Wednesday, 2 July 2014


I can't help but think that there wasn't enough thought in that response (quite apart from the fact that technically, I suspect, you TAKE inferences rather than MAKE them, but that is me being picky). 

It is, of course, true that in most campaigns of this type, illustrations are chosen to encourage people to think about why they should choose a particular outcome. But it's also true to say that the subjects are chosen for emotive reasons. In the same way as advertising for other products uses fluffy kittens, cute kids, pretty women, handsome guys and sweet old people.

This campaign is about people. It's about how we want to take our country and our society forward and how we look after the various sections of that society. It's about the direction that we want to move in.

It's not unreasonable for the campaign managers to want to use positive pictures of people, of whatever age and stage in their lives, to concentrate the minds of potential voters.

Most of us care to a greater or lesser extent about children, about sick people and about the old, regardless of which side of the campaign they are on. But different folk have different views about what that future should be and who or what is the best way of delivering that future.

There is nothing wrong with the above image of kids running across a hillside. Above all the future of the country is the future of its young people. They are the ones who will reap the benefits and/or live with the consequences of whichever decision we will make on September 18.

The booklet from the UK government goes on to show pictures of a nice family, mum, dad, a boy and a girl; a workman; a good looking young couple; a pharmacist (ironically) handing over a prescription; a young mother with a baby,  and an extended family. They have it more or less covered, although surprisingly there are few old people and not much of an ethnic mix. But there is nothing wrong with these illustrations. Our decision will affect all of these people.

The Yes side will have used the same kind of groups of people in their publicity. 

I don't know what led Ms Wiles to do what she did. If indeed it was a desire to keep children out of the campaign, she clearly hasn't been even glancing at her own side's publicity. I suspect it was a deep and passionate hatred of the SNP and independent Scotland, for whatever reason.

She has resigned. Her political career is over for now, and I suspect forever. 

As Mr Cameron once rather naively said... "Too many tweets make an ex candidate" , or something like that. 


  1. I would say that kathy Wiles, hatred for the SNP drove her to do what she did,the same hatred, for the SNP endeared her to the bigwigs of the Labour party, for their whole campaign is based on the decrying of the SNP. One just has to watch a FMQ's not even a recent one, to see, that Labour constantly attack the SNP Government.

    There seems to be such a deep seated hate for the SNP within the Labour ranks, albeit, not all Labour supporters, but certainly the upper echelons, and many brainwashed foot soldiers,. Hopefully they'll be a yes vote in September where Labour go from there is anyones guess, but a internal civil war within Labour is inevitable, its the only way forward for them, they need to be reborn,in an independent Scotland, if the Labour name is to survive.

    1. Yes there doe seem to be hatred. I suspect that many labour people see their own London party drifting farther and farther to the right, and at the same time see the SNP's policies as the ones that they should have.

      There are obviously Labour people who feel that teh Scottish parliament was THEIRS, adn it has been stolen by the SNP.

      No wonder they hate.

      The best way to get it back is with independence.

  2. I'm glad that you said "not all Labour supporters", because my experience is that many hitherto Labour supporters are having to come to terms with their gut feelings about the benefits of independence and their loyalty to the Party they may have supported for many years. The appearance of Labour for Indy, and the intentions to vote Yes by prominent Labour ex-MPs, Labour activists

    1. Absolutely agree Seanair.

      I know quite a few Labour people who will vote for independence. Because they see it as the only way to get some sort of left of centre government.

      The alternative is hard right with Cameron or slightly softer right with Miliband.

  3. tris Yeah know what u meen
    jus look at that pic showing those
    young children running like mad,
    away from the nasty snp Scotland towards
    a more happier UK .

    1. Your compass is as skewed as Broon's that view is looking West South West .

    2. ch

      you ACTUALLY believe that ........I mean Im nuts but i do have insight
      something you noticeably lack what you will do when you lose God only know.

      We will have to put you on suicide watch...well lets be honest you aint got the guts to do anything more err !! spectacular Jihad so not you more like having moan about it around yer mums

    3. Probably being chased by big bad Eck Niko... ?????

    4. Mair like;y running away from Johann Lamont/Jackie Baille or the erstwhile Kathy Wiles, though I some how imagine Niko could out run them

    5. Ha ha ha ha... I dunno... he's getting on a bit now, Helena.

  4. tris and the moany minnies nats

    Hows the YES campaign going thus far

    Latest poll: Yes 35%, No 54%, Don't Know 12%

    Umm not wery well at all............still live in hope you lot
    what else you got???


    Hate the snp ....thats what we do

    Though will admit there are a significant number of labour
    Westminster MPs who would rather ape torylite in the hope
    of resurrecting new ! new ! labour .
    For them its about being elected and having a nice little earner
    for themselves. ( as like wot some snp MPs MSPSs do )
    If only milliband would only copy Cameron et al then labour would walk it
    at the election............they would and do say (behind eds back of course all smiley to his face ) wan/ers !!!

    Must hold on to my unreasoning visceral hate for Alex Salmond and the snp
    hate ! hate ! hate !

    like wot they taught/indoctrinated me in the Labour youth movement all them years ago

    1. Now remind me again just how close YouGov got to the 2011 Holyrood result?

    2. Scot goes Pop has analysed the results of the Yougov Poll and questioned the methodology.

      Who knows.

      I just wonder if the No campaign were winning so handsomely as that poll seems to indicate, why would they be running around desperately offering Federalism, or trying to associate independence with some foul brand of blood and soil nationalism.

      Countries can be independent with that and they know it. It's a shame they feel that that is their best bet for making people vote No.

      If you vote yes, it will be like Nazi Germany.

      What to me is scary is the 60% of cuts that are still to come; the knowledge that the cancer services (already near the bottom of the EU tables) and end of life services, are out to tender in England, and that our future funding under the present regime is based upon what England wants to as little as possible.

      That is much more realistic and much more frightening.

      When you were young Niko, Labour was a decent party of the working man. They relished having Dennis Skinner among their ranks, along with people like Dennis Canavan.

      Poor old Skinner. After a lifetime of service, Ed has banned him.


    3. Living up or is it down to British Labour, funny that party was born from the Cooperative Movement so that working class folk could actually have a voice in Parliament. Where did it all go wrong Niko, but then you weren't born then.


    5. Where did it all go wrong?

      When an ex-MP from the Labour Party accepted a seat in the Lords.

    6. Thanks Conan. It will be interesting to see what James says about this.

    7. Agreed, Illy, although of course the stupid system we have ,meant that unless there was Labour representation in the second chamber, the laws Labour enacted could simply be overturned by a Conservative house.

      What should have happened was the place should have been abolished and replaced with an elected chamber, like most civilised countries have.

      But Labour Lords is an oxymoron, or it should be.

  5. Stop the wind-up Niko - Labour is like the death throes of a old buffalo who makes one plaintinve cry before being eaten by the carrion seekers of the Tory/UKIP coalition. A No vote will be taken by Labour and Tories as a mandate to run rough-shod over Scotland with the appeasement of UKIP supporters taking them in an even further- right direction. Anyone who cannot grasp that stark reality is extremely naive, gullible, blinkered or brain-washed.

    Incidentally, did you miss me?

  6. Hmmm. If you look back a few stories, you will find that at one point I asked if anyone had seen you... so, yes. We did.

    And I completely agree with your summation of the situation vis-a-vis a no vote.

    Even a narrow margin (given the fact that Westminister doesn't give a stuff about Scotland) will be disastrous.

    Labour will assume that its vote is secure because "we are the only way to beat the Tories"... and the Tories will wash their hands of the place, except of course to store their evil weapons and extract our oil. We will in either case be denied the oil bonanza that awaits us in the Clyde because of the MoD's desire to wave Britain's willie (if you'll pardon the crudity).

    I suppose I should mention the Liberals. So there. I mentioned them.

    The future may not be to actually vote UKIP, but it will certainly be to keep UKIP potential voters on side. No one would pretend that the EU wants Britain to leave, although heaven knows some of the leaders probably wish that our prime minister would...erm... go. (Who could blame them?)

    I see Frau Merkel is already trying to appease Cameron after his humiliating defeat last week, where the only ally he could call upon was a right wing nut job in Hungary, as near to a dictator as you can be and still stay in the EU).

    No one wants anyone to leave the EU, much less a contributor like the UK, so Merkel and even Hollande, who must really dislike the Uk, will work to keep the UK in. Of course Cameron and Milly know it would cost millions of jobs if it left.

    So the Ukip threat will continue, and the appeasement of Ukip factions in Labour and the Tories will have to be continue apace.

    Scotland will not be immune from the results of that.

    Britain, in my view, despite its many attributes, has never been a great place to live if you weren't rich or titled. It's become more and more frightening and more and more dangerous.

    I don't want to live in a frightening and dangerous country.

    Anyway... where the hell were you?


  8. Tris,

    That last comment illustrates the danger of leaving your blog open with a teenage daughter around. Now, where's the naughty step?

    1. It seems to me that there may have been an element of truth in what aforesaid teenage daughter was writing...

      Naughty steps for teenagers are usually to be found somewhere near the vacuum cleaner, the Pledge and dusters...

      Very handy way to keep the house clean.

      Oh, and bottle bank visiting is also quite a suitable "naughty step" occupation. Only if you happen to have a lot of bottles about the place of course.

      Just sayin'...

    2. Is the naughty step for you or her?
      Tris missed you by the way. Mentioned you once or twice.