Wednesday 23 April 2014


Well, they said there was something wrong,
so I suppose they were right on something!
Darling, as we've said before has no authority.
That's why there is no point in Eck debating with him.
He makes up stuff as he goes... en un clin d'œil*.
So all the devo not much plus was hogwash
Well Gordon... what was that you were saying??
It's a wonder any of us sleep
But we couldn't afford it?

* In the blink of an eye! Appropriate for Darling who, as he lies more, blinks more.


  1. I'm not quite sure what was 'discrediting' about Johann Lamont comment about the future of devolution being about fiscal autonomy... accountability for raising the monies our MSPs spend.

    It doesn't go nearly far enough, not even close... but I welcome any movement (however slight, slow) inside Labour toward home rule.

    1. Well she's selling it in Scotland as devo double plus and the end to our need for any more constitutional change (although as Stuart has pointed out she doesn't seem to understand what the powers would be and neither do any of her team. Whereas in England she is saying that it's status quo, more or less.

      In fact the change won't be allowed to happen and would give us no extra powers to do what we need to do to get people back to work and run a health service, unless we did what no government would ever do and altered one single tax power. Unless you have a multiplicity of tax raising/borrowing powers you might as well have none.

      It's not quite so stark as the others though... I'd agree with you there.

    2. Dean

      Please explain where the movement is, other than an adminstrative one adding additional costs to the Scottish people meaning less money not more. This is not a move towards home rule in any shape or form and does not add to the responsibilities of the Scottish Government and does not make then more accountable to the people.

      The reason that it doesn't make MSPs more accountable is that say the Scottish Government decide to lower tax or the tax they are allowed to, and this in the end results in greater tax revenue the greater amount then goes to Westminster so Scotland receives none of it. Or say that the Scottish Government lowers taxes and it doesn't work then the Scottish budget is then reduced from Westminster to take the change into account so Scotland loses and has less money.

      So the responsibility that the Scottish Government is being given is to a) leave taxes as they are in line with westminster with additional adminstartive costs and lose a little money in costs. b) raise taxes, make more money but not receive any benefit from it or c) raise taxes and not make any money from it but have a reduced block grant. So what Labour are propsing is that Scotland can become poorer no matter which way you look it and the responsibility that they are happy to accept is that Scotland is poorer . Is the agenda here to in long run get rid of Holyrood and bring about their belief that Scotland is not a country but just a region.

      Labour make me sick to my stomach.


    3. Sick to your stomach eh? That sounds painful. Some anti-acids may be in order.

      But you really can't claim "So what Labour are propsing is that Scotland can become poorer no matter which way you look it"

      You can't claim this because SLAB themselves are still squabbling over what their latest income tax devo plan actually constitutes in the fine print!

      If they are still trying and failing to 'clarify' their latest plans I fail to see how you can judge them already? Unless you can read tea-leaves?

    4. No, I think Bruce, that Dean was just saying that the poster didn't fit in with the theme of the post, and to an extent I agreed with him.

      On the other hand, Dean, I think you can judge Scottish Labour for publishing a plan that... a) they don;t understand themselves and have given conflicting opinions on its fundamentals ... and b) they won't get through a UK parliament anyway.

      That's incompetence.

      Before you launch a policy you have to have your party (at least the MPs and MSPs, Councillors and MEP with you and preferably those who may talk about it to members of the public should be reasonably sure what it means.

      Lamont had neither, and she was saying one thing in Scotland, and another thing to please northern England (where Labour still has a heartland).

    5. Dean

      I am judging them on their press conferences, statements and comments none of which are a move towards any home rule in any shape or form. I feel sorry for the members of that movement who are decent because the whole certainly isn't and who releases their policy and not understand it or even have agreement on it. Sorry but they make me sick.