QUESTION TO WHICH THE ANSWER IS PROBABLY ALISTAIR DARLING

With apologies to James for using his format of heading.

Imitation is the highest form of flattery, James.

BETTER TOGETHER, OR NOT?

So, what were they all about, these annoying ads that got pulled because of complaints from people who went to the cinema to see a film and not a political campaign?

By now you would think that Ukok and Nob Orders would have worked out that the Yes Campaign has plenty of people who will analyse every word they say and pull it to pieces. 

So, if you believe we are Better Together, you'd better have a more intelligent reason than...well, we just are.

Starring....

Rory "Alex Salmond speaks a lot of sense" Elrick with the FM

SLOWLY SLOWLY CATCHY MONKEY

I must admit that I thought that starting the referendum campaign early was a daft move. People have short interest spans and after the 6 weeks of a general election campaign people are usually sick to death of the sight of politicians. What, I wondered, was it going to be like after 2 years?

I had thought that an early referendum while the independence movement was basking in the glow of a massive victory at the polls in 2011 was most likely to bring in the desired result.

And I was spectacularly wrong.

Better Together, with very little to rely on except “clout” and “power” and “superiority of Britain” and “WMDs” and “empire” (none of which is overly impressive to the average man on the street, anywhere in the UK, especially when his income is static and his inflation is 10%), has instead depended on lies and scares.

And at that they seem to have been unable to coordinate them, so they have contradicted themselves over and over again. You won’t get into the EU; you will have to have the Euro! It would make sense to use the pound; you won’t be allowed to use the pound! The oil is running out for Scotland; the oil is a valuable resource for the UK!

Then the scare stories and demands that “Alex Salmond must come clean on…”. The latest of these as the Rev Stuart pointed out, was hilariously inept. What would the rates of income tax, corporation tax and VAT would be in an independent Scotland, they whined, without giving us any idea what these rates would be in the UK!

 

This poverty of argument doesn't affect ‘died in the wool one way or the other’, voters, but as lie after lie has been uncovered as such… over the EU, the amount of oil, the pound, the Euro, passports, border guards, grannies in Carlisle, etc, the thinking, undecided voter surely has begun to distrust everything BT says.

Of course the appearance of the public school boys (and girl…girl? Theresa May?) arriving in Scotland for an afternoon and lecturing us that, alone in the western world we, the Scots, would be unable to defend ourselves, heat ourselves, pay our pensions, protect ourselves from terrorism, etc, ad infinitum, whilst all the time telling us that of course there is no reason why Scotland couldn’t manage alone (lest they be accused of using the “too wee, too poor , too stupid” argument, which they have doubtless been told, we find patronising) hasn’t helped their image.

Probably a bad idea from the NO campaign's point of view.
But I'm happy to welcome Eton Boy here at any time.

And Eton boys standing by golden thrones, reading from speeches resting on golden lecterns, all the while telling us that we will face futures of austerity only add to the general sense that the BT campaign really don’t understand us at all.

Change seems to be afoot though. The Herald and even the Scotsman seem, belatedly, to be producing a slightly more balanced reporting of the campaign.

Recently a Labour ex-First Minister warned the unionists that they should start to think about what policies they would present to an independent Scotland…something they have steadfastly refused to do until now.  Why think about it; it’s not going to happen! 

In the last week two Labour party grandees have said what we have all been saying for a long time: that we have no chance of a socially just Scotland while we are joined at the hip with a country which is pulling away farther to the right, offering services more and more American and consequently less and less European, much less Nordic, which is the chosen desire, it would seem, of Scots. Not only have these Labour senior statesmen said this, but they have indicated that they will be voting with the yes side and against Labour party policy. There are those who think that maybe it won't be too long before the aforementioned ex Labour First Minister joins the ranks of the Labour for Independence movement.

Of course, it hasn’t helped BT that people like Anas Sarwar and Johann Lamont are lamentably inept.   

It actually doesn’t matter whether Sarwar’s absence from the Westminster debate and vote on the Bedroom tax made any difference to the overall result or not.

The crashing incompetence of a man who makes a monumental point, on live tv, of demanding that the Deputy First Minister bring forth a bill defying the London government (illegally), and then fails to turn up for a debate on that very subject in a parliament that does have the legal right to get rid of the morally bankrupt policy; a debate called by his own party, shows a remarkable detachment from reality.

Sarwar seems as distant from real people as his "honourable" friends opposite: Cameron, Osborne, Clegg and the other independent school millionaires. 

The argument that it wouldn’t have made any difference if they had all turned up; the government would have won, was a condemnation of the very system of government that they support. If there is no point in turning up for that vote, because the government will win, why turn up for any vote. A government with a majority will always win.

Maybe the long game is paying off for the Yes campaign. 

As folk like James Kelly and  Stephen Noon have said, the reality on the ground is rather different from the results of opinion polls funded by London based newspapers (which as we all know can to a certain extent be engineered to produce a desired result).

So be of cheerful heart.  Notwithstanding Cameron organising a red white and blue flag waving opportunity, just weeks before the referendum, I think we will win.

I’m glad I was wrong.

I USED TO BE A NO VOTER

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Televised_Independence_debate_between_UK_Prime_Minister_David_Cameron_and_Scotlands_First_Minister_Alex_Salmond/

WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO DO TO GET AN ARTICLE OUT OF THE NO CAMPAIGN?

In this month's "Left Review", there appears the following editorial comment.

·     "The Scottish Left Review has made even-handed coverage of the independence debate a central aim. 

     "Where we have published issues on the constitutional debate we have allocated equal space to either side. 

    

    "We requested articles from both Yes Scotland and Better Together with a deadline of 23 August. 

     "It is never our aim to embarrass anyone and we recognise that for the two campaigns this is a very busy time. However, as by 12 September and after a number of extended deadlines we do not have an article to balance the one by Dennis Canavan for Yes Scotland we feel we need to explain the circumstance.

     "We include instead a recent blog written by Blair McDougall, Campaign Director for Better Together. This originally appeared on the Better Together website."

    So Cameron couldn't be bothered to write anything in defence of the union for The Herald, except a few worn out platitudes about how much history we have and how great we are together, despite the paper contacting Downing Street to encourage a more heartfelt (and larger) contribution, and now the Blair MacDougall team couldn't get anything together for the Left Review at all, despite extended deadlines. 

    If the nation is as unionist as they'd like us to believe, you'd think that it would be a bit easier to get someone in Downing Street or at Project Fear to pen a few words about how fabulous the union is.

    It seems that  no one on the negative side of this debate is really that interested.

   

    **********

I  

I'm told that the blogroll is a handy navigator for some people to other reading. I've tried to keep it reasonably balanced so we get Labour and Liberal views, although some of the blogs that were on became  so appalling that I had to take them off.

     If anyone has ideas about blogs that they think should be featured on the blog list, please feel free to suggest them and we look at adding them. I'm open to suggestions from any political viewpoint.

     We should really try to include some Tory blogs and some Green ones. So if anyone has suggestions along these lines for decent readable blogs, please do let me know.

    

    **********

    The above photograph is, as you will know, a portrait of our proprietor  Munguin, of Munguin's Republic, with his flag and rosette, and seated in his penthouse suite at the top of Munguin Towers.

    Munguin will be accompanying us on the march tomorrow. He also adorns our t-shirts, so if anyone sees him, or us, please come over and say hello.

THIS COULD BE INTERESTING...

From Yes Scotland

The First Minister has described as "very serious" a claim that an email account connected to the pro-independence campaign was hacked.

Police Scotland launched an inquiry after Yes Scotland claimed private emails were accessed from outside the organisation.

The Daily Telegraph reported earlier on Tuesday that the pro-independence campaign was advised by officers to call in BT after it received a media enquiry which seemed to be based on private emails.

The paper reported the group contacted the police on Monday after BT looked at the email account and provided a list which showed it was accessed "a number of times".

Speaking on Tuesday afternoon, Alex Salmond said: “It’s a very, very serious matter indeed. There’s a limit to what we can say because it’s now a police inquiry, a police investigation.

"What I would say is this: If it turns out, and of course it’s still to be determined, that a newspaper has been involved in some way, given everything that’s happened over the last few years with illegal hacking and the whole scandal that erupted from that; if that turns out to be the case then it would be a very, very serious matter indeed.”

A spokesperson for Police Scotland said: “A complaint has been made by Yes Scotland regarding unauthorised access to an email account. The matter is being looked into.”

THOUGHTS ON NATE SILVER'S PREDICTIONS AND THOSE OF MATT QVORTRUP

It was interesting that the Scotsman, in common with most other papers in Scotland and the BBC, decided to ignore the opinion poll organised by Wings over Scotland.

Those which did mention it seem to have done so in a patronising fashion, or have suggested that the questions were biased, which I found odd, because Panelbase is a respected polling organisation which adheres to the British Polling Council rules, and many newspapers and the BBC use the company to conduct polls on their behalf.

Perhaps the silence is not surprising given that the general tone of the poll suggested that there was every reason for optimism from the Yes campaign, and that the question on who was considered trustworthy by the respondents showed the Press in a pretty bad light.

While completely ignoring the WoS poll, The Scotsman led their front page with comments from Nate Silver, an American mathematician who correctly foretold the results of each state and DC in the presidential election last year. Mr Silver said that the YES campaign had little chance of winning. James Kelly has done his usual top-class job of analysing Silver's prediction here.

The New Statesman, has also questioned Silver's predictions, based on the less than impressive predictions he made for the UK election, in an article by Alex Hern, which you can access here.

But I was somewhat taken aback to read an entirely opposite prediction in the Express, albeit one which was made a couple of years ago. 

Using historic precedent Professor Matt Qvortrup suggests that Yes will almost certainly win, given that, of 46 referenda on independence since 1905, 42 have resulted in a new country, two in Québec have resulted in status quo and the other two were later overturned by subsequent referenda which opted for independence (Malta and Montenegro).

Personally, I'm happy to know that we are moving slowly but surely in the right direction. 

We are still waiting to hear from Better Together how, apart from our seat on the Security Council, nuclear weapons and the respect and fear of all other countries for the the fourth largest military spend in the world, what exactly it is that makes us Better Together. 

The No campaign has been remarkably silent on what they can promise us for the future; indeed they all seem to say different things about further powers. Alistair Darling made an interesting observation that nothing could be promised at this time. 

Whatever may be further devolved will have to be in manifestos for the next UK election. And we all know that what goes in manifestos for Westminster is what the parties think will be well received in South East England where the votes are, and where elections are lost and won...so don't hold your breath for anything that will do Scotland any good.

OH DEAR, RUTH

Click to enlarge.

Whilst Better Together (including the Conservatives) argue that SNP members are "infiltrators" if they appear alongside Labour for Independence members in photographs, even if the original, undoctored photograph makes it quite clear that the picture is of a YES SCOTLAND event, it seems that Ruth welcomes contributions from people of all parties and none to CONSERVATIVE Friends of the Union.

How cheering it is that some things can be depended upon to never change. For example, when it comes to the Conservatives, it's one rule for them, and one for everyone else.

While we are on the subject of the poster, Ruth, isn't there something a bit Hitlarian about prophesying a regime that will last for a thousand years. 

I note that you talk about the important things that we will decide for the future (if not for a thousand years, at least for as long as we, our kids and their kids live).

I see that you make mention of what passport we use. (It's that important, you say.) Of course, currently we use a European Union passport, but most people won't even know that. So I wonder just how important that is?

You worry about what currency we spend. I worry more about how much that currency will buy; how much it's worth. I can already use many different currencies printed by many different banks. English, Scottish, Irish, Manx, etc. I can even use Euros in some better shops. In Scotland we rarely see notes with the Queen's head on them. I wonder how many people really care about that.

Your third big worry is which army protects you. At the moment the UK army and Nato forces protect you. They don't do a great deal of it as they spend a lot of time and a great deal of money policing the world (poking their noses into affairs in parts about which they, and their political "masters", know nothing, and leaving havoc in their wake.) But many of these men and women, are Scottish. They would continue to be. And as all main parties support being part of Nato, Nato troops that would continue to help protect Scotland in the future. 

I notice that sadly you don't make any mention of other matters. More mundane matters no doubt, but matters which, with respect, Ruth, are probably of a great deal more pressing interest to people in Scotland. Matters of pensions, social security payments, taxes, housing, house prices, inflation, fuel prices, internet connections, physical infrastructure, foodbanks, drugs, alcohol abuse, health, education, poverty, democracy...

Do these things not matter to you? Because if they don't maybe they should  For sure as hell they matter to the "ordinary" people whom you purport to represent.

IN WHICH DAVID CAMERON FAILS TO SEE THAT HE IS TALKING BLETHERS, LEARNS THE EXPRESSION "RED HERRING" AND OVERUSES IT

David Cameron has again ruled out a head-to-head TV debate with Alex Salmond ahead of the independence referendum.

Cameron said the idea was a ‘complete red herring’. (Why is it a red herring for the head of the UK government, which wants to keep Scotland and its vast resources for the good of the UK,  and the head of the Scottish Government which wishes to be independent of the UK and to be able to use the aforesaid resources for the good of Scotland, to debate? red herring my butt!)

He challenged Mr Salmond to debate with Scottish politicians such as former Chancellor Alistair Darling – who is leading the anti-independence Better Together campaign. (To which the answer is that the only position Mr Darling holds, other than being an ordinary back bench MP, is that of Better Together Campaign leader, and his opposite number is Blair Jenkins the head of the YES campaign. They should surely debate, otherwise  with whom would Mr Jenkins debate?)

He said: "This is a debate between people in Scotland, some of whom want to separate from the United Kingdom, but the majority of whom want to stay in the United Kingdom. The TV and radio debates should be between Scottish politicians with differing views." (Well David, if that is the case why are you giving an interview to the Scottish press on the subject? Why did it form the main part of your speech to the party conference? Why not leave that to Ruth, who is supposedly the Scottish Party leader and is certainly a Scottish politicians, therefore exactly the kind of person who, in your opinion, should be addressing it?)

"I seem to remember Alex Salmond said he wanted this referendum made in Scotland – well now that he’s made a bit of a mess of it, he wants to make it somewhere else." (Recent figures show that more people want to change the constitutional settlement than leave it alone. Support for independence, trumpeted by the No campaign only a few months ago at 23% has risen, by the same measures from the same polling company, to 35% in less than 6 months. Not my idea of a mess, Dave. You want a mess, go look at your hospitals, or trains, or schools. They ARE a mess.) 

"Let Better Together debate with Alex Salmond and the Nationalists. This is a complete red herring and I'm absolutely not falling for it." (Either you are very stupid and have failed to grasp the point [in which case, better shut up now, in fact resign now, because this is really simple compared with some stuff a first/prime minister should have to deal with], or you are being deliberately obtuse. 

Let me try to make it simple for you:

Better Together should debate with Yes Scotland.

Politicians should debate with politicians.

That might mean first ministers with first ministers; finance ministers with finance ministers; deputy first ministers with deputy first ministers; environment ministers with environment minister. By now, presumably  even you will have caught onto the system)

Please note for this exercise I have conflated "first" and "prime"... They mean approximately same thing.

It seems to me that the real reasons that David Cameron will not debate with Alex Salmond are as follows:

He feels that as Prime minister of the United Kingdom, he is better suited in the company of presidents and kings. A mere Scottish MSP is beneath his Eton and Oxford dignity.

Or, David Cameron knows that he would be a complete turn off to around 90% of the Scottish population and throw them running to the arms of the horrid separatists, because let's face it anything has to be better than this tosser.

Or finally, because he is feart (his word) of the intellectual rigour of the debate from a man who would wipe the floor with his silly arguments of "greatness" and "power" and "place in the world" and show him that Scots, by and large, care a great deal more about the fact that there are people in our country eating out of rubbish dumps and food banks, than the fact that we could blow a southern suburb of Moscow off the face of the Earth if the American gave us the co-ordinates.

SNAPS ON SUNDAY

This is what they want. Yellow trousers explosion in a paint factory shaping the future to a racist, homophobic, isolationist future with no devolution.

This is what we have. Minister for external affairs promoting Scotland and Scottish products in Germany

It's true

We didn't vote for this. Labour and SNP voted against...

That's another thing I can say YES to, although to be fair, only about 625 are actually corrupt bastards.

Compelling cases?

Which wouldn't be stupid if the idiot Cameron isn't demanding that the EU  discuss renegotiations of UK terms in the EU PRIOR to their referendum.

Sums it up perfectly. Why can't the rest of Labour be like these guys? Oh yeah, House of Lords! Silly me.

Sounds like Norway, sounds like a real life for our kids

It's what they seem to want... Good luck to them

Richer and richer and going into killing people when it could be used for keeping people alive.

Bless him. He probably should have stayed with carrier pigeon technology

I've been there and they do it rather well.

Yet I see that 50% of Scots now think that King Charles and Queen Mrs Parker Bowles will be an asset... 

Britain...makes you proud

And to cheer us up...

They know how to build roads in Norway, and of course they can afford them

They know how to make waterfalls in Iceland...

They certainly know how to do that in the City of London

Bitter Together have such compelling arguments all 7 million 463 of them

Handy waste disposal unit

that makes..... 5x days that have passed without me using algebra

People who think that women s place is in the kitchen should remembered that that's where the knives are kept

Stupidity is not considered to be a handicap. Go and Park yourself somewhere else

Humza Yousaf: Minister for External Affairs and Intentional Development, and one of the best and busiest MSPs in parliament and a damned nice guy too.

WHAT A FUTURE: WHAT POTENTIAL FOR OUR KIDS AND GRANDKIDS...

Becoming independent offers Scotland - and its businesses - the opportunity of a lifetime. With control of our economic policy we can focus on the unique priorities of our economy. An independent Scotland would have a secure and stable economy. We can afford to be independent and have a government which is specifically focused on developing and nurturing our own financial well-being.

• Even those who favour Westminster rule agree that an independent Scotland could thrive
• An independent Scotland would be the eighth wealthiest country in the world
• Our oil reserves are worth up to £1.5 trillion - ten times our share of the UK national debt
• We have 25% of Europe’s potential offshore wind and tidal energy
• We have very successful food & drink, tourism, construction and agriculture sectors worth £39 billion a year 

Scotland is one of the wealthiest nations on the planet. But for most of us it just doesn't feel that way. We do not see this prosperity reflected in our daily lives.

There are two big problems. First, the wealth isn't shared fairly. Westminster policies mean that a very few at the very top get most of the benefit.  And, second, Westminster isn't working for Scotland's economy. Its one size fits all economic policy isn't making the most of Scotland's strengths for the benefit of the Scottish people. That is why we need to be independent.

OVERALL WEALTH

An independent Scotland would be ranked 8^th wealthiest country in the OECD (in terms of GDP per head) compared to the UK’s 17th place (2011). (And we'd be more likely to spend that wealth on what people need, rather than killing foreigners.) 

EDUCATION

We have three of the top 100 universities in the world. Our universities compete at the top of the world leagues for the quality of their research. (We've hardly got a record of being thick, have we?)

RENEWABLES

We have around 25% of Europe’s potential offshore wind and tidal energy and 10%of Europe’s wave power potential. (Even those who think its all a load of rubbish can't deny the jobs that this is creating.)

INDUSTRY

Recent figures show food and drink exports at an all-time high of £5.4 billion. Our world-leading industries include engineering, life sciences, tourism, life assurance and wealth management. (Not all about oil then, Alistair?)

PUBLIC FINANCES

Our public finances are stronger than the UK's. For every one of the last 30 years Scotland has generated more tax revenue per head than the UK. (So  they don't subsidise us; au contraire, we subsidise them.)

OIL

Up to 24 billion barrels remain in the North Sea. This equates to a wholesale value of up to £1.5 trillion at today’s prices – that's 10 times our share of the UK national debt. (So it's not actually running out at all.)

 INWARD INVESTMENT

Scotland tops the UK charts for levels of inward investment by foreign companies. (Despite the devastation and uncertainty that Osborne et al predicted and lied about.)

The stuff in Black type is Blair Jenkins'. The red is all mine!

SNAPS ON SUNDAY

And, just for a laugh...