Thursday 11 February 2016


...We would have to put up taxes on Scottish people who, remember, did not vote for the Tories' cuts, while still paying taxes to London to pay for HS2, London's sewers, and Crossrail...

Was this what the Vow was all about? Was this what Gordon Brown promised on behalf of Better Together? Was this what Smith intended? 

Was this what convinced all these people to change from Yes to No?

I don't think so...


  1. tris

    Uh Nicola actually said we the snp thought we could both hold out the begging bowl
    slag of Westminsters transfer of cash and not not raise taxes in Scotland from our wealthy

    Obviously now we will have bring the old old chip on the shoulder tactic again after all
    asking for responsibility and getting are itwo vastly different things..
    The former is just the usual made up fantasy the latter means we can't hide from the choices
    we make and their consequences .

    I know we will blame the Labour Party

    1. Scotland has to hold out the "begging bowl" because your party fought, tooth and nail, to keep us under Westminster control. Labour are a fekin shambles both at Westminster and Holyrood, shouting SNP bad and having NO COHERENT POLICIES, ain't working.
      Roll on May, till SLab get another lesson in humility, maybe just maybe they could go in reverse, and revert go their founding principles, though Anas will make sure that doesn't happen.
      No grow up, wake up and smell the bleeding coffee, Labour are a busted flush, and so is the bloody union.

    2. Well, Niko, not a lot I can say to that.

      Even some of Labour don't think that it's a fair settlement to lose £3 billion a year, in order to have the right to increase income tax so that the London government can cut more from Scotland.

      You know that Mr osborne has found a black hole of £7 billion in his figures (something to do with his adding up) and needs to introduce MORE cuts, on top of the ones already done, and those planned.

      Doubtless many of them will be work and pensions. We must all hope and (for those who do) pray that we don't get old or sick or lose our jobs.

      But for all the cuts in what we get we will still be paying all that money to London for the fat cats to go on with their jolly lifestyles, for them to build railways that will actually impoverish the east of Scotland, and of course continue to make London the most pampered place in the UK..

      I'm not particularly blaming Labour. You put that in.

      The FM said that if we got what we were promised she'd work with the UK government to deliver.

      But as I've said before, what Gordon Brown on behalf of BT, promised was devo max.

      What we got was a commission which (someone worked out) had around 1 minute to read each submission.

      Which reported, not to Scotland, or even to the UK, but to the Tory/Liberal cabinet, which then threw out a lot of the proposals and left Fluffy Muddle to draw up an Act. Fluffy for heaven's sake! Id not let him draw a picture!

      Thence to the House of Commons which refused to countenance any amendments put forward by the Scottish MPs.

      The House of Lords said that it was financially incompetent. Even Mr Forsyth, unionist to his core, said it would starve Scotland of cash.

      And you are happy with that?


      For heaven's sake.

  2. tria and fellow Nat extremists

    I'll answer for you ,,,,,yeah but we need the full panoply of measures and all necessary levers
    especially REVERSE

    1. Hi Niko, I thought abut what you said about going in reverse and here is my take on your problem. Firstly way back if you were not in short trousers then, in 1997 the Scottish People voted for the reintroduction of the Scottish Parliament by a majority. This measure was introduced by the Labour Party, UK division.
      Using methods designed by the above said party the SNP won a minority Government in 2007, was never voted down, and in 2011 won another majority term. Now Labour have been greeting ever since, not once have they even drawn blood on a Government they have pursued by using the Establishment connections.
      The last straw for me was yesterday when Neil Findlay called the First Minister a Liar in the house, which show a tremendous disrespect for the office. That the Presiding Officer accepted as did the First Minister his apology has done nothing to quell my anger. I hope that the house will be driven by a stronger voice in the next Parliament and people who show disrespect for the House are treated as they should be, suspended from the house and a loss of pay.
      Now go away and chew on that. I realize that like so many Labour people you do not do democracy but that is the way things are. We the people of Scotland spoke in 2011 and chose another Party over you, who think it is your fiefdom well it ain't.

    2. Good point Helena. Reverse to the Tories ruling direct from London, Niko?

      I'm disappointed in Findlay. He was my choice for leader against Murphy.

      I can accept that he might have been angry with Nicola, and I know that our parliament isn't like theirs with books full of arcane rules and regulations, but we can't have it descend to the level of a primary school playground.

  3. Aye, we were told, vote to be a normal country and taxes would rise. Here we are, suckered by our imperial masters, paying more taxes (if SLab and their poodle wee Wullie get their way) to off set cuts by a government we didn't vote for.
    You couldn't make it up, any publishing house would demand a rewrite, as the plot would be deemed too far fetched

    1. I think he's just winding you up. He can;t possibly believe that is what Brown meant.

      Where is Brown?

    2. Darling said he would be cross if the vow was not delivered in full.

      Where is Darling?

    3. While we are on, where is Spud?

    4. Oh lord. Is there enough time in the world?

  4. Niko, in your tiny mind you seem to believe to contrary things. That Labour in Scotland would have more power to extrapolate a decent deal with Westminster, but only if they are also in Power in the UK. Well dearest that will not happen probably.nay certainly in my lifetime perhaps in not even in yours. You see your Gordie made a complete pillock of himself as both Chancellor and PM and wrote Labour's obituary, then of course Ed Miliband walked into the trap set by Cameron during the referendum and the rest dearest is history. Scotland to do as wee Dugdale wants needs control over Tax bands not just tax and you know it. Westminster are just like the us over Cuba, they cannot have a successful country on their border and use Quislings like you to maintain us as a subject nation. Now go off and think about that while you walk Taz.

  5. Damn, should read the US as in United States.

  6. Bloody hell, looking for the best outcome for Scotland is interpreted as having a 'chip on the shoulder'? No wonder Scotland suffered and is still suffering the consequences of Labour rule at council and national level when their advocated policy would seem to be to agree with anything Westminster dictates.

    The days where Scotland was content and complacent to have all decisions were made at Westminster by those whose agenda and priorities are geared to their own constituents, are in the past and in the past they will and must remain.

    Niko, if you and your party are going to make a come-back you will have to adopt more cohesive and compelling arguments then you are putting forward above. Sorry, I've just realised that I was being over generous there. You were not putting forward any argument except the typical Labour mantra of SNP bad.

    1. I'd love to know what Niko wants.

      NS has accepted that the Yes side lost. And that was partly becasue Gordon Brown gave such a compelling argument for devo max. Of course Galloway gave a compelling argument for devo super max, but no one knew what he was talking about, least of all him.

      But even Gordon has said that the outcome is a disappointment. The David Cameron has tricked Scots.

      So, whose side is Niko on. David Cameron's?

    2. I think he's on the the flip side, the flip side of reality.
      He just can't accept Labour are a spent force, he needs to move on, get over it, Labour socialism was a once in a generation event.

    3. Hoi ! Tris your the one getting in to bed (well the voting booth )with Cameron and
      voting YES to Cameron's proposition Scotland within the UK and the U.K. within the
      eu is the best possible outcome.

      Me I am voting NO and out of the eu come what may and stuff the snp threats of
      another Scots referendum".......and leaving the uk

      So who is on Cameron's side seems to me to be you and this snp

    4. You do know you are a conservative 'niko'?

    5. Niko, so you're voting to leave your dream of a bar in Greece, typical of Labour, cutting their nose off to spite...everyone.

    6. Jimminy

      I will be doing a blog shortly explaining my reasons unselfish of why I have
      Decided to vote no even after being pro eu for many a year .

    7. I will read it, with great interest; I assume the treatment of Greece is an area of much angst.

    8. Niko. The labour leadership is for the EU, although I accept that there are some against. As I understand it the party split down the middle is the Tory Party with cabinet ministers and backbenchers alike absolutely opposed to the EU, mainly becasue they hate foreigners.

      Me, I couldn't care less what they do. I know I should, but I've lost interest in the lying gits' machinations one way of the other.

      If Britain is so clever, let it come out of the EU. The consequences may be the end of the union (good), the end of the special relationship, as Britain won't be America's voice at Brussels (good).

      I too thought the EU treated Greece with disdain and that they have made a bit of a mess of the refugee crisis...although King Solomon would have made a mess of that!

      But it has its good sides, and without it i reckon we will struggle.

  7. Just to say, the beggar on the street is a better human being than Gordon Brown. The beggar asks for money directly and does not pretend to have better access than you do. He is asking for money for another tin of Tennents' Lager. He has no interest in much more than tommorrow.

    Compare and contrast as they used to say.

    Oor Gordon claimed a settlement that would have seen the jakey on the street drinking 25 year old malt and living to a hundred, just for a 'No' vote.

    Hah! Hah! Fooled you!

    It is semi-ridiculous to express it that way, but that is what he did.

    Gordon Brown served London, and they rejected him. I have difficulty finding a place for him in storytelling. Unless it is a vacuum, perhaps. Rejected by the electorate, rejected by the party, rejected by Scots, he retreats to Paris and re-groups?

    Perhaps not.

    That didn't work.

  8. I voted Yes, but I don't believe that the "Vow" had as great an impact as some believe. It definitely swung some voters, but there were other reasons, including the currency question. Then there were voters who simply did not want Scotland to go independent for their own reasons, and had nothing to do with arguments presented by either side. Instead of constantly blaming the "Vow", why not look at the areas of the Yes campaign that were weak.

    Insulting No voters does not help the cause, and simply gives the media and the SNP opponents more ammunition. "Quisling", "Traitor" and other descriptions are frankly puerile and destroy any attempt to present an argument in favour of independence. Wings doesn't allow such descriptions and they shouldn't be used elsewhere.


    1. With the timing, source and publicity generated by the "Vow" I think you under-estimate the number of previously "don't knows" who thought that it was a positive and satisfactory outcome for Scotland and voted accordingly. The currency question and the alleged threat to pensions were probably the factors that swung most voters. As for references to Quislings and Traitors I do not recall posters on here referring to no voters in that manner.

    2. While the timing of the Vow might have been influential, Salmond's failure to address the currency issue in the debate was also crucial. In a situation where he should have destroyed the BT campaign there and then, he blew it.

      Helena called Niko a Quisling in her comment above.


    3. Would you prefer the right word Zog for those who sell out their country, TRAITOR. Look it up, I will continue to use said word for those who used their power to confuse and commit fraud on mostly Elderly or indeed some very stupid people. I used Quisling which is a tame word for people if you do not mind and as for Niko, check out the things I have to tolerate out of him. I do not use it lightly Zog, I use it for people who choose to sell out, those who like Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling who have gained much not to people who were simply used to get them the preferment they sought.

    4. At the beginning of the campaign the polls pretty uniformally showed that the most popular outcome was "Devo Max" or some other way of saying, more or less everything except foreign affairs and wars. It's a bit like the situation with Jersey, Guernsey and Man, or between Denmark and Greenland or the Faroes (except that Jersey, Guernsey, Greenland are not in the EU).

      Cameron ruled out the possibility of that by excluding it from the ballot. He clearly did not want that, and he took a punt that the bulk of people who DID want it would opt for status quo.

      To begin with they did.

      But bit by bit they moved over.

      Cameron didn't suddenly promise Devo Max, Home Rule and the nearest thing to federalism that you could imagine, based on one opinion poll, by one point on one day. Private polling must have shown over a period a reasonable lead for yes.

      Cameron has admitted that he was worried. I imagine most particularly about himself and his career, and of course his "legacy".

      I think that it did have a big effect. Certainly Ashcroft's polling showed that it had a massive effect. Again, one poll on one day, but a very much bigger poll than most people could afford to do.

      We will never know, so there is not much point in arguing it. Even if we asked everyone individually, at this distance from the event it wouldn't be reliable.

      Brown? Was he used by Cameron? Did he take the opportunity to smack Darling in the face by seizing a Brown victory from the jaws of a Darling defeat? (Serve him right for criticising Brown in a money spinning book?)

      Who knows.

      The vow at this point has been watered down and watered down to virtually nothing. Except that it will cost is £3 billion a year. So much for Better Together.

      And where is Brown, or Darling, or any of the others who stood so firmly behind it? Clearly voting with the Tories. Or off out of the country making money at after dinner speeches. With real further interest in Scotland having made their money.. and millions of it... off our backs.

      I'm not quite sure what you call someone like that. My vocabulary fails me, but, I'm sure words would come back to me if I ever met them, which of course i never will, becasue they only operate behind closed doors surrounded by fellow travellers.

      Of course no one should ever call anyone names. Mr Findlay in the chamber, or me or anyone else on here. But it's bloody hard soemtimes!

    5. Zog: You are right about currency in my opinion.

      Although there were many people including Nobel winning economists who thought that it was perfectly sensible.

      As in so many things, I'm no expert. But there are countries all over the world who work with other countries' money.

      But there usually isn't the hatred that was stirred up by the Towel Folding permanent Black Hole that is the British Finance Minister.

      He was determined to give the impression that he would not allow it to work. Mark Carney said it could work, Tory ministers quietly admitted that it would be made to work, but Gidiot went on and on about how it wouldn't work and we couldn't have their currency.

      So, it was a weak spot and Salmond did very badly against his intellectual inferior Darling in that first debate.

      Despite that the Yes vote continued to climb until, as we said, Cameron had to do a volte face and too late to change the ballot papers, make a promise, through Gordon Brown.

      A Cameron promise.

      You know, like "The NHS is safe with us".

      Ho Hum.

      It's all working out nicely...

    6. Helena, Quisling is anything but tame. I don't resort to name calling, ever (expect IDS). You are defeating your own argument, by implying that the No voters were either old or stupid.


  9. What Niko wants, like the rest of the unionists, is his head looked. Their side lied and cheated its way to depriving our Nation of recovering its rightful independence. They know how they did it. And they lash out at us because they know that we know they did it. And they know they cannot keep the lid on the box much longer.

    They, and he, are on the wrong side of history.

    Alba Gu Brath

    Saor Alba

    Saor Alba

    1. Aye Anon, and there's no right way of doing a wrong thing.

    2. You would have thought that they would have grasped the fact that they aren't winning hearts and minds.

      There must be an argument for the UK, but they haven't got it, or they haven;t got the people to put it across.

      Doesn't seem to work whether it comes from smarmy Cameron, telling us about OUR united kingdom, or the poor band of second raters that labour keep putting forward, of Carmichael the liar.


    If you have a spare tenner, or even a fiver... you could do worse than send it that way...

    Latest video , where kez finds something she's actually managed to do...

    On in the side bar....

  11. The wifully blind nats

    yeah right just hoe did the referendum.............go ?
    and next time if she ever get the guts to call it the
    result will be the same no no no no no no no no

    1. I can then assume that you, Niko the socialist, are happy with permanent Tory rule? Labour are as right wing as many Tory governments of the past, including Thatcher's.
      If we stay in the union, permatory is what we'll get, as well as treated as second class, subordinate, subsumed peoples.

      The way Europe has treated Greece, is the exact same as Westminster has treated Scotland since 1707.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. Nope, I'll be voting to remain, but I do agree the EU ain't perfect. It has had a stabilising effect on the continent, reducing the likelihood of a pan- European war.
      It must however, look to it's peoples as people, and not a commodity. TTIP must be resisted, it has no benefit to the citizen, all benefit is aimed at big business; especially American big business. That is not what the European project was about.

      Scotland will be independent, its just a matter of time. I believe this to be true, furthermore I believe, paradoxically, it would bring Scotland and the rUK closer together, in an EQUAL ad-hoc partnership, of sorts.

  12. Jimminy

    I'll take it you are voting NO in the eu referendum thus
    ensuring the UK ejects from the eu and thence Scotland
    ejecting from the uk............wots not to like

    After all if Scotland hasnt got the guts to leave the eu
    they will never ever have the cast iron balls to leave the
    glorious union......

  13. I think the EU needs reforming, but not the way Cameron wants to reform it.

    I agree with Jim about the peace aspect though. Surely this is the longest period of peace in Europe (within the union) ever.

    Of course that hasn't stopped many of the countries getting involved in war after war OUTSIDE Europe.

    But I don't think it would be long if Europe split before we'd be at war again, INSIDE the continent.