David Torrance quotes me as evidence – indeed the only evidence – of a “Great Divide” in the SNP between fundamentalists and gradualists. There certainly are differences, but they are just differences over tactics rather than goals.
I am quite open that I fear that the trivial diversion of extremely shallow extra powers for Holyrood will consume energies better spent on campaigning for independence. And it is certainly true that I believe that during this very right wing Tory Westminster government is the best time to hold another referendum, and that missing the chance could be a disaster.
But there are others just as committed to independence who are more tactically cautious. This is a debate about tactics in which people can quite legitimately hold different opinions. I bear no grudge towards the advocates of a cautious approach, and I have experienced not one iota of hostility from anyone in the SNP following my article which Torrance quotes.
The one point on which I do feel extremely strongly is that the decision on the party’s position on a second referendum must ultimately be taken democratically by the membership, not handed down by the leadership. As long as the way forward is democratically decided, there will be no “great divide” in the SNP, no matter how much the Britnats may yearn for it.
Jim Murphy is getting almost as much extended coverage on quitting in abject failure as leader, as he did when appointed as head of the Scottish accounting unit. For the uninitiated, a particular Blairite reduction in freedom was new legislation stipulating that you could only have a registered party name or “independent” on the ballot paper in elections. Before you could have any brief description you like, such as “fight the bypass” etc. But the Electoral Commission ruled that “Scottish Labour” could appear on ballot papers even though there is no such registered party. When challenged, the Electoral Commission invented the pathetic excuse that “Scottish Labour” was the name of an accounting unit within the Labour Party and – they made this next bit up on the spot – descriptions of accounting units within registered parties are allowed on the ballot. Somebody should set up a party with an accounting unit entitled “the Electoral Commission are Corrupt” and put that on the ballot.
Anyway Jim Murphy today “likened the atmosphere in the TV debates in Scotland to a “quasi-religious rock concert so whatever truth you told it did not really matter”.” This is a ridiculous lie. The TV debates audience in Scotland were dour and aggressively unionist, notably vocal in opposition to any second referendum. This is because the broadcasters selected the audience according to the results of the 2010 General Election, meaning only a quarter supported independence and they were massively pro-Labour. Murphy could not have had a more sympathetic audience. He failed in the debates because he was rubbish.
I am willing to lay a large sum of money that the TV companies never select an audience based on the 2015 General Election results.
“I am willing to lay a large sum of money”
__________________
Do you have such a sum?
That was cheap rhetoric which could turn out to be expensive given the high interest rates the bloodsucker banks charge for personal loans! 🙂
Thanks for the long grass warning over Galloways next Millenium project Ba’al, I’m sure he’ll really want to do it, the way he schmoozed up to Labour on Question time during the elections, however did he get on there?
Once again you are making a case for a wholly Independent and unbiased Scottish Broadcasting Service, Craig, the only sure way to get a balanced and unbiased view of debates over to the public and members alike.
Why should a debate over Alistair Carmichael’s alleged lies not be broadcast to the nation, not from an Edinburgh studio but from the locality of the Shetlands or Orkney, his very own constituency?
Why should there not be a weekly program looking at progressive policies for Scotland, such as ‘making peace with unionists’ by supporting PR for all union members Parliaments, including for Westminster.
One could have the odd interview with hardliners on either/any side, in short something that is controlled by a non political independent body, fat chance….
Saw this the other day.
BBC Scotland staff consider industrial action in dispute over bullying claims
Staff and union leaders are meeting management to press for action after complaint of bullying successfully made against BBC Scotland’s head of news
12 June 2015
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/12/bbc-scotland-staff-consider-industrial-action-in-dispute-over-bullying-claims
‘They fear it may reignite long-running grievances among nationalists and pro-independence campaigners who believe the BBC’s reporting of last year’s referendum showed clear institutional bias against the yes campaign.
Alex Salmond repeatedly attacked the BBC’s coverage, and there was a mass demonstration outside BBC Scotland’s headquarters days before the referendum.’
Author: Severin Carrell
I fear that the trivial diversion of extremely shallow extra powers for Holyrood will consume energies better spent on campaigning for independence.
You think that the extra powers will be seen as removing the desire for independence? If they’re inadequate, so much the better for the breakup. If they’re adequate, so much the better for Scotland. Need there be a conflict? I mean, the objective of independence is to improve Scotland, isn’t it? I’m putting this a bit argumentatively, I realise, but this sort of question has to be answered with an agreed policy, it seems to me, not with infighting.
Re. GG: Antiestablishment white knight Galloway has announced his intention of standing as Mayor of London. I imagine all but the most corrupt councillors will prefer Diane Abbott, though.
Baal
I am quite capable of writing in the English language. If that were what I thought, I would have written it. As I do not think that, I did not write it.
*Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence*
I think you implied it. But I stand broadly, speaking, corrected.
Murphy has refused the offer to become a troughing b*stard aka a lord,knowing that sly shit he has something more lucrative lined up.
Meanwhile the SNP are threatening to include another independence referendum in their manifesto,if something close to FFA isn’t in the offing.
The Governor General David Mundell has shot this idea down in flames claiming Scotland would be up to her eyes in debt,(but theres no mention of the rest of the UK which is also running a deficit) citing another flawed IFS report.
A gradual implimenting of FFA,would be the chosen route,which in my opinion would lead to independence,but the Tories won’t play ball.
That’s why a referendum will be on the cards,sooner than later,and with Labour in such disarray the sooner the better I think.
Craig re David Torrance, I’m surprised he’s not your unofficial biographer,the wee naff of a man tries that route to infamy with everyone else.
Including Alex Salmond who only ever met the man once,he then did the same thing with Nicola Sturgeon.
“Re. GG: Antiestablishment white knight Galloway has announced his intention of standing as Mayor of London. I imagine all but the most corrupt councillors will prefer Diane Abbott, though.”
_______________________
Ball.
If you’re looking for corruption look no further than the Mayor of London candidate Zac Goldsmith.
London could do a hell of a lot worse than George Galloway.
Re my last comment.
Apologise should read Baal not Ball.
If you’re looking for corruption…
I find I don’t have to look for it. Arseholes who can’t do the job magically get the job, left or right.
…corruption’s institutional:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/06/13/conservative-donors-queens-birthday-honours_n_7575202.html
I mean, blatant, in your face, and insulting to the public.
But there’s more than one way to grease a pol:
http://trialbyjeory.com/2014/11/11/why-lutfur-missed-remembrance-sunday-he-was-in-bradford-with-galloway-on-saturday-afternoon/
Republicofscotland
“If you’re looking for corruption look no further than the Mayor of London candidate Zac Goldsmith.”
_______________
Well, I’ve looked very hard at Zac Goldsmith but have been unable to find anything.
As you have said he is corrupt, could you please expand on that with some chapter and verse?
Thanks.
Republicofscotland
“The Governor General David Mundell has shot this idea down in flames..etc, etc, etc..”
_______________________
Can’t you get the man’s title right, Ros? He’s not a governor-general, he’s a secretary of state for Scotland.
“But there’s more than one way to grease a pol:”
__________________________________
Baal,I’m not saying Lutfur is innocent or guilty,I certainly don’t believe a word the Telegraph prints,but what does Lutfurs position have to do with GG,is he in your opinion guilty by association?
Republicofscotland
“London could do a hell of a lot worse than George Galloway.”
________________
Londoners are canny bastards, they won’t be as easy to fool as the people who crowd-funded Mr Galloway’s “film”!
So they probably won’t vote for him.
By the way, when is his “film” finally going to appear? 🙂
“Can’t you get the man’s title right, Ros? He’s not a governor-general, he’s a secretary of state for Scotland.”
____________________
Sarcasm! Habb Sarcasm! don’t you recognise it when you see it,you know when Obama won the Nobel Peace prize,that was sarcasm.
RepublicOfCriminalJustice
“Baal,I’m not saying Lutfur is innocent or guilty,….”
_________________________
What is important, RoS, is not what you say but what the electoral judge said.
Too much sitting on the fence, RoS, and your arse will be as wasted as your mind.
Republicofscotland
Now for the difficult one, RoS. Don’t be shy, step forward!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
““If you’re looking for corruption look no further than the Mayor of London candidate Zac Goldsmith.”
_______________
Well, I’ve looked very hard at Zac Goldsmith but have been unable to find anything.
As you have said he is corrupt, could you please expand on that with some chapter and verse?
Thanks.”
“Well, I’ve looked very hard at Zac Goldsmith but have been unable to find anything.”
____________________
In 2008, Goldsmith was alleged to have breached electoral rules by making a donation of £7,000 to his Party while not on the electoral register.
Channel 4 News raised questions over Goldsmith’s declared expenses at the 2010 election, arguing “our findings do suggest that Zac Goldsmith has questions to answer about whether his spending has complied with both the letter and spirit of the law.
On 14 March 2013, Goldsmith married secondly banking heiress Alice Miranda Rothschild.
A in-law of Rothschilds running for mayor of London,as if they don’t already control enough of London as it is.
“So they probably won’t vote for him.”
___________________________
Oh I don’t know, I know I’d prefer a mayor in the mould of Ken Livingstone rather than a super rich in-law of the Rothschilds.
And Labour did pretty well in London in the GE,okay Galloway was suspended from new Labour,but look how far to the right new Labour have become.
Galloway may well be an independent but at least he has left leaning tendencies.
They never gave Livingstone a snowballs chance in hell of winning,he did.
Republicofscotland
To back up your statement that Zac Goldsmith is corrupt you have advanced the following:
1/. “In 2008, Goldsmith was alleged to have breached electoral rules by making a donation of £7,000 to his Party while not on the electoral register.”
We note the word “alleged”.
2/. “Channel 4 News raised questions over Goldsmith’s declared expenses at the 2010 election, arguing “our findings do suggest that Zac Goldsmith has questions to answer about whether his spending has complied with both the letter and spirit of the law.”
We note the expression “questions to answer”.
I will ignore your racist and anti-Jewish comment “On 14 March 2013, Goldsmith married secondly banking heiress Alice Miranda Rothschild.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++
I believe you have libelled Zac Goldsmith in your post at 15h46 today and that you would be well advised to withdraw that libel forthwith and offer an apology on here.
Republicofscotland
A word of explanation might be in order since you do not seem to be a very intelligent person.
I hold no brief for Zac Goldsmith either personally or politically. But I do believe that cunts like you should be made to face up to their responsibilities when they post – from the (imagined) safe haven of the internet – posts which are potentially libellous.
Good mothers don’t let their children out with dirty arses and there is no reason why you should be allowed to rampage around on this blog (or others) with impunity accusing public figures of being individually corrupt.
So – either withdraw and apologise or be prepared for possible consequences.
Long time reader, first post.
Craigs musings are always worth a read, and the comment’s are fab. Informative, and full of links to info I would never come across by myself. The banter & bitching between posters is the icing on the cake though!
Is that habba guy getting paid, or is he only here for fun ?
Second indyref inevitable, says Jim Murphy
17:30 Monday 15 June 2015
David Maddox
JIM Murphy has signed off as Scottish Labour leader with a warning that “there will be a second independence referendum” and it will come about because “lame-assly dumb David Cameron will stumble into giving the SNP the excuse for one”.
In a speech to the Policy Exchange thinktank in London, Mr Murphy also likened the SNP campaign to “a religious rock concert where nobody was listening to reason” but warned that Labour needed to offer the same “sense of destiny to voters” after a “purely transactional” campaign.
/..
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/second-indyref-inevitable-says-jim-murphy-1-3802683
He is such a good member of the ‘Labour’ party that he turns up at this right wing outfit.
‘Policy Exchange was set up in 2002 by a group including Nicholas Boles (director), Michael Gove (chairman) and Francis Maude.[9] Maude went on to become Minister for the Cabinet Office, and names being one of the co-founders as his proudest political achievement.’
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_Exchange
Policy Exchange @Policy_Exchange
You can now listen to Jim Murphy’s speech/Q&A at Policy Exchange from earlier today https://soundcloud.com/policy_exchange/jim-murphy-delivers-his-valedictory-speech-at-policy-exchange …
~~
PS Jeremy Corbyn has got on the list of candidates for leader.
All political parties are coalitions of thought. Many like to describe their own as being a ‘broad church’ rather than a divided nation.
Still, the remarks pall when considered against the massive upswing of SNP support from the last Holyrood election, through the referendum to a membership exceeding 100,000, winning 56 of 59 Westminster seats and an absolute majority of the vote count too. Having gained control of Holyrood and the Scottish Westminster contingent it would appear that the party, the people and the electorate are as one. The division is the wish of the bitter loser.
“Withdraw and apologise”
____________________________
It would appear that after further indepth reading that you are indeed correct Habby old boy,it would seem that Channel 4 have it in for Zac Goldsmith,or so to speak.
I therefore offer my apologises to Mr Goldsmith and withdraw the comment.
Tories majority already usec agaist them, David Cameron could face a rebel defeat.
David Cameron is facing his first bloody nose in the House of Commons just five weeks after the general election with as many as 50 Conservative MPs set to try to force changes to the rules of the European Union referendum.
The Prime Minister is hoping that the potential Tory rebels – which include former Tory Cabinet ministers Liam Fox and Owen Paterson – can be bought off with some “credible assurances” ahead of Tuesday’s crunch votes on backbench amendments to the EU Referendum Bill.
However Sir William Cash, who led the Tory rebels against Sir John Major’s Government over the Maastricht treaty in the 1990s, was confident that the rebels can give Mr Cameron a bloody nose, with the support of Labour and the SNP, by overturning the Tories’ 12 Commons majority.
Our troll challenges a poster here to say something, and then, when he does, he threatens legal action. Is that bannable behavior on this blog?
By the way, on whether Zac Goldsmith is corrupt, one can read about the expense account allegations against him in his Wikipedia entry.
“Our troll challenges a poster here to say something, and then, when he does, he threatens legal action. Is that bannable behavior on this blog?
By the way, on whether Zac Goldsmith is corrupt, one can read about the expense account allegations against him in his Wikipedia entry.”
__________________________
Afraid not Lysais,indepth reading of the accusations are unfortunately unfounded,it gives me no pleasure but Habb is correct this time.
And unlike some in here present company excluded,if I’m wrong or proven wrong then I will own up to it.
What’s the point of commenting, if you can’t admit when you’re wrong.
Habb just remain silent whe he’s wrong.