high speed link, it is likely to leap that hurdle with little problem.

Cheryl Gillan, SoS for Wales, who, for some unknown reason has her constituency in that Buckinghamshire, has previously, somewhat rashly, threatened to resign if the scheme went ahead. It remains to be seen whether the tunnels, (at an estimated £190,000 extra a yard) are long enough and deep enough to appease her and save her job, her face and her ministerial Mondeo!

Anyone who has travelled on the Continent, through Spain, France, Italy and Germany, the high speed trains are, if you're used to UK trains, simply amazing. You can get on a train in the North of Sweden and get off in the South of Portugal, Greece, Italy, having enjoyed a smooth and comfortable ride, with good service, in hours and having travelled through 3 or 4 countries on the way. And you can travel up to England from Brussels or Paris in the same comfort... but there it ends.

Anywhere north of London and you are back to dirty bone shakers running over Victorian track with antiquated signalling and the inevitable delays. And north of Edinburgh, even on intercity routes, you are relegated to diesel trains!

Back in the 1970s, Europe realised that there was a need for fast efficient rail connection between major cities. The UK preferred to develop a road system. And in the '80, the network developed across the Continent. But Mrs Thatcher didn't like trains, as you can see from the map.

I support the UK government's decision to go ahead. Britain has to catch up with the rest of the world at some point and the English Transport Secretary Justine Greening has said that the £38 billion line is just the foundation for a high speed network Britain wide.

The English transport department MUST take notice of the National Audit Office's findings on how the Civil Service negotiates contracts with private companies.

The £38 million could easily double or triple over the time scale set for building this railway, the first stage of which is set to be completed in 2026.

Oh, by the way, does anyone know why is it going to take 14 years to build this little bit of railway?

WHY IT'S NOT THE END OF THE WORLD--CHARLIE

2012-01-10T09:57:00.000Z

Oh well, that's all right then. A bit of light relief from Charlie McDonnell on why the world won't end this year, and why there's something wrong with Justin Bieber's new calendar.

THANKS OLD CHAP, BUT WE CAN READ AND WRITE UP HERE

2012-01-09T18:41:00.001Z

There are two main reasons, well official reasons anyway, why Mr Cameron has rushed, with what seems like indecent haste, to force a referendum on Scotland in 2013.

Firstly he says he is doing it because he wants any referendum to be "fair, legal and decisive", because, bless his ~~cotton~~ Vicuña socks, he thinks they "owe it to the Scottish people" to ensure that.

That would bring a tear to a glass eye, would it not?

Fine, and it's sweet of him to be concerned, but did it ever cross his mind that we have people in Scotland who are trained in law.We have our own law officers, they understand the terms of the Scotland act, and it's more than a little patronising of him to assume that we don't. No one in the Scottish government was going to take liberties with something as important as this. No one has now, or has ever, had any intention of trying to hold a referendum that was unfair, illegal or indecisive.

We have known since devolution, that any referendum we held would be consultative. The only person who can grant independence is the Queen, on the advice of her London first minister. Indeed David McLetchie, a Scottish lawyer, and currently the Scottish Conservative's Chief Whip, Business Manager and Constitutional Affairs Spokesman pointed out several years ago that the only question that the Scottish government can put, must ask the voter if (s)he wants the Scottish government to commence negotiations with the UK government... I'm not sure what Mr Cameron was doing to miss that. Maybe it was before he was interested in politics.

So to use Mr Cameron's own words: calm down dear, nothing to worry about. We weren't planning UDI.

The second official reason was that the question of whether Scotland, in a few years' time, would be a part of the UK or an independent country, was causing uncertainty for business and for the markets.

We all know, of course, that Cameron doesn't want the referendum held in the 700th anniversary year of the Battle of Bannockburn, the year of Scotland holding the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, and the Ryder Cup at Gleneagles, presumably things which he imagines will stir some pride in the nationalist soul.

Instead he wants it to be held in the period just after Her Majesty's Diamond Jubilee and the Olympic Games in London, events which doubtless he imagines will stir the spirit of the British Bulldog and good Old Blighty war time spirit, of Keep Clam and Carry On. He may even be planning get Vera Lynn out of retirement to give us her White Cliffs of Dover just to reinforce the image.

But to get back to the pretence. If Mr Cameron thinks that business or the markets are so worried about uncertainty caused by whether on not a certain union will be in place in a few years' time, would it not be sensible for them also to be sure of the UK's position relative to the European Union. Maybe he could do this by holding a referendum on the same day? We might even trust him to do it fairly, legally and decisively (despite the fact that he really didn't stick to his word over the last one).

Oh, and while he is doing that, he might like to find out how the Deputy Prime Minister feels about his vetoing treaties. The uncertainty caused by the Prime Minister reading not just from different hymn sheets, but reading them in different languages must be far more damaging to the interests of business and the markets than little old Scotlandshire's issues.

LESSON: WHEN YOU ARE A BIG CHEESE, CHOOSE YOU WORDS CAREFULLY

2012-01-07T23:01:00.000Z

I commend to you an interesting and well written article by Liberal blogger Andrew Page. I enjoy reading Andrew's stuff. I certainly don't always agree with what he's saying, but he has an easy style of writing and a moderate and thought-out approach to his subject. He is as likely to criticise his own party, as he is another. In short he thinks for himself, makes his arguments accordingly and is nobody's yes man.

This article stems from a speech made by Nick Clegg, or rather a part of that speech where he seems to call nationalists (and those who favour total unionism [presumably Forsyth supporters]), "extremists".

What it appears Clegg actually said, although I have not heard the speech myself, was that both the above categories of Scots are at the extreme ends of opinion. Well, that's a bit obvious, if overstated, isn't it? The middle is the status quo, the other two are at the extremes, or ends...

But it's not a word I would have used, and I don't have years of political training, nor am I the leader of a UK party, much less the Britain's deputy prime minister. So maybe it wasn't the brightest thing for a person who has, and is, all that to have said, but The Scotsman, well known for being a chip wrapper first and journal second, appears to have made of it something which it was not.

So of course nationalists are on one side of the argument but I'm not in the least an extremist. That takes far too much fire and passion.

I want Scotland to be independent not because I think our mountains are nicer than their hills, our burns nicer than their brooks, our lochs more lovely than their lakes, or indeed our fowk nicer than their people.

Some people do have that misty eyed, bagpipeish, Brigadoonian vignette notion of what Scotland is. Not me. For scenery, beautiful though Scotland is, there are plenty of other places just as lovely, and for the folk, I've found that they are much the same the world over, good and bad.

I'm a nationalist because I believe we are badly served being ruled from London, and frequently by a political party for which we didn't vote.

I doubt our people are any nicer than the English, but we do seem to have some sort of "common weel" as Alex Salmond would have it. Maybe the English have that too under another name (Noblesse Oblige??), and maybe it's because we have always been poorer than the English, and have felt the need to band together for protection, that we have preferred a more centre left government. When we say our government is based on 'society', we don't mean Royal Ascot and Wimbledon

And there's financial motivation for me too. I look across the sea to Norway unencumbered by a large "world power" status, with all the spending commitment that that incurs.

I see what they have done with their share of North Sea Oil, and I despair of poverty of our lives here, and of a British future, while our soldiers put the world to rights, according to the needs of American Presidents to whom all UK prime ministers seem in thrall.

I don't blame the English for our plight. The greatest needs of the UK are where the bulk of the population lives. And that is in the South East of England. I blame the Scots. It is in our hands to do something about our plight.

Even the devolution that was wished upon us by Labour was so very badly done: 'a parish council', said Tony Blair, before it had starter plotting how to control, at least the mainland countries. 'A wee pretendy parliament', said Billy Connelly sneeringly. Leaving the Westminster parliament to serve as English and UK parliament, simply reinforced the fact (previously demonstrated by the Celtic secretaries of state), that England was central and the small nations, mere satellites, or counties.

But for all that I don't want to "rip up" or "tear apart" up anything. And opposition parties' use of emotive language is not helpful to a grown up debate. Separation is inaccurate. Independence instead of dependence is what we seek.

Scotland could easily have good neighbourly relations with the rest of the UK and share many facilities and friendly co-operative relations. and even at the heights of the troubles there were no border guards in Ireland, so why would we want them now?

That's more or less that. There's nothing in the least extreme about any of it, is there?

DON'T WASTE TOO MUCH OF OUR MONEY OUT THERE MR H!

2012-01-04T19:25:00.001Z

Well, did you ever?

Following Mrs Clinton's visit to Burma, or more properly according to the UN, Republic of the Union of Myanmar, guess who's trailing out there on a jaunt to tell them all about how we will support them in democracy?

Yep, Wee Willie, from the ex-colonial power; the one which gave them such good examples of democracy, equality and respect for human rights when they were in charge of things.

The Burmese much resented their treatment at the hands of the British and there were violent riots from early on up to the 1930s. Some of the discontent was caused by a disrespect for local culture and traditions, such as the British refusal to remove shoes when they entered pagodas.

George Orwell wrote of his disgust at his role in the empire machine and at the way that the British treated the Burmese, when he was stationed there as a policeman in the Indian Police Service.

Buddhist monks became the vanguards of the independence movement as they have been against the military rule that has been in place since 1962.

So Willie will flyt out there like the great while hope, and lecture them about human rights and about democracy. Maybe he will advise them be like us and get a non elected head of state. In the old days he might even have offered a minor Brit royal for the job. Prince Edward or some other nonentity.

He cannot in conscience call for free and fair elections, given how unfair elections are in the UK, and he will have to ensure that the Burmese do not try to copy in any way, our parliamentary systems.

He will be expected to lecture them on prisoner release, human rights, and to ask what Britain can do to help.

Why should Britain do anything? What does it have to offer?

Is Mr Hague well versed in the running of countries on the other side of the world? Does he have experience of tropical rain forest agriculture, or housing, road building, education, health or job creation to offer? Probably not.

Does he then have money to offer so that expertise can be paid for? Nope. Not a bean.

So why exactly is he going?

No idea? Nah, me neither.

Still it's probably nice and warm out there this time of the year, and he'll get to play at being important.

MPs GETTING ABOVE THEMSELVES AGAIN WITH FIRST CLASS TRAVEL

2012-01-03T22:45:00.001Z

Click to enlarge

I understood that, following the scandal of MPs thieving from the public by putting virtually their entire expenditure on expenses, various things were to change.

One of these was that they were supposed to travel cattle class like the rest of us on what passes in the UK for a train network, instead of luxuriating in first class at the most expensive fares in the world.

Well, that is what was agreed, but of course, in practice (if you believe the Daily Mail) the thieving tossers have been on the fiddle again.

According to figures released by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA), MPs claimed for a total of 1334 first class train journeys at a cost of £136,800 in June and July 2011. This is a staggering increase of 155% over the same period in 2010.

It seems that as the memory of the expenses scandal uncovered by the Daily Telegraph recedes from memory, these self important public servants are back to enjoying the comforts that most of the rest of us are denied.

But it doesn't stop at first class rail travel. Oh no. While the public squeeze in to third class seats in aircraft, our representatives in parliament have been winging it hither and thither in business class. 115 flights were made in June and July last year, at a cost of £35,722 (including one to Athens costing £844.20!!!

Upper class air and train fares, say the Mail, are on target to reach £1 million this year.

They are supposed to go second class, or tourist class, like the people they have the great honour to represent, and of whom they are employees!

They were also supposed to take buses instead of taxis, except in exceptional circumstances. Of course, you'll have guessed that these exceptional circumstances have occurred more and more often. Indeed in June and July last year, they doubled from the previous year, to over £13,000 worth.

Message to MPs. Don't push us too far. We're getting poorer and poorer; you're taking more and more...and we're getting angrier and angrier.

COULD THIS BE PART OF THE ANSWER

2012-01-03T00:23:00.001Z

A police initiative in North Lanarkshire has cut serious violent crimeby 20% by identifying and tackling problem families and working with agenciesto help find work for young people in trouble using a mix of persuasion andcompulsion..

Statistics from the police division show there have been 90 fewervictims of serious assault in the past year – with estimated savings of £2million for the police and NHS: dramatic results by anyone’s standards.

Like everywhere else there are a small number of people responsible formost of the crime. By concentrating on them, the results have been astounding:

Youth disorder reduced by 43% in the last two years;

serious assaults reduced by 20% last year and down a further 14% so farthis financial year;

overall violence cut by 22%, includingmurder and attempted murder.

Having been identified as been on the verge of crime, the kids are takenon Outward Bound weekends after initially working with the police for a fewmonths, They get to know the police and the police get to know them andbarriers are broken down. Following from that the kids may go into training oremployment, through contacts with other agencies.

Some kids come from families with maybe three generations ofworklessness. They are people who are alienated from normal society and breaking that mould requires proactive work.

It seems that the police almost act like surrogate parents, role modelswhich the kids have never had. And it may seem like it’s hardly the cops’ jobs,but whatever anyone says, if it works, it works. It costs £40,000 to keep aperson in prison for a year; and when they come out, they are virtuallyunemployable. This is vastly cheaper, and kids without prison records are mucheasier to get into work.

I hope Kenny MacAskill will look very carefully at this scheme and itscost effectiveness with a view to suggesting spreading it over a wider area,and then maybe over all of Scotland.

A saving of that size over the entire country would make a hugedifference financially, but think how much safer the streets would be.

Let’s also hope that the police can work too with Shona Robison, the sportsminister, with a view to getting one of the hub sports facilities that come aspart of the Commonwealth games. Although I’m no sportsman myself, I’m convincedthat in sport lies the answer to many of our youths’ problems.

SO WHAT IS THE ANSWER?

2012-01-02T15:29:00.000Z

The other day I was talking to the guy who looks after the changing rooms at my gym. I guess he's in his early 50s, and working in what must be a reasonably low pay job.

I mention this because, in the way you do, without being particularly interested in the answer, I asked him what he was doing on Hogmanay.

'Oh nothing much', he replied. 'Time was that you couldn't afford a drink that often, so you splashed out and bought a bottle or two at the New Year, but now that it's a cheap as chips at the supermarket, you can have it all the time.

'Mind you', he added, 'in these days you could always afford heating. The treat nowadays is to be able to afford to have the whole house warm'.

I thought he was joking, until I got to thinking about it. But it's true that home heating prices are now exorbitant, and the cost of a warm house all winter is one that many working people can no longer afford. At the same time drink has become cheaper.

Someone is bound to have done one of those cost comparisons. You know the kind of thing. It sounds like an arithmetic problem from school: "A man on average wages in 1970 would have had to work 6 hours to be able to buy a bottle of Johnny Walker; now the same man on the an average wage would only have to work 2 hours. What is the percentage reduction in price, relative to income."

I'd be interested if anyone knows where I could find it.

There has been a lot of criticism of the government's plans to increase the minimum price of a unit of alcohol, and I have been among their critics. I think that no matter what it costs, the compulsive drinker will buy drink. (S)he will find the money somehow. As with any increase in price, it will hit the poorest hardest. The rich are never really hurt by anything. Another £10, £20, £30 on their weekly drink bill will mean nothing. And the teenager out on the batter? A night out is expensive: adding another five or six pounds to it isn't going to stop them.

So, is this the answer?

The chief medical officers of the UK countries seem to think so, and the Scottish government has already acted to bring in a raft of over 40 measures to tackle a problem that is reckoned to cost around £900 per adult in the country: A total of £3.56 million, around 10% of Scotland's total budget. England looks likely to be following our example.

If Britain has a sever problem with alcohol abuse, Scotland's is much worse. In fact alcohol sales in our country are 23% higher than in England and Wales.

We're not alone in having an alcohol problem, which as well as costing us so much of what we have to run Scotland, also makes our town centres no go areas on Friday and Saturday nights. Greenland, Iceland, Scandinavia, the Baltic states and Russia, all have the same issues. Is it the cold, the dark, the short summer?

There has always been a macho culture about drink in Scotland. 'You're not a man if you can't drink 8 pints', sort of thing. You're a wimp if after a few pints you have an orange juice. And guys have always bragged about how drunk they got and how they had no idea of what they were doing.

And in the recent past one of the less attractive aspects of sexual equality, has been the sight of teenage girls vomiting in shop doorways or lying drunk in the gutter.

We hear a lot of complaints from bloggers, newspaper columnists, and all, but rarely do we ever hear any really practical solutions put forward.

An effect of cirrhosis of the liver

I for one am sick to death of paying such a large proportion of the block grant to pump stomachs, deal with domestic violence, treat liver cirrhosis and cancer, patch up glassed faces, clean up vomit etc., ad infinitum.

Has anyone got any constructive suggestions to offer?

It's not the time for politics... maybe tomorrow! In the meantime, some jokes...

2012-01-02T00:24:00.000Z

Two neighbours are talking to each other.

First neighbour: Do you know that my dog is so smart, he waits for the newspaper to drop at the doorstep and then delivers it to me?
Second neighbour: Of course, I know that very well.
First neighbour: Really, well then, how?
Second neighbour: My dog came and told me.

A guy is sitting at home when he hears a knock at the door. He opens the door and sees a snail on the porch. He picks up the snail and throws it as far as he can.
Three years later, there is a knock on the door. He opens it and sees the same snail. The snail says, "What the hell was that all about?"

A precious little girl walks into a Pets Mart Shop and asks, in the sweetest little lisp, between two missing teeth, "Excuthe me, mithter, do you keep widdle wabbits?"
As the shopkeeper's heart melts, he gets down on his knees so that he's on her level and asks, "Do you want a widdle white wabbit, or a thoft and fuwwy, bwack wabbit, or maybe one like that cute widdle bwown wabbit over there?"
She, in turn, blushes, rocks on her heels, puts her hands on her knees, leans forward and says, in a tiny quiet voice,
"I don't think my python weally gives a thit !!"

Q: Why do seagulls fly over the sea?
A: Because if they flew over the bay they'd be bagels!

I was out for a drink with the wife last night and I said, "I love you".
She asked me, "Is that you or the beer talking"
I said, "It's me........I'm talking to the beer"!

A man was drinking at a bar and the bartender came over to tell him he had a visitor waiting for him outside the bar.
He had just bought another large beer and he didn"t want anyone to drink it.
So, he wrote a little sign on a piece of paper and left it by his beer that said: "I spit in my beer."
When he returned to his bar stool there was another note beside his beer: "I spit in your beer too!"

A boy and a blonde a stranded, in a blazing hot desert. They walk for miles and come across a shop. The boy buys food and water for the journey whilst the blonde bought a car door. "What will you do with a car door?" asked the boy and the blonde replies, "So that I can roll down the window for fresh hair when it gets too hot"

A blond walks into a library.

"PLEASE CAN I HAVE A CHEESEBURGER?!" he shouts at the top of his lungs.
"Sir, this is a library," the librarian says.
"Oh, sorry," he whispers. "Please can I have a cheeseburger?"

A GUID NEW YEAR TAE ANE AN' A, AN' MONY MAY YE SEE

2011-12-31T22:20:00.000Z

Another year over, and a new one just begun...

... And an opportunity for us to thank all of you who read this blog for your support over the year.

We really appreciate your visits and your comments. Without them the blog would be rather a waste of time.

We were genuinely proud that Munguin's Republic did so well in the Total Politics Blog Awards, and so we want to say thank you to all of you who voted for us.

So to all of you, wherever you are:

A Guid New Year;

Bliadhna Mhath Ur;

Une Bonne Annee;

Happy New Year;

Prost Neujhar;

Blwyddyn Newydd Dda.

NO AUSTERITY FOR JEREMY WHAT'S HIS NAME

2011-12-31T17:06:00.001Z

Always good to put on a show for the neighbours, don't you think.

Despite all the evidence of doom and gloom, the English Culture Secretary, the man some people call Jeremy Hunt, has announced that London's Olympics will not be austerity Olympics. Apart from MPs, top businessmen, the royals, lords and anyone from the city, the rest of us are living austerity lives, and will be, all the way through next year, but the Olympics will be lavish.

Yes, fut coat and no knickers Hunt promises us a show to remember. After all, it will be a time for people like him and Cameron and Prince Sebastian and all their business rich mates, to enjoy the best of everything at our expense, even down to having special lanes on roads reserved just for them.

There was a choice, according to that great expert of all things economic and sporting. We could say that because these are austere times we should pare everything back, or we could say that because there are times of austerity we must harness the Olympics. "People", he said,"would not forgive us" if we didn't make the most of the opportunity to spend spend spend. He said that it was going to be an incredible expression of British culture, British history and British creativity.

What is the fool on about?

It's the bloody Olympics; they belong to a city, in this case London. Most of the rest of us will see what we see on tv, just as if they had been staged in Paris, Ulan Bator, or the Moon! The only difference is we have all had to go without to pay for our betters to prance around self importantly on the telly.

Most of the promises that came with the Olympics have already been broken. I seem to remember in the dim and distant past, that there were to cost around £3 billion; now that figure is nearly £10 billion, and rising.

The security budget, the extent of which we will never know, has been more than doubled recently, as has the "showbiz" part of it, the opening and closing parts, where doubtless, the likes of Prince Sebastian Cameron and H h h h hunt will be sitting in a grand box along with the Queen.

There was supposed to be an increase in sporting activity throughout the four countries that are paying for it; in fact sporting activity has actually dropped off.

There were promises about the stadia being taken over by private companies; now it appears that nothing can be agreed and extra costs are to fall on the government, ie us, for them.

The accommodation of the athletes' village cost a billion to build and was supposed to earn a profit when it was sold; however, it only raised around half of that.

The Treasury is currently analysing the economic impact of the Games, but Mr Hunt, the genius that he is, has pre-empted them to tell us that it will be significant. Well, that's all right then. Thank God they have him; whatever would they do without him?

WHAT DOES 2012 MEAN FOR SCOTLAND? ...BRING IT ON AND LET'S SEE

2011-12-31T12:34:00.000Z

It's December 31: a time to reflect on the year past.

For Scotland it has been momentous. There was a general election which produced an SNP majority government, though the system was designed specifically to avoid any majority government, much less an SNP one.

So far, with the exception of the Sectarian legislation, all has been well and support for the government has increased rather than diminished in the months since May.

John Swinney has worked miracles with ever decreasing financial settlements over the years first from Labour and now the Liberal Tory coalition and has continued his magic touch, and Scotland's pensioners, sick, poor and those looking for homes, enjoy much that England's equivalents do not.

Of course, despite having made it clear before the election that the referendum would be in the second half of the 5 year-parliament, the opposition parties seem to find little else to question the government about. And talking about opposition parties, all but the Greens have had a change of leader since May.

First the Liberals, having swapped their 16 seats for 5, swapped Tavish Scott for Willie Rennie, a bad deal in my estimation. Tavish, despite his intense dislike of the SNP, had at least heard of constructive opposition and was prepared to apply it for the benefit of his country. Willie, maybe having failed to realise that his party had lost 2/3 of its seats because of its participation in Westminster with David Cameron and Tavish's inability before the election to distance himself from that, threw away his opportunity to start a fightback and backed Cleggameron's policies from day one. Duh!

Then the Tories swapped the estimable Annabel Goldie, a woman much more popular than her party, for Ruth Davidson, who had only just been elected to her seat a few months before. In doing so they threw away the opportunity to move forward as a new distinctly Scottish right of centre party under Murdo Fraser, and lost a good deal of support, including from our own resident Tory (or ex-Tory), Dean from New Right.

Finally Labour ditched the inestimable Iain 'don't sleep in the subway' Gray, a dreary soul who never seemed to make the right decision and whined his way through FMQs every week before being left battered and bruised. Iain had presided over Labour's most humiliating defeat ever in Scotland, and it was clear to everyone that a drastic change of direction was needed, so Labour elected the woman who had been second in charge under the catastrophe, Johann Lamont. Smart thinking.

Each one of the parties has failed to see that there is a new politics in Scotland. Maybe we are on the road to independence; maybe devo max, or independence light, but the status quo is not an option, and sticking to it, on orders from their London bosses, may minimise the damage done to the government (which is of course all about change), but it's not what is best for Scotland.

While a new separate identity is what people seem to want, Willie Rennie walks around in Clegg's shadow and Ruth is David's woman all the way. After all, David's own strategist man came to Scotland to give her campaign advice.

Whilst it is true that Mrs Lamont in now supposedly leader of everything she surveys in Scotland: (in order of importance, or should that be 'impotence') MSPs, MPs, MEPs, Councillors, the tea fund? the Lords, it's not quite clear what that means.

Do Labour's English/Scottish stars, Spud and Wee Doogie, at Defence and Foreign Affairs respectively, report to her? Would they continue to do so were Labour in government? Does Vinegar Maggie report to her? Who's boss of whom?

I suspect that the changes in Labour's constitution are cosmetic only and that orders will inevitably continue to come from London. I don't see Johann as a rebel. But I wonder how long it will be before someone blows a hole in the pretence. That will be interesting.

So far there has been an air of unfinished business about parliament. Now the new leaders are all in place, let's hope that somehow, together we can take Scotland forward to survive what everyone predicts will be battering year all over Europe.

PRESIDENT THATCHER BOUGHT THE BOMB

2011-12-30T14:30:00.001Z

Isn't British democracy wonderful?

It's not bad enough that we have an unelected head of state, an upper house mish mash of aristocrats, English bishops, failed politicians, old politicians and creeps, a lower house which can command a huge majority on 30% of the vote and which is whipped into shape by enforcers, but worse, it is revealed today, under the 30 year rule, that a presidential style prime minister can walk over the cabinet with no repercussions...well, except that her decisions can cost us all billions.

The cabinet was against the purchase of Trident's first version--C4. But in a secret deal with Jimmy Carter, the then president of the United States, the purchase went ahead anyway, because Mrs Thatcher wanted it. She was told that a debate was necessary because two-thirds of the party and two thirds of the Cabinet were against the purchase of Trident, but she was disinclined to bother much about debate.

The original cost was to be £5 billion. A lot of money now, but very much more in the late 70s.

However the cost was doubled when Ronnie Reagan was elected and decided to go for the Bells and Whistles version of Trident. The British system had to work in concert with the American's, and so the cost became £10 billion.

Failure to buy the system would have left France as the only nuclear power in Europe, and Mrs Thatcher's dislike and mistrust of the French wouldn't allow her to tolerate them having something that England didn't. Entitlement to a seat as a permanent member of the UN Security Council would also have been impossible without nuclear weaponry, and that Mrs Thatcher could not contemplate. Her status as a world leader would have been diminished and she would have been excluded from the most secret of talks with the American president.

So taking advice from Cabinet Secretary, Robert Armstrong in the form of a hand-written top secret note, that going it alone had precedents (Harold Macmillan had done the same thing over Polaris, and Harold Wilson over Chevaline), she decided to ignore the wishes of her Cabinet and do what she wanted.

And so the billions were spent and we have been lumbered with this useless supposedly "independent" deterrent (that we have to have permission from America to use) in Scotland. Effectively, it is extra nuclear capacity for America that the idiot Brits pay for and house in return for a seat at the top table.

On balance though, Mrs Thatcher did buy an ironing board for herself at a cost of £19! (damned expensive ironing board in 1979), and sent back bedding and crockery which had been ordered on her behalf for Downing Street, saying that she would provide her own. So it wasn't all bad. [By contrast Mr Cameron spent £30,000 in his first year, doing up the flat above the office.]

SCOTLAND'S OTHER NATIONAL DRINK...MADE FROM GIRDERS

2011-12-28T22:30:00.001Z

It was either these Irn Bru ads, or Kim Jong Il's funeral. On balance I thought that these were moderately more entertaining.

2011-12-27T22:15:00.000Z

I'm not Prince Charles' biggest fan, as most of you will know, but after reading this, I'm very glad that I don't have to live in his Duchy. I thought you might like to read it too. Far too much privilege, far too little accountability or democracy. My thanks to the author of Cornish Republican for bringing it to my attention.

For the information of anyone who is remotely interested, Kate Middleton wore a pair of earrings to go to the kirk on Christmas day. They were a present from her husband, William, and according to AOL News, they cost £1,900. I wonder how many of his colleagues in Search and Rescue, Wales, were able to spend that much money on their wives... or come to that, how AOL News found out how much he spent on her...

Talking of royalty, you have to hand it to Phil. He certainly knows how to enjoy himself. He got out of hospital this morning, and although we only have the BBC reporter's word for it, he was told to rest for some time. But instead the old goat was out shooting defenceless birds this afternoon. Whatever you think of that (and I take a dim view of it), you have to laugh at the Telegraph's reporting: "Dressed smartly in a blue shirt with a green patterned tie and grey jacket, he sat in the passenger seat of a blue Range Rover for the 60 mile, one hour 13 minute journey."!!!!!!!! Goodness. He was dressed smartly, was he? How else was he going to be dressed? With his money he's hardly likely to look like he fell out of a bin, is he? Oh yeah...and the journey was 1 hour and 13 minutes? Bang on.

Sinead O'Connor latest marriage lasted 16 days... that's a record, even by her standards.

Alex Salmond has gone and got himself voted Briton of the Year. He is reported delighted! Oh the irony.

Those who predicted that Scots looking for cheap, cheap booze would head over the border to England for their Diamond White cider and offers of '3 for the price of 2', were a wee bit previous in their predictions. Cameron has just announced a similar scheme of minimum pricing for his country. It had to come. Chief medical officers in all parts of the UK have been advising it for a long time. It's not perfect, and i don't think it's the only solution, but it may help a little.

DOWNTOWN--WHERE ALL THE LIGHTS ARE BRIGHT

2011-12-26T14:06:00.000Z

At Number 2 in the Irish Republic's charts, some 47 years after its first appearance there and 22 years after its last appearance there, it's back, proving that you can't keep a good song down. They filmed the video in Downtown Galway, she filmed it in Downtown Paris, but they met in Downtown London to record it.

AND SO THAT WAS CHRISTMAS...

2011-12-25T19:56:00.000Z

It's time of year for messages. Well, yes, of course, if you had the misfortune to be in a supermarket yesterday, you'll know that (but only if you are Scottish and so know that messages, as well as being things that people send, are also 'the shopping', 'the marketing', and 'les commissions', depending on where you are).

But beside that, I suppose in order to give the news media something to report on Christmas day, it's also the time for the other kind of messages.

So today, I've heard the Pope's "Urbi et Orbi", in which, not surprisingly he talked about a global picture, and a rather unhappy one it is too. We're a long way from peace in Afghanistan, Iraq, North Africa, the Middle and Near East and another year has passed and the Palestinian/Israeli situation is no better. He also reminded us that there are people starving and suffering from floods in Africa and in South Asia.

As you know, I'm not religious, but it was all rather sobering.

The Archbishop of Canterbury concentrated on the riots that took place in England last summer, and bankers, seeming to make little difference between the thoughtlessness that motivates both.

The Queen talked mainly about her family, which was probably wise, given that her message has to be approved by Downing Street, which wouldn't be too keen on her giving the bankers a kicking, or the student protesters who had the audacity to poke her son's squeeze with a stick (although I bet Phil had a good laugh at that one).

Closer to home both the First Minister and the leader of the Labour opposition thanked the people who will work over Christmas to keep up safe in so many ways, soldiers, nurses, doctors, police, firemen, and of course the volunteers who will give up their holiday to help those less fortunate.

Ruth Davidson seemed to leave only a message for the Tory faithful, urging them to greater action in the New Year.

Willie Rennie, gave a largely political message attacking the SNP for making the wrong decisions and asking for strong Liberal voices to benefit the community.

So, that only leaves one message left to cover. Mine. It's short and it's sweet.

I hope you had a happy day.

DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ...?

2011-12-22T22:01:00.001Z

I see that Willie Hague has condemned the bombings in Iraq yesterday which cost at least 60 lives.

They were probably sectarian in origin, inspired by the exile of the Shi'ite deputy first minister to the Kurdish north of the country, and were exploded as the last Americans left Iraq.

I join with Mr Hague in condemning the killings.

I did not, however, join with Mr Hague and his party when they stood four-square behind Tony Blair and George Bush in their determination to beat Hans Blix to the starting line by bombing the hell out of the country, in the name of some mystical weapons of mass destruction, which the Americas just absolutely KNEW were there, and they had photographs to prove it. The British secret service too, had incontrovertible evidence of their existence, based on a ten year old PhD thesis written by an Iraqi dissident.

Needless to say, the photographs were as reliable as the thesis, because in the intervening 8 years, although hundreds of thousands of people have died, innumerable have been maimed and injured, homes and businesses lost, millions spent, and a massive step back has been taken in human rights, particularly for women, not a single weapon or trace of a weapon has been found.

George DubYa Bush has retired to a job more suited to his doubtless talents (chopping down trees on his extensive Texas ranch), and Antony Linton Blair has turned into a money making machine caring not what he does to make a buck. To cover for his iniquitousness he has apparently become some sort of Christian (although a bloody funny sort of Christian it seems to me).

Two not very wise monkeys.

I assume that everyone who was anyone knew that this WMD nonsense was a scam.

I imagine that Saddam had simply become an irritation to the West, that is to say Bushair (a sort of amalgam of Bush and Blair, with our man hanging out from behind DubYa).

So back to Mr Hague.

Democracy is a grand system of government, and dictatorship is not. But not one size fits all in this world, and depending on the country you have to rule, sometimes you need to do what you need to do. Sometimes there is no other way to rule. Democracy hasn't really worked that well in Iraq, has it?

Try to think of this the next time the opportunity to through Britain's weight around arises.

Unless you REALLY know how to fix something, even if it's broke, don't try.

SCOTLAND WILL BENEFIT FROM SCOTLAND'S GAMES

2011-12-21T21:22:00.002Z

Following newsthat Scottish businesses have won 133 of the 171 contracts through the GlasgowBusiness Portal, Shona Robison, Minister for Commonwealth Games and Sport said, in a statement to parliament, that Glasgow 2014 is providing economic hope in a challenging climate.

Shona'sfull statement to the chamber is here

Shona announced that many of the venues are already in place, and thatwork is continuing on the others, on schedule. She talked about thelegacy for Glasgow, including improved public transport and reduced congestion.Local companies and business throughout Scotlandare benefiting from the contracts, and work has been provided,especially for young people.

The opening and closing ceremonies will provide opportunities for Scotland's abundantcreative talent.

There is a genuine intention to ensure that Scots benefitfrom the games in the provision of sporting facilities allover the country. It was a condition of the games award to Glasgow, and it isbeing fulfilled. Even now, nearly 3 years before the events, 41 Community SportsHubs have been created and more are on their way. Shona wants to see 150 ofthese hubs by 2016, at least half of them in schools and using schoolfacilities.

It may seem hypocritical for meto lambaste the Olympic Games in London, which we are helping to payfor, and then to support the Commonwealth Games which we are payingfor in total. But it is more the mismanagement of the Olympics rather than thegames and the money that is being thrown around like confetti that angers me. I hope too that the sponsors who have demanded so much in London realise that they have done themselves no good at all. Greedy McDonalds, Mastercard Coka Cola, etc. London is all business, and very little sport.

However, in Shona Robison we have a sports minister whopassionately believes in sport. And shesees that the way to make this event a success for ALL of Scotland, and notjust Glasgow, is to make sure it touches all of us.

These community sporting facilities will do that. Itis, however, important that people are aware of where they are, and how to access them.

I'm not just backing this because it is the SNPgovernment which is running it. This must be a non-political event. Remember that it wasJack McConnell's Labour Executive that did all the ground work, andJack, I suppose, who expected to be the first minister to oversee thegames. And of course Glasgow Council (Labour controlled) is hugely involved in the organisation.

I'm sure too that Shona will get support and encouragement from the sports shadows ofthe main parties, Patricia Ferguson and Alex Johnstone. Ministers and shadows for young people's employment need to work together too over this.

Working with young people has taught me how important this is. This is our opportunity. We must grab it with both hands. The difference to young people that, for example, Spook's* football academy makes, is outstanding. Lads want to be successful. They just need the opportunity. Sport can give them that.

Scotland will ensure that opportunity for, andencouragement to participate in, sport, and therefore enjoya healthier and better life will be provided.

In doing that we'll not only be fulfillingour commitment to the Commonwealth Games Organisers, we will help our kids to find better ways of passing their lives than with booze, drugs and computer games.

(You remember Spook don't you? Accountant, ex-blogger, footballer and friend to many of us.)

PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES

2011-12-21T17:15:00.000Z

There has been a lot of discussion recently about what marriage means, what it should mean and if and how we should amend the laws relating to it.

Reading around the subject today I found an interesting fact.

In the American state of Minnesota (that's one of the big ones, in the middle at the top, surrounded by Canada to the north, the Dakotas to the west, Iowa to the south and Michigan and Wisconsin to the East), adultery is a crime (Statute 609.36), punishable in law by a fine of $3,000, 1 year's imprisonment... or both.

So what, you may say, a lot of countries have old laws, based on strict adherence to the Old Testament's or Torah's, teachings of Leviticus (Vayikra), which should have been repealed years ago, but were simply forgotten. The police would never act upon them.

After all, until a few years ago you weren't allowed to buy sugar or carrots in England on a Sunday, alcohol sales were banned in some parts of Wales and in the Western Isles of Scotland pretty much everything was banned on the 'Sabbath' (which wasn't Saturday, but Sunday!) if it didn't involve reading the Bible.

But in this case, you would be wrong. A Democrat Senator tried to have the law repealed in 2010, but an organisation called the Minnesota Family Council (MFC) objected. The MFC not only wanted the law retained, they wanted it strengthened. They said it sent a message to the public about how important marriage is and they were supported by the Republicans.

As far as I can make out, no actual strengthening was done, but the law remains on statute. To strengthen marriage however (and placate the MFC), the leader of the Republican majority in the Senate, Amy Koch, brought forward legislation guaranteeing that marriage would always (in that state) be between a man and a woman. (The constitutional amendment, of course, has to be voted on in a referendum to take place at the same time as the Presidential election in November next year.)

So we can deduce from that that Amy Koch is strong on marriage, or can we?

No. In fact, Mrs Koch might have been better advised to avoid getting involved in the subject of marriage altogether, because it has come to light that Mrs Koch has been conducting an affair with one of her subordinates, and has been obliged to resign her leadership.

Oops.

I expect that she will be glad that they didn't strengthen the penalty for adultery to, say ten years or $100,000

Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs for You Little People, and Dirty Deals for the Big Boys

2011-12-20T01:15:00.000Z

I was just heading to bed when I noticed this story in the Telegraph.

It appears that, at this time when the country is desperate for cash, when everything is being cut, people are losing jobs and sick and old people are being denied services they paid for and expected, the Revenue (Her Majesty's), which we thought to be rather inefficient and disorganised, disenchanting and disillusioned, in fact a bit lame, is actually crashingly dishonest. It has been doing deals with large companies, which have seen them excused from paying billions in tax.

Last year, millions of us were sent notices demanding tax which, entirely by the fault of the Revenue, had not been collected in previous years; some others were lucky enough to receive rebates, because the HMRC had been taking money from them when it shouldn't have been.

I had personally phoned and phoned to get something done about my tax, and every time I spoke to a different person in a call centre promised that action would be taken. It never was, of course. In the end I gave up because there are only so many years in my life and I'm not going to spend them in fruitless, expensive, frustrating calls to HMRC.

So now Margaret Hodge, no less, has said that there is £25 billion of tax outstanding from the biggest companies. £25 billion!!! That's almost the Scottish Government's budget.

Hodge is concerned, rightly, that big companies are treated more favourably than ordinary tax payers. In Britain? The bastion of fairness, of justice and equality? No, surely not?

Well yes, and what is even more disgusting is that HMCR won't tell the Commons Accounts Committee before which they were summoned, who owes what. Companies involved include Vodafone and ...wait for it, Goldman Sachs. Surely the byword for all that is evil in business.

So this government committee had to depend on the testimony of a whistle blower for the estimate.

I won't précis the whole story, this post is linked to the article in the Telegraph. But I will say that there's a pattern emerging here. In the last few years we have been told (and seen for ourselves) that the Home Office in London is completely out of control and "not fit for purpose". Actually it's not fit for anything. Remember this "great department of state" while responsible for immigration, was actually employing illegal immigrants... Yep!

The Ministry of Defence's attitude to purchasing equipment reminds me of my attitude to buying crisps. It spends billions like I would spend 50p on a packet of of pickled onion only to discover that they were bouffing and dump them. An organisation that was buying light bulbs at £22, when any fool can get the same ones for 65p in the 99p shop, is hardly one that you would want to trust with the life of your brother or son out there at the sharp end.

The Revenue (which is due to be taking over the payment of some benefits from 2013) seems to have joined the band of London government departments which couldn't run a booze up in a distillery.

Serious suggestion to Osborne. Get it sorted tout de suite matey. Tell these cheats and thieves that we want our money and we want it now before you are downgraded to "junk", which is what you are.

No wonder they didn't want the EU rules and regulations in the affairs of London. It is as bent and corrupt as anywhere in the world.

Something rotten in the state of England, I fear.

(* Click on cartoon to enlarge.)

(I'll apologise in advance for any mistakes. This was a rushed job! I'll correct it tomorrow.)

LETTER TO LAMONT

2011-12-19T14:25:00.000Z

This is a letter to Johann Lamont from Patrick Small. It was first published in Product Magazine, but I saw it in, and lifted from, Labour Hame, where it was contributed by Duncan Macniven

I think it encapsulates the issues that Ms Lamont needs to address over the next few months, but will, unfortunately, almost certainly not.

The most important of them, I think, is the constant whining and criticising. Not everything the government does is good, no one would pretend that. But not everything it does is bad either. So stop the automatic sniping. No one takes you seriously if all you can do is whine. Start constructive opposition and you will gain respect. And tell that to Maggie Curran too!

Dear Johann
Congratulations on your victory. If you’re to dispel the notion that Scottish Labour leaders have steadily diminished since Donald Dewar, each one seeming progressively less capable and less attuned to the country they seek to lead, you’re going to need to take advice from across the board. For what it’s worth, here’s mine:

1. Get Humble

Labour didn’t just lose the election in May, you got horsed. You are where you are because the Scottish electorate put you there. Your victory speech suggested you you may understand this. So shut down the old duffers. Whenever Brian Wilson or John McTernan take to the airwaves you can almost feel thousands of voters turning away. The Wilson/McTernan message is one of simple entitlement: Labour dominance is the natural order, the election results of 2007 and 2011 were some kind of aberration, instead of the democratic choice of the Scottish people.

2. Endless Naysaying is a No No

The art of opposition requires that you choose carefully when to be positive about your opponents. A constant stream of negativity will just put people off. So commend and support the SNP government where it does things well. You will look like a bigger politician, and a potential first minister, instead of a slightly nippy loser. Iain Gray didn’t get this, and look what happened to him.

3. Apologise

Your party decided to oppose the Scottish government’s attempts to introduce a “Tesco tax” on the supermarkets, a modest proposal which would have brought in revenue from the very rich. You opposed this -either because you’re funded by Sainsbury’s or due to basic political lunacy. If you’re committed to being the Supermarket Owners’ Party, don’t expect to be taken seriously on social justice. And without a commitment to social justice, Labour can really pack up and go home. Just apologise. People will respect you for it, and it will mark you out as different from your predecessor.

4. Develop policies for a difficult age

Your victory speech also intimated a desire to develop real policies that might
work for Scotland. If they could be new, original, practical and costed that would be good. Top of these should be social and economic justice, taming feral banks and corporate excess, tackling drugs and homelessness and developing a climate change strategy. You might think these are intractable problems but if you have nothing new to say about them, don’t stand for high office. And don’t say you can only articulate policy in line with the powers devolved in the Scotland Act, that’s just going to make you look like a pygmy. Build links with community and campaign groups and talk honestly about poverty in Scotland. No-one else does.

5. Ditch Trident

We relentlessly hear about the age of austerity, the dark days ahead, the lack of cash and the “logic” of cuts. On Saturday you said we were “no longer living in an age of plenty”. But Trident, and its £75 billion price tag is to be left untouched. This has been shut down as a subject of serious debate in mainstream British politics. Except that last May the Scottish people elected two Greens and 69 SNP MSPs. Both parties’ manifestos explicitly reject nuclear warheads on the Clyde. You have previously suggested you may be against Trident, but have now gone quiet on the issue. If you really want to look people in the eye and say we must carry on closing schools and nurseries but keep blindly paying through the nose for a Cold War relic, you’re going to project both dishonesty and contempt for mainstream Scottish opinion.

Scotland needs an articulate, imaginative opposition to function as a healthy democracy. If Labour can’t provide this, something else will fill the vacuum quicker than you think.

First published in PRODUCT magazine.

MORE REASONS TO BE CHEERFULLY INDEPENDENT 1, 2...

2011-12-18T15:08:00.001Z

One of the issues concerning the proposed new single police force for Scotland, highlighted by Les Gray, chairman of the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, pictured), is that the new body will be due to pay VAT.

Mr Gray suggests that the bill might be as much as £22 million per annum (-500 officers). He doesn't seem to mention that the savings of having one administration would be around £125 million (using the Acpos figures, +3,000 officers). Net balance: +2,500 officers.

I know which I'd rather have.

It couldn't be that Acpos is looking after the interests of the most senior officers, the need for whom would be substantially reduced under the single force plan, could it? You have one police force, you need one chief constable!

Having no knowledge at all of the regulations regarding the payment of VAT, I'm not sure why one police force covering five million people would be due for VAT and eight forces covering the same population would not. I'm sure however, that if Mr Gray says that it is so, then it will be so.

But, one thing is for sure, if Scotland were independent we could make our own VAT rules, which might not involve the police paying it. And even if they did, they would at least be paying it to the Scottish government, so it could be recycled for the good of the country.

*****

The BBC doesn't rate Scotland as being of much importance, we all know. After complaints last year that their "British" riots coverage was causing cancellations in the Scottish tourist trade, they rather forcedly agreed to refer to the riots as "English", although you could almost hear the contempt in their voices as they emphasised the word, as in "We have to call them English riots otherwise these chippy Scots get all bent out of shape about their tourism". This reluctant demarcation lasted for a while.

However, I've noticed that the Beeb is slipping back to its bad old ways. Recent news about the shameful neglect of dementia patients in English hospitals was reported simply as "failings in the NHS", never mind that there are separate services for the different countries .

And yesterday BBC news gave Scotland a 30-second acknowledgement of the election of the new leader of the opposition, somewhere towards the bottom of the running order. (Imagine how they will treat the election of Mr Miliband's successor. More that 30 seconds?)

Right after that we were transported to a shopping centre in Gateshead, where the annual unseemly rush to grab money in the name of Jesus Christ was at full tilt, in what we must remember the prime minister has described as a Christian country.

We were introduced to a succession of women, dressed in their finest, telling us how hard things were this year; that they were trying not to get too overdrawn and that they had had to think about what presents to buy this year (in so doing admitting that in the past they didn't bother with thinking).

Then, as if we hadn't had enough, we went to London's Oxford Street where more celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ was taking place.

I'm sure that Ms Lamont will be pleased that she got some coverage in Munguin's Republic, because the national broadcaster sure as hell wasn't interested.

I understand that the bulk of the BBC's viewers weren't much interested in what was going on up in haggis land, which is precisely why we should have control of our own broadcasting.

Because we, in our turn, are not that interested in how the citizens of Mr Camergoon's Christian country show respect for their saviour.

CONGRATULATIONS TO JOHANN LAMONT AND ANAS SARWAR

2011-12-17T15:43:00.000Z

Labour's Scottish branch has elected Johann Lamont as their leader with 51.77% of the vote.

Her old job of Deputy Leader has been taken for the first time by an MP based in London, Anas Sarwar, reflecting the fact that their leadership is, as of now, over the entire Scottish branch of Labour (as Iain Gray always wanted it to be) and not just over the group of MSPs in Holyrood.

Munguin's Republic offers most hearty congratulations to both of them.

In the last few months three of the four opposition parties in Holyrood have changed their leadership. Two chose people entirely new to Holyrood. Now that the new leaders are in place (and having been Deputy Leader, and a member for the parliament since its inception Johann will hit the ground running), we must get to grips with the challenges that the next few years will bring.

Because of the mess that greed has got us into, the UK is in a very serious financial situation. Even Tory MPs like Douglas Carswell are warning against the smugness that Cameron and Osborne are showing in relation to the worsening financial situation. The UK too may soon find itself lamenting its loss of the much prized AAA status.

Scotland is unfortunately in this mess every bit as much as the UK. I've just listened to FMQs and I'm disappointed that even as Iain Gray bowed out of his leadership, it was all about carping and point scoring.

We all want a better Scotland, although clearly each party has different ideas of how this can be achieved. None is mad; none is bad. We are all just different.

My plea to Johann and to the other party leaders, including the first minister, is this:

It is a time for, in as much as it is possible, working together.

As leaders you set the tone for debate in parliament. Let's see if the watchword, at least for the duration of the financial crisis, can be "cooperation".

As Nicola Sturgeon said on election night, the SNP does not have the monopoly on good ideas. Other parties can, if they offer the help constructively, make an impression on the dire straits we find ourselves in.

Let's stop carping about the independence referendum. It is going to happen towards the end of the parliament. That's a done and dusted fact. In the meantime there is a country out here that sent you people, of all political colours, to parliament, not to point score, but to do your best for us.

If you can't do that, then move the hell over and let someone else do it.

LET'S HAVE AN END TO THIS EXPLOITATION OF UZBEK CHILDREN

2011-12-16T21:43:00.001Z

A few weeks ago I signed a petition requesting, or possibly even demanding, that the parliament of the European Union reject trade preferences for Uzbekistan and that they should take tougher action to stop child slavery in the country.

Craig Murray, ex-ambassador to Uzbekistan, has previously reported that over one million children are used as slave labour during cotton harvesting in the country. They receive little or nothing for their work, and because they are charged for their transport to and from the cotton fields many are left in debt.

I'm not sure how the petition hoped that the second part of that demand would be fulfilled but the first half seemed simple enough. I don't think that the EU should be buying cotton which has been picked by kids of 10 to be used within its borders.

Many large supermarkets have already refused to buy cotton products which use material made from Uzbek cotton, and finally on Thursday the parliament voted overwhelmingly to reject a textile trade deal between the union and Uzbekistan citing child slavery as its reason.

I hope that a market the size of the EU (Europe buys 1/3 of the Uzbekistan's cotton/cotton products) refusing to do business with the country will force its leaders to look again at its production methods, and the people it uses as slaves.

PAY UP TO PLAY THE GAME

2011-12-14T19:34:00.000Z

You may remember that a lad was walking home from his girlfriend's house on one hot night of the London riots in August. He was thirsty and helped himself to two bottles of water from a shop that had been looted and was sitting open. Total value of his theft, around £2.80. He was sent to prison for 6 months.

With the agreement of the government courts were encouraged to hand down severe sentences to anyone who had been even remotely involved. For example, two lads who posted invitations to the riots on the Facebook pages were sentenced to 4 years in prison.

When cases went to the English Appeal Court they were upheld.

Baron Haddingfield, a man in a position where no one would question his integrity because of his station, a man who was bowed and scraped to, who was entitled to a chauffeur driven car, and who was called a Noble Lord, in fact a man people might have been expected to look up to stole, not 2 bottles of water worth £2.80, but £28,000. He was sentenced to 9 months imprisonment but actually only served 9 weeks because he was feeling poorly.

Baroness Uddin stole £125,000 from us by pretending that she lived at the seaside and was obliged to purchase another house in London because she had to attend the House of Lords. In fact she had had the house in London for many years. Her kids had been brought up there. The seaside flat was unfurnished and she never went there. It was all a great big scam to make her some money. And she went further. She would walk into the Lords, sign in, and walk out another door, spending less than 5 minutes in the building. For that she claimed her daily allowance of £300.

She hasn't been sent to prison at all, although the police are said to be looking into her case a couple of years on.

But now the House of Lords has decided to punish them and all their grubby little mates most severely. Yes, draconian measures are to be taken.

From now on they won't be allowed to return to the House of Privilege until the money has been repaid, or until the next UK General Election, whichever comes first. They will, of course retain their titles and styles.

Nooooooooooo, I hear you cry in unison, at the severity of the punishment. Take it to the European Court of Lordly Rights.

The Lords' authorities have decided against trying to pursue noble members through the courts as they think that judges would not be prepared to hear cases involving the rights of the house.

Dear dear, and I thought London had police! Where's Cressida Dick when you erm need her?

THERE THEY GO, BARGING IN WITH THE SENSITIVITY OF A HIPPO

2011-12-13T23:45:00.000Z

Are you worried about the future?

Well don't be. Because by June next year all this austerity stuff will be in the past.

How do I know that?

Simple. We we will be able to afford a royal barge... Well, I hope we will, because we are getting one.

No, I lie, we aren't actually getting one, so much as borrowing a luxury Thames steamer from its owner, a guy called Philip Morrell, (look out for his name in the honours list sometime soon) and doing it up a bit.

We are taking the boat and making it into one of the splendid barges that transported royals in the 17th century when, presumably, they had plenty of money. And we are going to have a pageant. Well, we are not going to have a pageant. London is going to have a pageant. We are just going to help to pay for it.

Resplendent in Red and Gold, the barge will carry the Queen and the Duke down the river, with a flotilla of 1000 small ships and boats. There is even a Pageant Master, Adrian Evans (look out for his name in the honours list sometime soon).

The barge will be adorned with flowers from the royal gardens. Floral displays in red, gold and purple will be created by Rachel de Thame (look out for her name in the honours list sometime soon).

Mr Evans said that the royal barge must be a jewel. Well, yes, I can see that. We wouldn't expect any less, rich old lot that we are.

The Queen and the Duke, along with other members of their extended family who will be joining them, will be seated on ornate chairs under a canopy of gold on the top deck of the boat. The sides will be covered in rich red drapes and the Queen's cypher will be engraved on the bow, beneath a crown.

And all this for only a couple of hours' pageant... after which the barge will be handed back to the generous ~~Sir Philip~~, I mean Mr Morrell (What am I saying? You didn't read it here if anyone asks), and it will be worth at least 100 times what it is worth now.

So, by my reckoning, if we will be able to afford all that by next June, we should be able to afford to leave cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy off our hit list of lazy work shy layabouts. Huh, Mr Duncan Smith?

In truth I don't grudge the Queen a celebration. She has done that stinking job for 65 long years; she's never really had a private life; she's been lumbered with a family from hell and a series of prime ministers (with whom she has been forced to spend time) that you would cross a continent or six to avoid.

And she has gone down in history as the longest reigning monarch since...well you tell me...so I reckon we should give the old dear a big thank you. As Munguin said, other people get a gold watch.

But this ostentatious celebration is surely not right at a time when so many of us are suffering so badly.

Unless Fred Goodwin and some of his grubby associates would like to volunteer to pay for the junket?

THIS IS WHAT THE FIRST MINISTER WANTS TO KNOW

2011-12-13T01:42:00.000Z

The First Minister’s questions to the Prime Minister are:

* What risk assessment, if any, did the UK government undertake of the likely impact of its veto decision on investment into Scotland and the UK, and on negotiations affecting key Scottish industries such as agriculture, fishing, and financial services – where qualified majority voting already applies?

* What assessment, if any, was made of how Scotland’s interests will be affected in the EU by being represented by a UK government that is excluded from important decision-making meetings, which will impact directly on Scotland?

* Given the serious impact of a UK treaty veto, why did you not consult with the Scottish Government and other devolved administrations on the use of an option which Mrs Thatcher and John Major in their negotiations both managed to avoid?

* Can you confirm the reports in the Italian and UK press that you told the new Italian Prime Minister that your negotiating stance was based on the ‘big internal problems’ you would face if you had agreed to the Treaty change?

* With key negotiations ongoing concerning the EU Budget, agriculture and fisheries, how do you believe that the important Scottish interests involved will be affected by being represented by a UK member state which has isolated itself?

* Will you agree to an urgent meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee, involving all four of the UK administrations, so that the full implications of your decision can be considered?

HO HO HO LITTLE MAN, HAVE I GOT A SURPRISE FOR YOU? I'M REPOSSESSING YOUR HOUSE!

2011-12-12T22:35:00.000Z

My nickname at work has always been Scrooge. Not I hope because I'm mean, but because I think that what we call Christmas, is a great big commercial con.

Its real function is, or rather was, to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ, the Christian Messiah. Indeed its name comes from the Old and Middle English 'Cristes Maesse' (derived from both Greek and Latin) meaning a Mass for Christ. It dates to the 11th century.

It is celebrated across the world in Christian and non-Christian countries alike (although I've never really worked out how a country can be Christian or any other religion). It has other names, of course. It is known as Nativity (birth, Old French), Yuletide (Old English), Midne Winter [or Midwinter] (Anglo Saxon) and of course Noël (French).

It's highly unlikely that December 25 is the actual date of the birth of Christ, indeed scholars think that that event may have taken place somewhere around October, based on comparisons with the date of birth of John the Baptist. And Eastern Orthodox Churches celebrate it on January 6 because of the confusions between the calendars.

It may be that December 25 was chosen because it tied in with a Roman holiday "Dies natalis Solis Invicti", a Pagan holiday celebrating the sun's rebirth after mid winter. Not a bad idea. "In the bleak Midwinter" seems a good time for a bit of feasting and celebration.

And in each place where it is celebrated, it is different... if only slightly. It always seems to involve presents and what the people of that country consider to be a "good" dinner.

The French, for example, tend to eat oysters, foie gras, a little roast duck or goose (turkey is still rare), une bonne salade française, chocolate cake and of course, cheese. Champagne, red and white wines are served dependant on the course and the whole affair takes hours. No rush...and no Christmas Pudding to be seen anywhere!

But everywhere bit by bit business has seen the opportunity to exploit the occasion to a greater or lesser extent.

Today in Scotland, so that shops and stores can maximise the Yuletide, they start advertising as early as August. 'Is it that time already?' you think to yourself, and you realise that it both isn't... and, unfortunately, it is.

In November they start playing Christmas music in the shops and you can't move for Santas, reindeer and elves. 'Seven more weeks of this', you think to yourself as you try to get the tune of 'God Rest Ye Merry' out of your head.

By mid December, I imagine, most people are heartily sick of it.

Tired (mainly) women are hunting through stores for something for Great Aunt Nellie, and cousin Bill, and purses, wallets and credit cards take a severe beating.

Christmas cards have to be sent to everyone and their dog (literally in some cases) and lists have to be made and remade, food planned and FAR too much stuff bought. And the Joneses have to be kept up with!

By Christmas day everyone is exhausted. And still someone has to cook the most important meal of the year. (Ye gads!)

Invariably that's a nerve racking affair because all the family is round and there aren't enough pots, rings on the stove, plates, chairs... and in the lounge Grandpa is getting tucked in about the drink along with Uncle Bart, and the kids are starting to get fractious because they are bored.

And when dinner finally comes, something's bound to be wrong... and there's always someone who left their tact at the bottom of an empty glass and is wont to remark on the hardness of the sprouts, or impart the unwanted details of how THEY would have cut the carrots.... and, is this cake shop bought??? Horror!

Businesses now depend on December for about 20% of their yearly take, and they will do almost anything to get you to buy.

Even in good years when there's work and people are doing all right, there are those who don't have enough to give their family a "decent Christmas", although I'm not certain what's 'decent' about this unnecessary splurging of money.

People borrow to levels that they can't afford, max out their credit cards and store cards... and then after 4 months of buying, it's over, and all they have left is the knowledge that when the bills come in... there will be trouble.

How many times have how many people said "never again"?

This year, more than ever, people are determined to "have a really good time despite everything". And according to the Metro today, people are even intending putting their mortgages on hold or missing their rent so that they can spend, spend, spend. Citizens' Advice centres beware.

What all this has to do with 'Cristes Maesse', I'm not sure.

But I know that throughout next year people will be running to stand still with their bills, without having to pay off Christmas too.

Well, I won't. So, maybe there's some merit in being Scrooge.

....EHRR... IS THE MANAGER IN, PLEASE?

2011-12-11T17:01:00.001Z

The newspapers in the UK today are full of praise for the Great British Bulldog, David Cameron. His own right wing are having a love fest, along with the City and the usual suspects in the Press (Mail, Express and yesterday's Sun* which carried the picture below).

So what has he done, this British Bull~~shit~~, sorry dog?

The way I see it, you may be able to stand alone when you are strong. But the UK is the most indebted country in the West. The banks, the government and personal debt through mortgages, bank loans and credit cards, are in debt to 1000% of GDP.

How long will it be before one of these rating agencies come after Britain? And then what. Remember the UK makes Greece look solvent, and there's hardly any gold, because McCavity sold it off cheap.

I'm obliged, as I so often am for my stories, to Cynical Highlander. He pointed me in the direction of Max Keiser.

Max pulls no punches.

Both Cameron, whom in comparison to Angela Merkel he considers to be a little boy playing at the grown ups' table, and Gordon Brown come in for total ridicule.

Just how come we have been so badly governed all my life?

*I quote yesterday's Sun; there is, for the moment, no Sunday paper from that stable, because it (The News of the World) was shut down in a cynical and ultimately unsuccessful attempt to stop the inquiry into phone hacking digging deeper and deeper into the sordid business of tabloid newspapers in the UK.

WHAT A CRACKING COALITION THIS IS...

2011-12-10T23:18:00.000Z

Cracks have started to appear in the coalition, and indeed in the Tory party, with Dr Cable, Michael Heseltine and Ken Clarke among the first to verge on the sceptical about Cameron’s more Thatcher than Thatcher stance. (Can we buy him a handbag?)

Some newspapers too, have been critical, both here and in America, but Mr Cameron’s treating backbenchers to dinner at his stately pile (well, ours really) must have paid off, because his stock has risen within his party. (They must have broken out the good wine.)

Sometime rival for his job, Giant Haystack, has said ...in the parlance of the playing fields of Eton...that Dave “played a blinder”. Perhaps less surprisingly William 10 pints Hague, who apparently was there in Brussels with his boss, said that David had done the right thing for Britain. George Gideon Osborne, who never seems to me to have mastered the idea of at least attempted guile, said that nearly all the City was pleased.

[Note to George: There are people who don’t actually work in, or have contacts who work in, the City. You know, ordinary people, who don’t stand to gain millions or even billions from this, who might be, erm, less than interested in the pleasure or otherwise of people who have 3 or 4 private jets of different colours... to go with their suits.]

Needless to say the English natural antipathy for the French has been greatly magnified by Napoleon’s snubbing of Canute Cameron, when our man was silly enough to think that the wee emperor advancing on him, about to shake and be friends. The little one was instead heading to shake with anyone who was not Dave.

Andrea Leadsome (I think)

My favourite French-hater comment is from the once fragrant Andrea Leadsom, of the Fresh Start group of Eurosceptic MPs, who wrote in a piece for The Sunday Telegraph attacking Le Petit Nicolas: “Sarkozy commented that the EU shouldn't accede to Britain’s demand because it was 'deregulation that largely got the Eurozone into this mess’ … what utter rubbish!"

Oh lord help us... where has she been?

And lord help Dave too. Because nothing is all good or all bad in the world of politics. He was warned that the minute that the Eurosceptics got a sniff of blood they would be after him for a referendum. I thought that they would let him enjoy his “victory” for a few days, but it according to the Sunday Telegraph, plans are already afoot.

Serves him right.

NO, NO, NO

2011-12-10T09:12:00.004Z

So how would he explain the British decision, made at 4 am, by one Englishman, while the premiers of Hungary, Sweden and the Czech Republic decided to go home and consult the parliaments of their countries?

Democracy British style?

It had been my intention to write a piece on the Euro summit, but having read this by Sturdyblog (from whom I borrowed the illustration), I'm inclined to feel that he has done a far better job than I would have.

Questions are bound to arise, though, about where the Liberal Democrats stand on Cameron's decision to be more Eurosceptic than Thatcher, but I see that Scot goes Pop has that subject neatly and amusingly tied up here.

It only remains for me to ask then... was it necessary for him to explain his decision to his backbenchers over dinner at his country estate last night? And who paid for it?

WHAT OF THE RIGOURS OF THE SCOTTISH EXAMS SYSTEM?

2011-12-10T01:29:00.000Z

For something like 20 years exam results have been improving year on year in England.

And every year their Education Secretary has told us it was because the pupils were working harder and the teachers were teaching better.

None of us believed it much and suggestions were made that maybe the exams were getting easier. Studies comparing exam papers over the years bore out our doubts, not to mention the facts that many employers refused to employ school leavers because they were neither literate nor numerate, and university teachers spent the first year of courses teaching what the kids should have learned at school.

But when anyone had the audacity to mention this they were shouted down by ministers, teachers and parents. Why did we have to put down kids and teachers who were working so hard?

Now the doubters have been somewhat vindicated.

It appears that the dual follies of applying market forces to the examination boards and setting targets on exam passes for schools have resulted in an inevitable dumbing down.

Telegraph reporters have secretly recorded and filmed executives of examination boards telling teachers what questions WON'T come up (and by default, which ones will), and bragging about how easy their exams are for students to pass, and for teachers to teach. 'I don't know how we got it past the regulator', said one executive.

Well, we know the answer to that one. Like every other regulator, 'Ofthis' and 'Ofthat', Ofqual (yeah, that's what it's called) is a toothless waste 'ofspace' and public money, seemingly staffed by people who can't be bothered getting off their backsides to do the job they are paid to do.

So far it is only English and Welsh boards which have been found to be wanting. (Of course English and Welsh Education Departments are separately run, but the examination system is largely the same and some English schools buy Welsh exams.)

In Scotland although results at standard grade have improved steadily over the past ten years, the same period has seen a much more varied pattern in Higher passes, percentages dipping in the middle of the decade and recovering to about the same level as 2000 by 2010.

Here there is only one exam board and every pupil takes the same exam removing the commercial incentive for the board to set ever-easier questions. The Cabinet Secretary for Education, Mike Russell says that exams are not getting easer here.

However, in the light of the Telegraph's disclosures I hope that he makes it his business to double check the standard of the papers set by this one exam board. There's no point in having free education if it's not true education, and it's better to be safe than sorry, Mr Russell.

As for the shadow education person in England getting up to high doh about the revelations... Please, Mr Twigg, you surely can't think it only started since the Tories got in, can you?

WASTEminster strikes again

2011-12-08T14:49:00.000Z

Ha ha ha...

... Mr Pickles, the man who spends his life berating English councils for wasting taxpayers' money, has paid his own finance officer £580,000 for 16 months' work. That's around £432,000 a year.

When questioned by MPs about the generous wage, the permanent secretary of Mr Pickles' department, Bob Kerslake, said that he agreed that it was a lot of money, but that the consequences of not having the finances of the department run in a sound way would have been more expensive.

I take that to mean the the English Communities Department thinks that in order to run accounts in a sound way, it is necessary to pay the head accountant over £400,000 a year.

So does that mean that any of the councils in Mr Pickles' jurisdiction would be failing in their duty to have sound finances if they were paying their accountant less than that?

Or is it yet another example of Whitehall departments, which we in Scotland help to fund, being run by greedy incompetent idiots?